I always learn something new from Bruce's videos. In fact, I came to appreciate and adopt Darktable because of him. I am now at the point where I need to come up with my own workflow to make my photo editing process faster and more consistent in Darktable. I am now convinced I do not need to force Adobe's business model down my throat.
My philosophy is not to avoid display-referred modules. I use scene-referred modules for most of the processing, the use display-referred modules for the "last mile" for the final tweaks, if for some reason I am not fully satisfied. This allows me to go back to the scene-referred processed image in the history stack any time. It also means the display-referred editing is minimal, one or two modules, usually.
Thanks for another wonderful workflow video Bruce. I agree regarding the tone curve module. We use it all the time and losing it will be simply unacceptable.
Hi ! Thanks for your interesting and understanding videos ! Concerning the replacement of the tone curve that I also loved, isn’t it what tone egalizer is supposed to do ?
Great tutorial. Darktable is such a versatile tool, with so many approaches to achieving an intention. So many. And in recent years the pace of development is staggering. I have found the version 3.4 on Windows 10 to be pretty stable, literally no crashes, for over two weeks. From an ergonomics, the more recent versions are so much improved in the usability, with features and buttons placed conveniently, and its just a lot easier to use. Maybe also I have taken more time to learn it. Especially as I am not willing to invest in a tool like Photoshop or Lightroom's monthly subscription, just to take and edit the occasional photo, this has made me more resolute to learn Darktable. The one thing that has always stood out for me, even over and above any of the tools from Adobe, is the image quality of darktable while editing. It is incredibly good. So good that I can immediately see the slight but pretty consistent difference between viewing in darktable, and viewing the jpeg in any other tool. One way to achieve exactly the same image out of darktable, for large viewing or printing, is to export as .tiff fomat images, then the result is truly lossless. It definitely has a steep learning curve, cos like Reaper my favorite audio DAW(Digital Audio Workstation), when there are lots of features developed over many years, you cannot avoid the complexity. Let's face it editing photos from RAW is NOT for the faint hearted. Anyone who wants the simple life should stick to in camera jpegs and or RAW files, edited with Adobe Photoshop Elements which is also free, and does a decent job. Thankfully the few youtubers who dedicate time to cover darktable have done a good job of making it easier to discover many of its features. The one challenge is that Windows users, do not get access to any of these interim releases, but maybe that is a good thing, cos many of us really would not want to be perpetual beta-testers, rather wait until the software is stable before we dive in - cos we are far more interested in the images than in the image processing workflow. In conclusion, I think the advice to not use certain modules, because they do not fit in with the "perfect" scene referred workflow, is only that - advice. I for example still use the tone curve module and the rgb curve module, and what's more important is not the tool but the result. If the results look ok, then that's what is important. Maybe if one wants images that look pretty close to what is possible in an optical transformation workflow, sure stick to the scene referred. But if you are going for a specific look in your images, such as high-key, the scene referred workflow will limit you somewhat, cos some of the display referred tools are, at this point in time, a lot easier to use, and many of us are familiar with them. The important thing is to understand the limits of the tools you have at your disposal, and use them in context. A fighter pilot needs to know the limits of their planes ability, and stick within these. Within limits, all the modules in darktable serve a purpose. I recently discovered the raw denoise module, and while absolutely no one I can recall on youtube has convered this module, this is the one that I find does the best job for me, when I have compared the results with what I could achieve with other noise reduction modules. Darktable is great for that, one needs to do one's own exploration, in addition to studying the manual and watching youtube/reading stuff in forums about darktable. Just try things out and see, there are literally hundreds of controls in darktable and there seems no end to the discovery. Ultimately, what I love about darktable is that it forces you to start taking better pictures in the 1st place, cos editing can only go so far, and you over time realise that a really good image, needs very little editing, unless you are going for a pretty specific look. And in all honesty, I think darktable is and should remain an intermediate photo editing tool - something in between Lightroom and Photoshop. While a lot can be done in darktable, one must also admit - Photoshop, it is not. If one's photography needs extensive edits with compositing and layers, clearly the current version of darktable is not for you, go use darktable to process the image in a similar manner to Adobe Camera Raw . limit your changes to white balance, exposure and simple things, then export as tiff and continue editing in something like GIMP - if you need freeware for this. One has to set realistic expectations, darktable is a great tool, but it will not and should not be compared with something like Photoshop, even if it has some similar capabilities. For the kind of editing I need, darktable does the job.
You can use *tone equalizer* as a substitute for the curves module. Aurelian has even prepared some presets as a starting point for this (both for increasing contrast and for compression of shadows/highlights). If you then use one of the presets for contrast, for example, one of the nice options (besides the obvious readjustment of the curve points) is the possibility of using mask exposure compensation as a kind of contrast fulcum.
Yeah, I get that the tone equalizer is meant to be a replacement for the tone curve, but I find it much harder to get the curve I want. Maybe I need to play with that module more often.
Thanks a lot for the awesome video! I love seeing full workflows, please keep them coming, they help a lot :) I am still a beginner and finding the sweet balance between "no modules" and "too many modules" is the hardest part for me, especially with so many modules to choose from; so far I was just using a mix between scene-referred and display-referred modules without much reasoning.
Great workflow video and looking forward to seeing new features on darktable 3.6. I do wish there will be less restrictions on using various modules when it comes to scene referred workflow.
Damn Bruce! Amazing videos and channel. I’ve just switched my MacBook over to mint and installed darktable. Video 069 helped me out a lot! Cheers mate. I’ll be watching a lot more.
Nice one. As an alternative when I want to vignette I use additional exposure modules with either an ellipse or graduated density masks. I do use multiple graduated filters changing angles and curves as necessary. Looking forward to your next one.
You won't be using 3.5, you'll be using 3.6 In darktable-land, the development cycle always has an odd numbered extension, but when it goes to a stable release, it gets an even numbered extension. So the current dev cycle of 3.5 will become the stable, released version 3.6. And yeah, there is some great stuff coming!
Bruce, noticed a few comments about the tone equaliser. If you disable the dodge/burn functionality - can't remember how off the top of my head - the original image effectively becomes the mask to which the exposure control is linked. Think you'll need to align it so that you get most of the tonal range spread across the 9 EV bands (?), before you disable the functionality. I'm guessing that the tone curve has been dumped because of the maths required, and instabilities it can cause.
Great.. The way you used graduated density module added a new way of proccessing to my workflow. I only wanted to add another way of doing it using the color balance module. You just have to make a drawn or drawn and parametric mask and then push the shadows down to any level that suits you. And by the way I totally agree with your opinion of keeping the tone curve active.
Hi Bruce! hope your doing fine. Wow, what a great video! Seeing your workflow I can notice how different I process my own stuff. And also I have a bunch of comments (sorry if this is too annoying!) * If I understand it correctly, the fulcrum at 18% is what the eye percieves as gray50 (because of log scale). Moving that slider would move the "center point" of the s-curve (instead of the angles) * I thought "RGB curve" replaced "tone curve" * Your first parametric mask, in the graduated filter, has a few funky spots at the right (you can even see them when you activate the masks) * for "drawing attention" I wouldn't have used the graduated filters. Instead, I would just use the RGB curve (you can add 2 graduations or more in just one instance!). And I would have even used a draw mask around the basil, invert and lower the middle of the curve. * I love that "show mask" feature comming in next version!
Not sure about the fulcrum function. That's one of those address where the documentation is not overly helpful! I also thought RGB curve was supposed to replace tone curve, but I'm fairly certain I read that RGB curve was to be avoided (it's possible I have that wrong!). Yeah, I only noticed those wobbly bits after is rendered the video and was crafting the thumbnail for the video. Gah! And yes, 3.6 will be a great release!
@@audio2u The thing with the fulcrum is my understanding from watching your videos, specially your "Aurelien" topic videos. I think you've covered this once or twice. I may be totally wrong too :D
@@wido123123 In the end the fulcrum results in more contrast in either the shadows or highlights...you can add the module with say 15% or 25% constrast bump and then blend in difference mode.. white area are the ones impacted.....slide the fulcrum to extremes and you can see the shift and what areas are affected ....in the end you could use this as a way to "mask" your fulcrum....
I have had a love hate relationship with the colour balance module sometimes I can get it to work well other shots it’s a disaster agree re tone curve I still use it
Haha. After Martin commented, I fired up charitable and gave the tone equalizer a go. Still not a fan. I got some weird artefacts from it. I would probably need to go and watch a video about how it works! 😃
Hi Bruce, can you compare using the contrast adjustment in Filmic RGB rather than using the contrast slider in the color calibration? You prefer the color calibration version because of the fulcrum slider?
Aurelien has said many times from what I recall is that filmic is really more about mapping the tones and not also trying to add or correct global contrast in fact it sort of removes contrast so I reckon that the contrast slider in filmic is a little bit about helping to over come some of that loss while color balance and local contrast are consistently recommended to deal with global image contrast as could the tone eq starting with one of the tone curve presets....that's my take...
I had honestly never looked at the no-no list. Turns out a quarter of the modules I use I’m apparently not supposed to be. Anyone know if there is going to be a scene referred sharpen module in the upcoming release? I use local contrast and the equalizer but there’s still just a bit of sharpening that i can’t seem to accomplish without either the sharpen module or high pass, both of which I’m apparently supposed to be avoiding.
Not sure about any advances in the sharpening front, Cass, although if you were to make sure that the sharpen module was the last thing prior to the output profile module, you SHOULD be ok.
So Bruce if the output of filmic as it says is non-linear display referred then why can you not use the rgb curve after it?? I get that the tone curve expects lab but the other one should be okay no ??
Is filmic display-referred? I honestly haven't looked, but that strikes me as odd, given Aurélien is so gung-ho for us adopting a scene-referred workflow. I'll have to check that when I'm next on my pc.
@@audio2u It was my understanding that filmic is kind of the necessary step of getting from the wider range of scenic captured by the sensor down to an end result that can be displayed on a monitor and that the scenic workflow lets you do more prior to this step when you still have all the information while the display referred workflow does most of the editing after you scale the info down to the realm of the display. As far as why rgb curves has to come after this scaling down and what negatives it can have if used too extensively thats where I start to get lost and haven't noticed any issues in using rgb curves myself.
You are correct about the intent of filmic rgb. It does the scene-referred to display-referred scaling for you. As for whether RGB Curves goes before or after filmic rgb.... common sense says to me (unless I misunderstand something here... which is always a possibility!) that it should go BEFORE filmic rgb, so that you do get to utilise the full range of data, and then all your edits are re-scaled to display-referred by filmic rgb. That's the way I imagine it working, but like I said, I could be barking up the wrong tree!
Wouldn't the Tone equalizer be the thing the closest to the Tone curve? Still i agree there should be a tone curve. Although it's 'wrong' i have been using it in the scene referred workflow, and didn't see anything going wrong. Sometimes i tend to think the dev's go on about theoretical errors that are not visible to the eye?
Yes, tone equalizer is an option, although I, personally, am not a fan of it. And it turns out that the RGB curve IS fine for scene-referred workflows; it's just the old tone curve which isn't.
It's actually reassuring that a user of your experience suffers the same 'aggghh where's that gone' feeling as the rest of us when there's an upgrade. Or just ignore the advice, just because a certain module may offend the coding sensitivities of the devs, if it still works and does what you want, who cares?
I always learn something new from Bruce's videos. In fact, I came to appreciate and adopt Darktable because of him. I am now at the point where I need to come up with my own workflow to make my photo editing process faster and more consistent in Darktable. I am now convinced I do not need to force Adobe's business model down my throat.
No, you absolutely do NOT! And how awesome is that?
I'm coming from LR and this is exactly what I've been looking for! Thank you!
Glad it was helpful! Your next stop should be episodes 128-129.
My philosophy is not to avoid display-referred modules. I use scene-referred modules for most of the processing, the use display-referred modules for the "last mile" for the final tweaks, if for some reason I am not fully satisfied. This allows me to go back to the scene-referred processed image in the history stack any time. It also means the display-referred editing is minimal, one or two modules, usually.
Yep, that's pretty much my mindset these days, too.
Learned a lot from your Videos. Nice pace. Thank you
Cheers!
Thanks for another wonderful workflow video Bruce. I agree regarding the tone curve module. We use it all the time and losing it will be simply unacceptable.
Yeah, I certainly hope Aurélien is on the case!
Hi ! Thanks for your interesting and understanding videos ! Concerning the replacement of the tone curve that I also loved, isn’t it what tone egalizer is supposed to do ?
Oh,I had not considered that. Maybe you're right. I will have to investigate! 😃
thanks for the fun videos :) they helped me a lot to get useful results in DT :)
Glad to hear it! Cheers.
Great tutorial. Darktable is such a versatile tool, with so many approaches to achieving an intention. So many. And in recent years the pace of development is staggering. I have found the version 3.4 on Windows 10 to be pretty stable, literally no crashes, for over two weeks.
From an ergonomics, the more recent versions are so much improved in the usability, with features and buttons placed conveniently, and its just a lot easier to use. Maybe also I have taken more time to learn it. Especially as I am not willing to invest in a tool like Photoshop or Lightroom's monthly subscription, just to take and edit the occasional photo, this has made me more resolute to learn Darktable.
The one thing that has always stood out for me, even over and above any of the tools from Adobe, is the image quality of darktable while editing. It is incredibly good. So good that I can immediately see the slight but pretty consistent difference between viewing in darktable, and viewing the jpeg in any other tool. One way to achieve exactly the same image out of darktable, for large viewing or printing, is to export as .tiff fomat images, then the result is truly lossless.
It definitely has a steep learning curve, cos like Reaper my favorite audio DAW(Digital Audio Workstation), when there are lots of features developed over many years, you cannot avoid the complexity. Let's face it editing photos from RAW is NOT for the faint hearted. Anyone who wants the simple life should stick to in camera jpegs and or RAW files, edited with Adobe Photoshop Elements which is also free, and does a decent job.
Thankfully the few youtubers who dedicate time to cover darktable have done a good job of making it easier to discover many of its features. The one challenge is that Windows users, do not get access to any of these interim releases, but maybe that is a good thing, cos many of us really would not want to be perpetual beta-testers, rather wait until the software is stable before we dive in - cos we are far more interested in the images than in the image processing workflow.
In conclusion, I think the advice to not use certain modules, because they do not fit in with the "perfect" scene referred workflow, is only that - advice. I for example still use the tone curve module and the rgb curve module, and what's more important is not the tool but the result. If the results look ok, then that's what is important. Maybe if one wants images that look pretty close to what is possible in an optical transformation workflow, sure stick to the scene referred.
But if you are going for a specific look in your images, such as high-key, the scene referred workflow will limit you somewhat, cos some of the display referred tools are, at this point in time, a lot easier to use, and many of us are familiar with them. The important thing is to understand the limits of the tools you have at your disposal, and use them in context. A fighter pilot needs to know the limits of their planes ability, and stick within these.
Within limits, all the modules in darktable serve a purpose.
I recently discovered the raw denoise module, and while absolutely no one I can recall on youtube has convered this module, this is the one that I find does the best job for me, when I have compared the results with what I could achieve with other noise reduction modules.
Darktable is great for that, one needs to do one's own exploration, in addition to studying the manual and watching youtube/reading stuff in forums about darktable. Just try things out and see, there are literally hundreds of controls in darktable and there seems no end to the discovery.
Ultimately, what I love about darktable is that it forces you to start taking better pictures in the 1st place, cos editing can only go so far, and you over time realise that a really good image, needs very little editing, unless you are going for a pretty specific look. And in all honesty, I think darktable is and should remain an intermediate photo editing tool - something in between Lightroom and Photoshop. While a lot can be done in darktable, one must also admit - Photoshop, it is not.
If one's photography needs extensive edits with compositing and layers, clearly the current version of darktable is not for you, go use darktable to process the image in a similar manner to Adobe Camera Raw . limit your changes to white balance, exposure and simple things, then export as tiff and continue editing in something like GIMP - if you need freeware for this.
One has to set realistic expectations, darktable is a great tool, but it will not and should not be compared with something like Photoshop, even if it has some similar capabilities. For the kind of editing I need, darktable does the job.
So, "darktable, good".... Got it! 😃
You can use *tone equalizer* as a substitute for the curves module.
Aurelian has even prepared some presets as a starting point for this (both for increasing contrast and for compression of shadows/highlights). If you then use one of the presets for contrast, for example, one of the nice options (besides the obvious readjustment of the curve points) is the possibility of using mask exposure compensation as a kind of contrast fulcum.
Yeah, I get that the tone equalizer is meant to be a replacement for the tone curve, but I find it much harder to get the curve I want. Maybe I need to play with that module more often.
Love the workflow videos. You should make more of them, where you use different types of modules.
So I'm told! 😃
Thanks Bruce- right in line with my need re: seeing a so-so image and learning what needs to be done to make it pop.
Cheers!
I would love to see more workflow videos like this ? Very insightful
Cheers.
Thanks a lot for the awesome video! I love seeing full workflows, please keep them coming, they help a lot :)
I am still a beginner and finding the sweet balance between "no modules" and "too many modules" is the hardest part for me, especially with so many modules to choose from; so far I was just using a mix between scene-referred and display-referred modules without much reasoning.
Yeah, I must confess to having been in the same boat. Not really thinking about which modules I should really avoid. Have to reassess that mindset!
Great workflow video and looking forward to seeing new features on darktable 3.6. I do wish there will be less restrictions on using various modules when it comes to scene referred workflow.
Well, they are only recommendations, not really restrictions. Once you understand the why, it makes sense.
i agree the new version is better, blessing all
The new version of what?
@@audio2u the picture you created, the 2nd one
Ahh, right!
Damn Bruce! Amazing videos and channel. I’ve just switched my MacBook over to mint and installed darktable. Video 069 helped me out a lot! Cheers mate. I’ll be watching a lot more.
Thanks for the support! 😃
Nice one. As an alternative when I want to vignette I use additional exposure modules with either an ellipse or graduated density masks. I do use multiple graduated filters changing angles and curves as necessary. Looking forward to your next one.
Cheers!
Thanks Bruce, great video! Love to see more end-to-end videos from you!
And I love this new mask selection feature in 3.5! Can't wait to use DT 3.5!
You won't be using 3.5, you'll be using 3.6
In darktable-land, the development cycle always has an odd numbered extension, but when it goes to a stable release, it gets an even numbered extension. So the current dev cycle of 3.5 will become the stable, released version 3.6.
And yeah, there is some great stuff coming!
Bruce, noticed a few comments about the tone equaliser. If you disable the dodge/burn functionality - can't remember how off the top of my head - the original image effectively becomes the mask to which the exposure control is linked. Think you'll need to align it so that you get most of the tonal range spread across the 9 EV bands (?), before you disable the functionality.
I'm guessing that the tone curve has been dumped because of the maths required, and instabilities it can cause.
I'll have to look into that.
Great.. The way you used graduated density module added a new way of proccessing to my workflow. I only wanted to add another way of doing it using the color balance module. You just have to make a drawn or drawn and parametric mask and then push the shadows down to any level that suits you. And by the way I totally agree with your opinion of keeping the tone curve active.
Cheers!
Hi Bruce! hope your doing fine.
Wow, what a great video! Seeing your workflow I can notice how different I process my own stuff. And also I have a bunch of comments (sorry if this is too annoying!)
* If I understand it correctly, the fulcrum at 18% is what the eye percieves as gray50 (because of log scale). Moving that slider would move the "center point" of the s-curve (instead of the angles)
* I thought "RGB curve" replaced "tone curve"
* Your first parametric mask, in the graduated filter, has a few funky spots at the right (you can even see them when you activate the masks)
* for "drawing attention" I wouldn't have used the graduated filters. Instead, I would just use the RGB curve (you can add 2 graduations or more in just one instance!). And I would have even used a draw mask around the basil, invert and lower the middle of the curve.
* I love that "show mask" feature comming in next version!
Not sure about the fulcrum function. That's one of those address where the documentation is not overly helpful!
I also thought RGB curve was supposed to replace tone curve, but I'm fairly certain I read that RGB curve was to be avoided (it's possible I have that wrong!).
Yeah, I only noticed those wobbly bits after is rendered the video and was crafting the thumbnail for the video. Gah!
And yes, 3.6 will be a great release!
@@audio2u The thing with the fulcrum is my understanding from watching your videos, specially your "Aurelien" topic videos. I think you've covered this once or twice. I may be totally wrong too :D
@@wido123123 In the end the fulcrum results in more contrast in either the shadows or highlights...you can add the module with say 15% or 25% constrast bump and then blend in difference mode.. white area are the ones impacted.....slide the fulcrum to extremes and you can see the shift and what areas are affected ....in the end you could use this as a way to "mask" your fulcrum....
I have had a love hate relationship with the colour balance module sometimes I can get it to work well other shots it’s a disaster agree re tone curve I still use it
Yep, we definitely need a scene-referred compatible tone curve module!
So looking forward to your episode 93.... will it be about what´s new in version 3.6? I have a hard time waiting for that....
No, it's not about 3.6, but THAT isn't far off now!
Thanks for this video. Did you try the module tone equalizer to darken the background? For the shown image it could be an alternative in my opinion.
Nope. If I had, I'd have shown it! 😃
@@audio2u It actually has a curvy thing in it which you might like. :D
Haha. After Martin commented, I fired up charitable and gave the tone equalizer a go. Still not a fan. I got some weird artefacts from it. I would probably need to go and watch a video about how it works! 😃
@@audio2u Per hapse a chance for a new video and to analyse to see how it works
I did one back when it was introduced.
Hi Bruce, can you compare using the contrast adjustment in Filmic RGB rather than using the contrast slider in the color calibration? You prefer the color calibration version because of the fulcrum slider?
Good question. I would have to sit and play with both to see if/how they differ.
Aurelien has said many times from what I recall is that filmic is really more about mapping the tones and not also trying to add or correct global contrast in fact it sort of removes contrast so I reckon that the contrast slider in filmic is a little bit about helping to over come some of that loss while color balance and local contrast are consistently recommended to deal with global image contrast as could the tone eq starting with one of the tone curve presets....that's my take...
I have so much work to do. #shakeshead
I had honestly never looked at the no-no list. Turns out a quarter of the modules I use I’m apparently not supposed to be. Anyone know if there is going to be a scene referred sharpen module in the upcoming release? I use local contrast and the equalizer but there’s still just a bit of sharpening that i can’t seem to accomplish without either the sharpen module or high pass, both of which I’m apparently supposed to be avoiding.
Not sure about any advances in the sharpening front, Cass, although if you were to make sure that the sharpen module was the last thing prior to the output profile module, you SHOULD be ok.
So Bruce if the output of filmic as it says is non-linear display referred then why can you not use the rgb curve after it?? I get that the tone curve expects lab but the other one should be okay no ??
Is filmic display-referred? I honestly haven't looked, but that strikes me as odd, given Aurélien is so gung-ho for us adopting a scene-referred workflow. I'll have to check that when I'm next on my pc.
If you hover that is the defined output
@@audio2u It was my understanding that filmic is kind of the necessary step of getting from the wider range of scenic captured by the sensor down to an end result that can be displayed on a monitor and that the scenic workflow lets you do more prior to this step when you still have all the information while the display referred workflow does most of the editing after you scale the info down to the realm of the display. As far as why rgb curves has to come after this scaling down and what negatives it can have if used too extensively thats where I start to get lost and haven't noticed any issues in using rgb curves myself.
You are correct about the intent of filmic rgb. It does the scene-referred to display-referred scaling for you.
As for whether RGB Curves goes before or after filmic rgb.... common sense says to me (unless I misunderstand something here... which is always a possibility!) that it should go BEFORE filmic rgb, so that you do get to utilise the full range of data, and then all your edits are re-scaled to display-referred by filmic rgb.
That's the way I imagine it working, but like I said, I could be barking up the wrong tree!
Wouldn't the Tone equalizer be the thing the closest to the Tone curve? Still i agree there should be a tone curve. Although it's 'wrong' i have been using it in the scene referred workflow, and didn't see anything going wrong. Sometimes i tend to think the dev's go on about theoretical errors that are not visible to the eye?
Yes, tone equalizer is an option, although I, personally, am not a fan of it.
And it turns out that the RGB curve IS fine for scene-referred workflows; it's just the old tone curve which isn't.
@@audio2u Good to know about the RGB curve. feels much more straightfoward and intuitive then the tone eq i find..
I don't why my comments are removed, but it's always like Christmas when you put up a new video.
I don't know, mate. I certainly haven't removed any of them.
@@audio2u I know, I guess it's youtube's AI or something.
If I used the word Lightroom I would understand ;).
Bwahaha!
Hello Bruce.
When I post my resulted Pics in WhatsApp, ist Turns Out Not aceptabl.
What do I wrong?
No idea. Was it a case of an incompatible format, maybe? Like, did you try png and jpeg?
👍👍👍
Cheers!
"Color balance rgb"?!?!?! Is that new of darktable 3.5/3.6?
Yes it is - You can see it here in french, but you'll have it soon in 3.6 - th-cam.com/video/qRLH5hMschs/w-d-xo.html
Yes, it is a new module (or more correctly, a reworking of the colour balance module).
Why 16/9?
Just a personal preference. I usually process my favorite images, then export them to a wallpaper folder, which is used for desktop wallpaper.
Familiarity breeds discontentment. Try using diopters and you will see your garden in a completely different way.
Yeah, good call!
What?! You can use several points in the curve in "tone curve", NOT just two (as well as in "rgb curve").
Yeah, you can add as many points as you like. Were you not aware of this?
@@audio2u Yes, I was, but you said that was just possible two because it is "display referred".
I think maybe I didn't communicate clearly. I was never under the impression that two control points was the limit.
@@audio2u ok, then I understood it wrong.
It's actually reassuring that a user of your experience suffers the same 'aggghh where's that gone' feeling as the rest of us when there's an upgrade. Or just ignore the advice, just because a certain module may offend the coding sensitivities of the devs, if it still works and does what you want, who cares?
Bwahaha! I blame the senility! :)
I was thinking "end-to-end workflow" would mean from importing to renaming to organizing to editing to exporting.
Each to their own! I have covered all of that other stuff in previous videos. Sorry to disappoint.