Sad. I work with pictures that are huge in size. I just keep the source, then create variants in different color profiles, but I don’t keep variants when the work is done. So having the possibility to save snapshots (because I create sometimes different light tones) as an option (in saving panel) would be useful, but never mind, as you won’t do it anyway.
I don’t compile myself.
You open your photo with snapshots in your_photo.tiff.arp.
Load another arp (with different parameters) this way :
In fact, you don’t want to do that for a reason, Ctrl+Z or directly with side panel :
You don’t retrieve your snapshots.
Now if you close the file, the your_photo.tiff.arp is automatically saved, without the snapshots, of course… So except if you close by crashing ART, you’re screwed, your snapshots are lost forever.
This sounds like a bug. I’ll investigate and let you know.
Regarding your use case of saving snapshots, it’s still unclear to me what you want to achieve exactly. If you can provide more details I can see whether there is actually something missing or whether there is some alternative workflow that can be used.
Working with brush mask I noticed two strange things, I’m not sure are they bugs or not.
When smoothing is used, increasing the size of brush affects smoothing size of all previous strokes as well, and only when I do another stroke (with increased size). Decreasing size - doesn’t affect any strokes, and smoothing remains as if brush size wasn’t decreased. Here is a video: 2021-08-09_20-10-22.mkv (17.8 MB)
Maybe it’s intended behavior for feathering, but sometimes it lays on the texture in some particular way, and combining it with increased Highlight/Gain results in decreasing contrast in that area. In other words, as I understand, it may lay on darker details of texture and Highlight/Gain is applied to these darker details and as result contrast of area is decreased. Switching to smoothing instead of feathering helps. Is it intended way or maybe there is something wrong happening? Here is a video for it: 2021-08-09_20-14-14-1-1.mkv (4.4 MB)
I notice it in different areas of photos and it’s not looking great and makes me to use smoothing instead of feathering.
that’s expected. “Smoothing” operates globally on the brush mask, and the actual effect depends on the size of the maximum brush radius used.
feathering is an edge-sensitive blur (actually a guided filter), so in some sense it’s expected to behave differently on areas with detail wrt flat areas. But what you show in the videos is weird indeed. The guided filter is known to have some dependency on the “exposure” (on the magnitude of the pixel values, actually) so that darker areas and brighter ones affect the filter in different ways even if they contain similar edges. I think the darktable devs have come up with a variant that removes such dependency and makes the filter behave better wrt. exposure differences – I should probably check that out. In the meantime, would you be able to share one of the problematic pictures+arp?
Thank you for quick response. Sure, here is a photo and arp. Try to set smoothness of brush mask to 50 without changing anything else and then back to 0 - you will instantly notice problematic area right in the middle of the photo.
Hi,
I took a look but I’m not sure there’s a simple fix for this – I’m actually not even sure it needs to be fixed. I would say that in this picture smoothness works better than feathering, and that’s it…
However, I’ll think about it a bit more and let you know if I find something that works better
Hi,
Liquify would be nice, but it’s a too big task for my limited time at the moment, sorry…
Frequency separation is used (in different ways) in both local contrast and texture boost: if you can describe what you want to do we might better discuss whether these tools are up to the task
thank @agriggio I would like to smooth out the unevenness of the color while retaining the fine texture. I have been experimenting with the smoothing, local contrast and texture to see if it possible. Normally we would blur the color layer and apply the details layer using a soft light blending mode in photoshop.
let me try and use the current available modules to see if it’s possible to simulate skin editing using frequency separation and get back to you.
yeah liquify would be awesome but I understand that’s is not an easy undertaking. no need to be sorry, appreciate very much what you have done with ART.
If I activate the tone curve with no function active, it seems that clipped highlights aresent back to the some color space
It gives a rosy cast that I don’t find realistic. Instead of yellow, the sun becomes pink. Perhaps it is needed to apply color tone curve. But I think the way OOG colors are clipped is not really satisfying.
Second, to clip OOG colors, one can use the film simulation
In the second screenshot, there is no longer OOG colors and I think its a better rendering.
What are your thoughts on this problem and your advices to nicely tackle OOG colors in ART?
my “advice” is always the same: use whatever tool gives you the result you want
Regarding your specific question, yes the tone curve applies some formula for clipping that takes into account all the channels (called “film-like” in the code – don’t ask me why because I don’t know) rather than just truncating. This is by design (was already in RT) and I find that in general it is better at avoiding artifacts. In the image above, you might very well prefer the “naive” clipping to the “smart” one, but I don’t think the result is necessarily more natural. I wasn’t there but I bet the sun was more red than yellow, fwiw.
That said, one trick to simulate the naive clipping within the tone curve is to raise the white point:
Note this only works if the curve is of “parametric” type, and only in modes “standard”, “weighted std”, “film like” and “luminance”.
Question. If I apply a rectangular area mask, set roundness to +100 and width and height to the same value, say 30, I get an ellipse. I would expect that these equal values would result in a circle. To get a circle, I have to set width to 20 and height to 30 and then I’m even not sure if that’s a real circle or something that only looks like a real circle. Am I missing some logic here?
The size is in percentage of the corresponding image dimension. So if you have a 3:2 picture, setting 20:30 will give you a circle, whereas 30:30 gives you an ellipse.
Hello Alberto, one more thing about this circle shape in the area mask bacause I think those values for width and height are not really user-friendly.
Example, I make a circle with height=50 (% as you explained). Now what width I must enter to have a circle? I have to calculate.
My image is 3272x4940px. If height is 50 percent, then the height of the circle is 3272/2=1636.
This means: width = 4940 x y% = 1636, or
4940 x y/100 = 1636
y/100 = 1636/4940
y/100 = 0,33
y = 100x0,33=33
And now I have my circle - but a bit complex!
Can’t you change those values for width and height from percentage to pixels? Would be very helpful for an end user like me!
Hello @agriggio, feature request. What I really miss in Art is that when zoomed in in the edit window, I can’t use the arrow keys to navigate over the photo. The only way (as far as I know) is moving the red area in the navigator panel with the mouse.
Is there a way to implement this while the edit window has the focus? The Z and F keys are always available to zoom in and out. I know the arrow keys are used to navigate the history panel or sliders in the tools, but something like Ctrl+arrow left/right/up/down to navigate over a zoomed photo would be very welcome.
P.S: I think this thread has reached its limit, please people consider starting new, more specific, ones in the future. Having a big “everything ART” thread defeats the purpose of having a dedicated forum section…
)