I was trying to provide an explanation for the contradictions (where sharpen sensor demosaicing should be placed before input color profilebutsensor and demosaic correction being listed as the last one). I think the ‘sharpen sensor demosaicing should be placed before input color profile’ advice was entered into the manual before Aurélien changed his recommendation.
What I’ve found as a pleasant surprise is that the AA filter preset gives better results and takes around the same time (on the GPU) as the deblur preset of contrast equalizer. I’ve actually replaced the latter with the former in my default edit style.
But putting a medium lens blur preset on top is already a bit too much, and I don’t want to find out what happens to my laptop if I add three instances more
LOL With my system, I can’t even run a single one. Anyway, the question is more about where it should lie in the pipeline rather than using 3+ instances. As Aurélien already said, it depends.
if you don’t have a specific purpose the default pixelpipe order is quite reasonable. But to speed up your workflow you should keep this inactive while editing your image.
But my desktop is only about 8.3MP in size. Yet I can see the difference between applying and not applying the capture sharpening without zooming in (admittedly only by comparing with a snapshot, and looking carefully), and without going to full screen (normal configuration with side, top botton and header panels visible).
Bear in mind that, at zoomed-out resolutions diffuse is operating on a much lower resolution image so the results will be more obvious, but not necessarily very close to how the exported image will look. AFAIK, the only accurate way to see the results of diffuse/sharpen is when fully zoomed in.
I have an entry-level i3, 12 GB old notebook, no GPU.
With three DoS instances, editing gets tough, but not impossible: it takes some 10, 20s to complete.
Things get almost impossible, though, in exporting a downsized image: some 40 minutes.
But if I export the full size image, I get 20 minutes, which I think is worth trying, given the excellent results I get from these instances.
I think I won’t discard using this module in my current very low profile hardware.
(hardware upgrade is out of question for now)
Do you use a pre-built, packaged version, or do you compile your own (you may be able to improve performance by compiling yourself, specifically for your machine)? If the latter, do you build with RelWithDebInfo or with Release? I build my own, and Release was way faster for me than RelWithDebInfo.
The time difference between scaled-down and normal export is shocking; I thought scaling down was the last operation, and it’s not so resource intensive. Have you tried running with -d perf to see which operation takes up much more time?
Maybe this is not the right thread to ask this question, but I did not want to create a new one.
Which existing profile in Diffuse and Sharpen would be most appropriate (according to you) for a developed tiff/jpg file in a target printing resolution? This sharpening would be the last action before printing.