Please take a look at @HIRAM’s builds https://keybase.pub/kd6kxr/
@Silvio_Grosso Your question regarding denoise is better suited for a different thread since it is not related to Local Adjustments. That being said, if the name DxO gives their tools make any sense, they may be using a genetic algorithm / deep-AI-learning-whatever algorithm, which is unlikely to find its way into RT.
I’m a Mac user and I run the nightly in Linux via Parallels - it’s worth the Parallels license
fee believe me!
@jdc - as ever Jacques, your work is very much appreciated.
Nice work performed on this dev branch.
Any news about the eventual integration of local control in the main branch? Is it planned to released it in the next 5.9 release?
Thanks for your answer!
regards
olivier
The tool youre looking for is wavelets denoise. Check out the YouTube video by @Andy_Astbury1 on how to use it effectively. From memory I think it’s this one (but he does have a few others on noise reduction):
After seeing the results, you probably won’t feel the need for commercial software.
@cabernet_olivier
Yes “Local adjustments” is in main branch, but not yet in 5.9…I don’t know when exactly 
@Andy_Astbury1
Thank you very much for your evaluation
@mikae1
“LA” is positioned in the middle of the pipeline, just before the global Lab settings.
https://rawpedia.rawtherapee.com/Toolchain_Pipeline#Processing_order
You can put as many spots as you want, but it seems more logical (not mandatory) if you want to use a “full image” spot to start with this one.
Another remark, these “full image” are not new, just now it’s automatic. It used before to take 6 manipulations, now it takes one.
General remark : I recommand to clean the cache to avoid bad behavior with this new GUI fonctionnality.
The problem you mention is not simple and is more than a general problem of “denoise” as pointed out by @Thanatomanic
Nevertheless I evoke the problem of the noise, in one of the links that I gave with in particular the possibility of “marrying” processes; for example “Denoise (main)”, with “Denoise LA”… since we are in an LA thread
I’m going to propose an approach, I’m not saying it’s the best…nor the worst, the denoising and the appearance of the image is something subjective that depends on a lot of parameters (personal tastes, shooting conditions, viewing conditions, material used, phisiological abilities (eg I am 73 years old and my visual abilities are no longer very good. …) things that partly come out of a CAM (Color apperance model)
First of all, the image setting parameters (independent of Denoise) are different in the Dx0 and Rawtherapee image.
if we look at the eagle’s wings, the black parts and the white parts :
Black wings :
DxO L=2, RT neutral L=6, RT « auto-matched » L=11
White wings :
DxO L=94, RT neutral L=41, RT « auto matched » L=60
In the same way the image is more saturated, more flattering
I don’t own DxO, Capture One or Lightroom, and my computer is only used for development RT. So it’s hard for me to make comparisons. Nevertheless the principles of CAM (human vision) are there. For example we will see much less chrominance noise on an almost black background, than on a gray background. I’m not trying to say, it’s better or worse, but different and evaluators will have to take that into account. it is therefore necessary to try to evaluate the noise by « ignoring » these differences.
How did I do it? By remembering that it is one solution among others. For example I didn’t use “wavelet levels denoise”, nor “excluding spot”…and some of my choices are arbitrary
First step, I open the raw file, with default settings (with auto-matched tone-curve)
Second step : I used « Noise reduction (main) » with « small settings » with 2 goals :
remove large clumps of noise
reduce a little bit the noise on Eagle
Of course, these settings are quite arbitrary and can be changed.
Third Step : Using « Local adjustments »
Some principles used :
avoid using tone curves and prefer the “tone equalizer” to change the general aspect of the image (contrast…)
Step 3 – 1 - Denoise :
differentiate the action between the green background and the Eagle. For this we will use principles and methods :
a) Work in full image
b) position the center of the spot in the zone to be denoised the most (the green part)
c) choose a high scope value, because the range of the image goes from green (background) to red (Eagle), so big amplitude of dE, but not to maximum
d) use the hue equalizer, to strengthen the action in the greens and reduce it for Eagle (red)
e) create a mask where we will try to separate the eagle from the background (the background in black)
f) use « Recovery based on luminance mask » to accentuate denoise on the green background
g) use a curve « Luminance denoise by level » minimizing the action on the first level to preserve details and then acting mainly on the lower levels
h) use « Fine chroma » to adjust chroma noise
i) others settings (Luminance detail recovery, Chroma detail recovery, equalizer, edge detection…) according to your taste
j) note the importance of the bilateral filter
a) Create a new RT-Spot around the « Eagle »
b) use « Vibrance warm cool » to increase Saturation
c) use « Local contrast and Wavelet » to increase « local contrast » by using « Contrast by levels ».
All these settings are quite arbitrary, you can for example change the shape of the curve “Luminance denoise by level”, or the DCT parameters, or Bilateral, or “Recovery”, or…
Eagle_copyright-Jean-Charles_Rivas.NEFjdc.pp3 (22.4 KB)
Thanks! Now I’ve looked at the processing order and this kind of brings me back to my first post on this forum. It was not very well articulated, but I still stand behind the principle.
I so wish that at least Film simulation would be placed after the local adjustments. As an example… The LUT usually increases contrast and thus darkens shadows. Trying to raise those darkened shadows — during dodging and burning via local adjustement — after applying LUT will reduce the editing headroom for local adjustments dramatically. It seems counter intuitive, but I’d love to hear the reasoning.
To me, the logical placement of the local adjustments in the processing order would be between step 12 and 13.
I want to add that I’m extremely thankful giving us these local features. I also want to add that I’m not a programmer, but I did work as a professional full time retoucher for close ten years and I this is the way those I came across worked. If possible, local adjustments first (for maximum editing local adjustments headroom) and global after.
Now, I need to install VirtualBox ASAP to try this thing out! 
Yes, as it’s in dev branch it will also be in 5.9
I think this makes sense, but I’m not sure if there is a catch. If you would, please file an issue on our GitHub tracker so that we can discuss it there and make code suggestions / test cases.
As I mentioned before, you don’t need to. HIRAM makes macOS builds of the dev branch which are available here.
Oh, I read 5.8-xxxx on those and figured they wouldn’t contain the the local adjustment features that will be a part of 5.9. Thanks!
Hello @jdc
Thanks a lot indeed for all your suggestions. They are super useful (I have even printed them on paper…).
I am extremely grateful for all your work done on RawTherapee all these past years. The Local Adjustements are quite powerful
I am going to study all your Local adjustment process thanks to the .pp3 file you have linked on this post, for this Raw image
Hello @Soupy
Check out the YouTube video by @Andy_Astbury1 on how to use it effectively.
Thanks. I am a great fan of Andy’s videos myself.
Actually, the idea to use the demoisaic RCD-VING4 method in “my” workflow is shamefully “stolen” from one of his YouTube videos on the noise reduction with RawTherapee 
Sorry for nitpicking:
RCD+VNG4
Hello @heckflosse
Sorry for nitpicking: but it is RCD+VNG4```
Thanks a lot indeed! I was aware of the missing + but on my computer I didn’t notice the missing I (VING4) and yes I should wear (buy) spectacles but I am trying to procrastinate this outcome as long as possible (I am nearly 50 years old…)
BTW, since you mention this.
I have read on this thread on Github [1] about the different RCD “methods”. I have chosen RCD+VNG4 thanks to Andy but I suppose I should have also opted for RCD+Bilinear as well, right?
On RawPedia [2] the +Bilinear “variant” is not fully mentioned and this is why I am asking…
EDIT: just checked @jdc .pp3 as well. He chose “rcdvng4”. Therefore, I suppose it is the right one for this noisy image
[1] Fast bayer demosaicer for flat regions · Issue #5748 · Beep6581/RawTherapee · GitHub
[2] https://rawpedia.rawtherapee.com/Demosaicing
I’m getting 53 years old this year…
And I’m 62 so both of you can stop using age as an excuse 
Hi Desmis,
very good news !! 
PS: Are you sleeping sometime… or you are a machine man?? You are making updates every day 
Good Good!!
Hello @dafrasaga
There are several reasons for this commit flow
But I think, it’s quite finish (the flow)…
Jacques
I just updated to Big Sur just to be able to run the latest build (RawTherapee_OSX_11.2_64_5.8-2711-gb554f52ab.zip) from there. If anybody is about to do the same, I just want to say that it does not contain local adjustments. 