venezia.rialto.arw.xmp (17.0 KB) darktable 3.9 Development
I was curious so I also gave this one a try using darktable.
venezia.rialto.arw.xmp (17.0 KB) darktable 3.9 Development
3 Likes
Being about 4 or 5 stops underexposed, not so bad results…
Interesting edit!
I do think it is a bit too orange, but it also does seem to work. Interesting indeed.
Thank you very much for your comment.
The orange color was there, I just gave it a little more prominence.
Thanks to @lightlover for capturing this moment.
Excuse my English …
Quick test with RT and “custom profile”
DSC03629.jpg.out.pp3 (16.0 KB)
Tried to approximate the feel Venice has had the times I’ve been there.
1 Like
On all the edits, except the second one of @lightlover, where it is reduced considerably, and the RT version of @nosle, there is a strange pattern of what looks like tiny sticks in the water around the two front boats:
If you zoom in, they go away, so they are not actually there, but a function of zoom. Anyone else notice that?
I noticed that too…
@Underexposed : When do you see this?
I’m asking because I did see this while editing and spend some time to figure out what was going on. It wasn’t long before I noticed that 100% (or close to it) views did not show this and neither did both exported jpg files (RT and DT alike).
I just double checked and I do not see this, at any zoom level, when viewing both my jpegs (viewed with XnView MP). I also do not see it in the version I uploaded here to be honest (small, medium and full sized).
1 Like
I noticed it while editing myself, but I never exported to a jpg because I was dissatisfied that I couldn’t get rid of it. I’ll try an exports.
You had me worried there for a minute 
Confirm… 
You’re right; it goes away. Learn something new every day!
In darktable, I think it also goes away in the preview if you set the scaling algorithm to bilinear. I have not tried exposing at reduced size.
.As it turns out, the artefacts only affect the darkroom.
Darkroom image, at 39% zoom, default (lanczos3) scaling:
Exported at size 3731x2787 (39% of original size 9568x6376), opened in the Gimp:
Export settings:
1 Like
This can be true for a number of artifacts or level of details observed in exports. I did some experimenting in a thread a while back where the OP found more apparent noise in his exports.
He was evaluating them at fit to screen preview (ie zoomed out) before exporting.
From what I could see the export was actually faithful to the 100 % view and the noise was very clear and matched his export.
. For me normal full screen preview in darkroom editing is around 25% so a fair bit of scaling for preview. In that case the zoomed out view with this scaling showed less noise and if I exported the image with a scaling factor of 0.25 instead of 1 then the JPG now was more like what he had expected as a match for his exported image.
I think this is why RT has taken the approach in some of their modules to only show the effect at 1 to 1 zoom. In any case I would bet many DT users edit the image full screen and don’t evaluate at 1 to 1 and will find that the level of detail and sharpening in their exported images doesn’t match what they feel like they set during the edit…clearly the extent of this effect is likely also impacted by the current scaling aligorithm in place
1 Like
I was under the expression that darktable does full-resolution processing (of the visible region), scaling it using the selected method. But I think we’d better deal with this in another topic. Opened darktable zoom artefacts in darkroom
Your parade looks like a dance!
3 Likes