On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 07:15:28PM +0200, Pascal de Bruijn wrote: > On Fri, 2009-09-18 at 17:57 +0200, Frank van Maarseveen wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 02:47:10PM -0500, Udi Fuchs wrote: > > > > Here's take two. The white balancing has been removed from > > > > dcraw_finalize_interpolate(), together with the hack to compensate > > > > for that again. This consolidates the path for WB because > > > > dcraw_finalize_shrink() doesn't do that either. > > > > > > White balance has to be applied before interpolation, otherwise you > > > get interpolation artifacts. > > > > > > A compromise for the preview could be to apply WB once in > > > create_base_image() and then apply changes in WB relative to the > > > original one. Of course this would only make the WB logic more > > > complicated. For now, disabling WB during 100% zoom would be enough. > > > > Disabling any GUI controls for 100% zoom is a bit poor IMO. Converting the > > image in the dcraw_finalize_shrink() path [in case of a WB adjustment] > > is slow. So, I decided to keep the two WB paths and cleanup the code in > > ufraw_convert_image_first_phase() instead. > > I agree... But on the pragmatic side, disabling the controls is still > less poor than not having 100% zoom at all... :)
Well, we don't need to make that choice. The patch provides 100% zoom with full controls, optimized for the non WB adjustment case :) -- Frank ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Come build with us! The BlackBerry® Developer Conference in SF, CA is the only developer event you need to attend this year. Jumpstart your developing skills, take BlackBerry mobile applications to market and stay ahead of the curve. Join us from November 9-12, 2009. Register now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/devconf _______________________________________________ ufraw-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ufraw-devel
