Am 24.03.2011 18:00, schrieb Bob Bright:
(BTW, what kind of hardware do you have? The 5.5/8.5 minute results
were on an 4 year old Toshiba laptop with an Intel Core2 Duo @ 1.73GHz
and only 2 GB of ram. It wasn't hitting swap during the unsharp
masking, though, so I don't think lack of memory wa
On 11-03-24 02:07 AM, Erik Krause wrote:
But it's trivial to capture the full DR
in a stack of tiffs with different EVs. And (although I'm sure this
depends on the workflow you're accustomed to) feeding the exposure stack
to enfuse strikes me as a lot easier than fiddling with large-radius
unsha
On 23 Mrz., 15:01, dmg wrote:
> Particularly relevant with respect to in-software lens corrections
>
> http://www.canonrumors.com/tech-articles/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-...
Thanks, Daniel. The kind of sobering reality check I needed having
done too much programming recently. When it's just
On 24 Mrz., 01:10, Calvin McDonald wrote:
> I didn't quite follow what the process is to get a lens profile if I
> generate it with Hugin. This also makes me a bit nervous because I assume
> the Hugin-generated lens profile numbers are not perfect and are likely
> coming from a stitch that's not
Am 24.03.2011 04:25, schrieb Bob Bright:
Erik, I don't understand why you think this technique is easier. As you
note, it can be difficult to capture the full dynamic range of a raw
file in a single 16-bit tiff.
It's difficult to find good settings. Once you have them you only need
to apply t
