Â
Then off to gimp and. Unfortunately, I must have messed up somewhere along the way - suspicion points out with hard gloves and even harder gaze that must have been when I was exporting a visualizing copy and dropped the precision from laser to viking’s hammer - as there’s some a bit of banding showing up in the water. Anyway, some other notes: gmic’s LHC is super nice and takes sometime to process big boys, final stage before grain was a shifted homy LUT
Â
After some super pondering, superficially pondering this is, I got stuck with the crop, that left side… mmmm… that corner… I could arti-lit it and throw away the keys (???) but… wJaJht about straighten it up, you mean like sobering? nono no, sir, I’m affraid your time is up Shut up, your instinct  >> Final image
That’s a nice crop mr pixel mc… if fight wants against trapeizodal shape, is less dynamic and more prone to spectators… kind of passive agressive with the strong faling dush that burns light - ( ) - and all
Yes, the lens is not part of the lensfun database yet. I’ve started to take pictures for it, but I need to redo the vignetting part. I will do it when I have my new camera and have to profiles for the new lenses too.
I cheated a bit, as I developed in darktable but than I also did a little dodge and burn and web (resize+sharpen) prep in gimp.
Here is my xmp everything_frozen.nef.xmp (9.0 KB)
Once I have seen it, it felt like this is a BW image (although there are interesting colors). Conversion in darktable without any special tweaking. (only desaturation, tone curve and local contrast)
If you look at some icicles, for example right of the waterfall in front of the darker area, you see some color fringes at 100% view with defringe turned off.
Nothing too visible though and the defringe module gets rid of most of it with a single click.
Both picutres are not actual exports from darktable but simple screenshots.
@heckflosse Yep, you are right. I just tried it out and exported the image with defringe off an CA removal on. CA removal really gets rid of the fringes.
Nevertheless, I used defringe as quick try out and it worked well enough for me on this picture so I did not bother to try out CA removal. Also, as I cropped a bit, the view in the darkroom module is not reliable when zoomed in if I understand the manual correctly. Quote:
"The underlying model assumes as input an uncropped photographic image. The module is likely to fail when you zoom into the image, as in that case it will only receive parts of your photograph as input in darktable’s pixelpipe. As a consequence, chromatic aberrations do not get corrected properly in the center view. This limitation only applies to interactive work, not to file export. "
But after that little experiment I lean towards using CA removal first as it is a nice one click solution. If I see poblems after export, I will try again with defringe.
That may be true for darktable. I referred to using the raw auto ca correction in Rawtherapee which always is applied on the whole raw data. The algorithm in darktable is the same as in rawtherapee though. But it’s true that applying it just to a part of a raw file (as in darktable preview) may lead to differences between preview and final output.
raw auto ca correction also has limitations. For example if you shoot angainst bright light (e.g. leaves against the sunlight) you will get fringes raw auto ca correction is not able to fix (it wasn’t designed for that). In that case defringe is your friend too.
Shut up, your instinct 
 >> Final image
. Thanks for sharing 
.
