Mechanical of death

This file is licensed Creative Commons, By-Attribution, Share-Alike.

I shot this picture in very bad conditions - clouds, mist, dust, wind and warmth.

Just curious about how it might have been developed, and why.
Here is the original NEF :
16211133.NEF (33.0 MB)
and my own development :
16211133.NEF.xmp (7.9 KB)
I have based my settings upon tutorials I watched, trying to adapt them to my tastes. Very subjective, I agree.


:blue_car: :red_car:


16211133.NEF.xmp (8.5 KB)


My take with ART.

16211133_art_HD.jpg.out.arp (13.4 KB)

My take with GIMP space LAB

1 Like

16211133.NEF.xmp (17.7 KB)

Well, stupid me ! :frowning: I forgot the essential : I am running dt 3.8.1, so I will not be able to reproduce what was not done with this software (and maybe version too).
Well, not quite exact, as I am going to play with the settings so as to get something as close as possible as what I can see on the photos which were processed with a different RP.
@Thomas_Do, unless I am really tired, the only difference I could see comparing your adjustments with mine, is a rework of the ton equalizer curve. Would this mean that otherwise my approach was rather good ?
@apostel338, are there noticeable differences from 3.8.1 to 3.9, that would explain the many differences between your settings in filmic and mine for, if I am not mistaken, so few difference in aspect (I even find yours slightly darker, especially the tyres that were rather dusty) ?
Thank-you for playing the game.

I don’t know what my edit looks like when you open it in 3.8.1, so here are my settings for filmic rgb:


The big change in 3.9 is color science v6 in the options tab. But it doesn’t hardly make any difference on this photo, so my settings on 3.8.1 and v5 would be exactly the same.

I think the biggest difference between our edits is contrast-based. Of course I can’t compare my edit with any remembrance of the original scene, but I don’t feel my tires are particularly dark. They also look dusty and dirty. For me, your edit looks pretty faded.

Apart from that, I see that you don’t use color balance rgb, which I believe is a pretty essential module to work on your colors.

Also, I see that you have the misfortune of not having a noise profile for your cam. In that case, denoise (profiled) just kills all details of the photo and everything becomes muddy.

But I’m afraid I don’t know what’s the best way for denoising in such a case. :frowning:

Kind of tough to set the black level, but here goes…

16211133.NEF.xmp (7.0 KB)

1 Like

Yes, I like your edit. However, I don’t do play raws as a competition. In my version I tried to get some more contrast in the background and the the tires, although others might have done a better job in this respect.

dt 3.8.1 with filmic :slight_smile:

Thanks for posting
darktable 3.8.1

16211133_01.NEF.xmp (9.9 KB)


OK, the question now is : Why ? And how to work this ?

Thanks for the tips.
Also, as for Filmic, here are my settings :

Well, I think there is something going wrong there. :frowning: I compared your xml after using it and noticed that it had dropped from ~17 kb to ~9 - so some steps were discarded.
I think that is why I see your work darker than mine on my computer. The processing is broken by 3.8 unable to use 3.9 settings.
So I will have to compare the jpeg you exported with mine instead of working directly in dt, the xml being useless. :roll_eyes:

It is not a competition of course, just a way of learning.
I am kind of isolated - all the photographs I know use PS and do not want to ear about anything else.
Plus, most of the tutorials are not in french, and even if some seem very good, I have to rewind 6 to 10 times some parts before I can really understand what were really meant.
And the subtitles, when accurate, tend to disturb me.
Add to that that some are many months old, and so explain things in a way that is no longer used.
I recently found some videos from Aurélien Pierre, and L. Viatour, from which I tried to adapt my settings.
Luc is very easy to understand, and Aurélien sometimes tends to be technical and I feel lost - so imagine when he explains things technical in english !
I have been using dt since 2.6 I think, but in a way that makes me say I am a beginner. I am just starting learning dt.

More important than my impression is what you like. I’m not really qualified to give specific advise, but you are already doing what would be my first tip: go and play in play raw. And then there are series of videos like Editing moments with darktable, but like you mentioned, in english.

Looks like it doesn’t load the 3.9 XMP at all but opens the photo with your DT default settings. I just took a look at 3.8.1 and recognized this.

Here is my - hopefully more usefull - edit with 3.8.1.

_16211133.NEF.xmp (8.4 KB)

That’s what I like this forum for, so many open source users :+1:. And a lot of usefull information to find hear, too. The threads are mostly in English though, but a good place to start learning.

Have you checked out the French DT site I think it is actually pretty good…Also Nicolas Winspeare now has quite a few videos in French…

@FalCT60 How close were the bystanders? Perspective-wise, it may not be as close as it seems.

16211133.NEF.xmp (11.3 KB)

I did a few edits…looks pretty good right out of the gate. I just played around with filmic mostly to expt with contrast and added diffuse and sharpen not much in the way of modules…

They don’t look that different but there are minor differences…

16211133_03.NEF.xmp (14.3 KB)
16211133_02.NEF.xmp (9.5 KB)
16211133_01.NEF.xmp (10.9 KB)
16211133.NEF.xmp (9.5 KB)

1 Like

To me, they are quite different, emphasizing different areas of the frame. It would be interesting if you fused all the edits into one master result.