I just applied your patch. It works perfectly now… I don't see a point in trying to prevent it on already processed images, as it works so much better now.
Thanks ! On 23/07/2016 02:20, Dan Torop wrote: > There should be a fix for this as PR 1225 > (https://github.com/darktable-org/darktable/pull/1225). The column # was > off by one from the column of the pixel being examined, hence the code > was reading the wrong color values from the X-Trans sensor pattern. As > hotpixels works by comparing a given pixel with its neighbors of the > same color, due to this bug, often a pixel was compared with neighbors > of different color. In the example image, the code saw the intense red > as too-hot green pixels, "correcting" them with unfortunate results. > > Note that this will change the behavior of the hotpixels iop for X-Trans > images (that is, threshold/strength values may need to be changed on > already processed images). I'm not sure if there is a useful way to > address this via iop version, or to (as with a recent change to the > highlight reconstruction iop) figure that if this is a long-standing bug > (and, in this case, to still-experimental X-Trans code), that the change > should just happen? > > Dan > > > > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016, at 11:45 AM, Marc Cousin wrote: >> I hope this one works. >> >> >> http://www.filedropper.com/xe021880 >> >> Putting the ML back in CC in case someone else is interested :) >> >> On 21/07/2016 16:51, Dan Torop wrote: >>> Hi Marc, >>> >>> I just tried to download the example RAF you posted, but it seems to be >>> expired already? If you're able to send me another link, I'd be curious to >>> look -- though it might take a moment these days. I wrote that x-trans >>> hotpixels code some time ago... >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> >>> Marc Cousin <cousinm...@gmail.com> writes: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I have a picture (Fuji XE2, XTrans, sorry :) ) with two hot (white) >>>> pixels. One of them is perfectly corrected by the hotpixels module, the >>>> other not. If I try to raise the strength, several other pixels (which are >>>> correct) are corrected that shouldn't (in the red blurry flower). >>>> >>>> Both pixels are below the damselfly, and demosaiced bright white. >>>> >>>> As this happens even with an empty history, I just share the RAF for now. >>>> Please tell me if an XMP is also needed. >>>> >>>> Here is the link to this RAF: >>>> >>>> http://dl.free.fr/rm.pl?h=hADGGHNK4&i=79426743&s=CcmFA50FqLHFmVY0exVdmcwI2CiOJZ27 >>>> >>>> >>>> I don't know where it comes from, and I lack experience correcting hot >>>> pixels: these two appeared on this picture and disappeared since then. I >>>> suspect the camera was quite hot (very hot weather currently here, and the >>>> camera stayed in the sun quite a bit). So >>>> >>>> I don't know if this is a problem of me using it badly, a bug, or they are >>>> not hot pixels and I'm wrong in assuming they should be corrected :) >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> >>>> Marc >>>> ___________________________________________________________________________ >>>> darktable developer mailing list >>>> to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org >>> >> ___________________________________________________________________________ >> darktable developer mailing list >> to unsubscribe send a mail to >> darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org >> ___________________________________________________________________________ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
