I would like to see how others approach this photo - especially with Darktable. I’m still developing a DT workflow and feel like I’m treating every photo the same.
2020-02-25_10-13-39.NEF (28.2 MB)
License: CC BY-NC 4.0
11 Likes
3 Likes
2020-02-25_10-13-39.NEF.xmp (13.6 KB)
4 Likes
3 Likes
1 Like
2020-02-25_10-13-39.NEF.xmp (20,1 KB)
11 Likes
Hi @Terry
Why do you offer your edits always in such a low resolution. Of course, it makes no sense to upload huge jpegs. But I often struggle to enjoy your edits to the full extent, only because they are that small. Maybe in future you can raise the resolution a bit. Maybe to the suggested resolution: [Friendly reminder] Limit JPEGs to maybe full HD resolution
I hope that I don’t upset the admins with such a plea. 
You can grab the xmp and see it in full res with the raw file.
I know, but doing this with every offered render is a little bit exhausting 
Thanks for the comments and for everyone’s effort processing the photo. I am going to download the xmp’s and have a look at various workflows - suspect I will learn a fair bit. Thanks again.
@Popanz here are my export settings just for this forum. What do you recommend
Mine are these:
which means for a 16:9 pic that it is a tiny bit larger than the Full HD resolution @darix asked for.
So I hope and think this is OK. If not, I hope the admins will tell us differently - but up to now no-one complained. Maybe it would make sense to reduce JPG quality to 90% to reduce file size, but I always fear to create some artefacts, which is probably a ridiculous fear.
3 Likes
6 Likes
@Popanz’ great version made me rework my last edit 
I added a second local spot for the clouds
2020-02-25_10-13-39_RT-4.jpg.out.pp3 (28.0 KB)
3 Likes
You’re asking us to tell you but we have already made the request for an HD sized image.
To be clear, we don’t inspect every image, or any image really, I think my time is more valuable than that, but this is soemthing we ask you to keep in mind while posting. Are there reasons to post a larger image? Yes. Can you post a larger image? Also yes. Should you post a large image every edit? We ask for no.
The idea is that you get a feel for the edit, and if you want to inspect it, download the sidecar and load it into your editor. That’s why we religiously ask people to share their sidecar files.
We are trying to make the forum for the long rum, and super large jpegs are just something we have to pay to store every month.
You should be able to use jpeg at 85% and that should be acceptable to view at 100% size and it keeps the file size down.
3 Likes
I believe that 1080P is actually 1920x1080 - so if you changed both of your dimensions from 1080 to 1920 you would align with the intent of the moderator’s request.
3 Likes
Smaller is great too, but most people are maximalists.
1 Like
@paperdigits
Thanx for clarification, I think a max size of 2000 in width or height is what you have asked for - something Full-HD-ish. I sometimes post larger resolutions, if I think it is necessary to post in larger resolution. For example, when it is to demonstrate noise reduction.
I totally understand, that every posted picture eats some storage and the smaller the pictures are, the smaller will be the footprint on the disks. Which means in the end less costs. For that reason, you have my deepest respect for not making hard restrictions.
May I ask if there are enough donations to sponsor the cost of the servers? I already donate a small monthly contribution (to pixls.us as well as to darktable). But it’s hard to estimate if this is an appropriate amount.
Rest assured, I honour your efforts to keep up this great forum and I’m willing to help wherever I can.
My plea to @Terry was in no way something I wanted to upset you with. It’s just that a picture with a width of not much more than 1000 pixels looks on a larger screen more like a thumbnail. So I think it makes sense to post the pictures in Full HD resolution but lower the JPG quality.
As a start here is my next version of this beautiful picture with JPG quality set to 85% (which reduces the file size to around 50% compared to 95%):
2020-02-25_10-13-39_02.NEF.xmp (59,0 KB)
8 Likes
If I were pressed, I’d say you could still do that in HD with a cropped image to show a region of interest of the noise reduction. At any rate, it isn’t one specific image that will do the damage, but rather all the images in aggregate.
I believe so, but I don’t keep the books, perhaps @patdavid can confirm.
Any amount is deeply appreciate, thank you! I know times are tight for a lot of people, so whatever you can give is excellent.
I am not upset at all, just trying to be clear. I have received this criticism often, and I’m not sure how to navigate it. Most of the time its “too few words” → he’s upset. Sometimes “too many words” → he’s upset. There is some middle ground, I just can’t find it. Generally it’s too few words for me because I do a lot of support here and elsewhere, and if I can get my point across in fewer words, I do that. I also have off and on RSI, so often its a choice of no words because typing hurts or a few words to try and help someone. Thirdly, a lot is from my phone, which makes the RSi worse, so fewer words = better for my hands/fingers.
2 Likes