@stuntflyer: After reading @betazoid’s reply I’m not sure if you meant spot removal in general (if so, see my previous reply) or the dedicated spot removal tool that Anna has been talking about.
I also just merged that branch into dev and it works nicely (after testing it for 5 whole minutes ).
Not sure if this one will be in 5.9. There must be a reason why it isn’t available in the current master atm. Me, and Anna as well, like to live dangerously by using the development version and merging branches that are potentially going to break RT…
I guess it would make more sense to include the improved spot removal tool from ART in RT. I am compiling ART master right now, I think there are some more improvements in this tool. But I think the tool that is available in the RT spot removal tool branch is ok, too. Anyway, the core/original code of both tools seems to be from the same dev.
I have not (yet) spend any time playing with ART, so I must take your word for it. It does make sense to “borrow” each others strong points though. That is assuming there is no bad blood between the developers and it is in the philosophy of the program (there’s a reason why ART split away from RT).
My idea about spot removal is a rather simple one; If there are very few spots that needs removing I want/like to use the RAW editor. Anything more serious and I pull it into GIMP. Main reasons being that GIMP has more specialized tools and doing retouching/spot removal in a RAW editor slows down your editing way too much.
I have not noticed any such thing with the RT/ART spot removal tool, although I used many points. And my computer is not really fast.
The retouch module in DT, that does indeed slow down the computer, but I think the more simple spot removal tool there does not.
I have compiled RT dev with the spot removal tool on Manjaro and Ubuntu 20.04 LTS. They are being uploaded right now, but it takes a lot of time to upload. Hope they are functional and useful for someone. At least I’d be happy if I get feedback and hear if they are usable on other systems than mine. I have compiled them on a recent i7 laptop.
Why not ideal? You just have do recreate the flat fields now and then. You just enable the flat fields in your default profile. Hint: use General Profiles which enable the automatic search for flat files together with Dynamic processing profiles - RawPedia (rawtherapee.com)
I will read the link you just sent me as well as a re-read of the flat field link.
I have only four dust spots on my sensor that I can see using Andy’s dust off curve. If a dust spot is in the high frequency detail I’m not overly concerned about it. For the model ship photos I often shoot against a white background where in those areas the spots are easily seen. I have not cleaned the sensor in over five years. I used to do it once every couple of years. I guess it’s time for another cleaning.
It’s easy enough to save a processing file along with the spot removal. Should I need it, I can always turn it on. I can see that using flat-field for dust removal would be a viable way to go. For the kind of photos I’m taking, I can’t see where I would need to use it. For now, anyway.
As far as I know, it was a very amicable split. RT was being held back by the need for backwards compatibility and an abundance of rarely used tools. @agriggio wanted to be able to make more radical feature changes and have a more streamlined app. Everyone is still friends though.
).
and it is in the philosophy of the program (there’s a reason why ART split away from RT).