Yes that sentence probably won’t make it past the copy-edit (says the guy who does the copy-editing)
1 Like
But that is the difference between filmic and sigmoid. In addition, from what I’ve heard, filmic has emphatically not been designed to be easy to use nor robust.
Again and again its authors, devs and users have emphasized that it hasn’t compromised on power and control for the benefit of ease of use or prevention of foot shooting? Have I imagined years of such comments?
You are free to make that comment anywhere you want but subjective statements like that don’t belong in a reference. I’m sure we can find some more neutral wording.
For example we could say that it’s “intended to be” those things, but I have no way to objectively assess whether it “is” or not.
1 Like
It isn’t just about being neutral. Terms like “easy to use” and “robust” don’t add value to the text. We aren’t trying to convince readers of something.
What sigmoid is, what it does and how to use it are the things people want to know when referring to the docs. Additional math, diagrams, references, links to alternative modules, troubleshooting notes may reinforce the text.
5 Likes
I think there are lots of links and math and the curve simulator to play with that can actually plot filmic and other curves is provided and give the background math for the module. There is the statement about valid rgb values for every pixel between 0-inf and the fact that sigmoid does not rely on the concept of a rel black and white only middle grey and this might be the area to clarify in practical terms what that means in terms of making the choice to use this for tone mapping… I think one could say that it provides a condensed simpler UI implementation which may initially be easier for early adopters of the scene referred way of editing to use…
1 Like
Looks good to me! I think the first sentence has already been changed, reading the comments above.
2 Likes
Download the daily built version last night. As an enthusiastic amateur user of DT, I am impressed. As said before, DT gives us many options of doing the same thing. Keep Sigmoid and FilmicRgb separate and give the user the choice.
1 Like
Finally playing with sigmoid now 4.2 has been released. It is so good! Definitely becoming my default tone mapper, thanks @jandren !
And a little trick to deal with the lack of contrast that can result in highlights - use a module in multiply blend mode after sigmoid in the pipe, masked to the highlights. I personally like using color calibration due to its flexibility, but color balance rgb or exposure are also options.
6 Likes
I have not resorted to that yet. I have been happy with using the tone eq to bump highlight contrast and a bilateral preset in local contrast along with an instance of D&S but I should experiment more…
Hi, I have a question: if I have an underexposed pic with a piece of sky that is underexposed so the sky does not get clipped, the first step is to increase exposure with the exposure module. BUT that kills the sky. How do I restore the color of the sky? Is this possibe with sigmoid or do I have to use an additional module? With filmic, this task is pretty easy.
Also, is there a detailed documentation of sigmoid? The chapter in the official manual is pretty rudimentary.
I find tone EQ works really well usually.
1 Like
ok, but that is in fact a completely different workflow. in that case, I have to do most of the exposure/brightness work with the tone equalizer.
1 Like
Yes… sort of anyway. My approach (not saying it’s ‘correct’) with sigmoid is to set the sigmoid contrast and exposure where to get the amount of ‘punch’ I want, then go to tone eq and bring the highlights down and shadows up as needed.
It’s different to a filmic approach, but I actually find that I usually need to do very little in colour balance rgb with this approach. At least partly cos sigoid in the default ‘per channel’ mode (all I use) increases saturation with contrast, which I find quite intuitive.
BTW, I’m not sure whether it’s just to do with my perception somehow, but I don’t seem to need to add local contrast nearly as much with approach. I think maybe it’s because the tone eq guided filter is ‘preserving’ on a local level the contrast I add with sigmoid…
3 Likes
Yes, the scenario I am still often finding filmic preferable is for colourful skies, when using max rgb preservation mode.
1 Like
You can set color processing to “RGB ratio”, and move skew to the left. This works for me. However, Sigmoid seems to require lower exposure, compared to Filmic.
3 Likes
@betazoid Before using sigmoid, you probably have to mask/filter the sky so that it isn’t so bright and low in detail relative to the rest of the image. Adding a bit of noise/grain may reduce drastic changes.
4 Likes
I prefer this approach as well. It is quite analogous to using a graduated ND filter when shooting, just with more control. A masked exposure module instance should go a long way here.
3 Likes
I think this is an excellent piece of software. The technology seems to be simpler than filmic yet it’s brilliant. Congrats and thanks to @jandren for creating it and @Pascal_Obry for making the right decision (if I remember correctly, there was quite a discussion).
8 Likes
Thank you Anna!
The advice given by the community for you has been pretty good, but I can summarize.
- rgb ratio mode gives you a similar behavior to filmic when preserving color.
- I personally prefer the look of per channel with an adjusted amount of hue correction, and that has the consequence that you need to reduce the brightness of the sky (which is surprisingly bright usually!). Darktable has a nice suite of tools for this task, color calibration, masked exposure, graduated filter, and tone equalizer. Plenty to work with!
7 Likes
Did you have a specific style or aesthetic in mind when you created this module?