I need to presume things in order to provide consistent and reasonable workflows from start to end. You get the scene-linear one, based on linear editing with exposure and filmic, and the display-linear one, based on legacy modules and modules order (and base curve), or alternatively, no workflow at all, and set everything yourself.
I guess the question could be reformulated as : why can't user shoot himself in the foot faster ? Pick a consistent workflow from the start, and abide by it. There is no point in trying to interleave unrelated things, unless you want to make it worse for everyone. There are technical reasons at play here, that impose to think the pipeline as a whole, and not just as a stack of individual modules allowing local shortcuts to spare 2 clicks at the expense of degrading color for all the upcoming modules and image processing steps in the pipe. Global exposure needs to be fixed before input profile for people who use LUTs ICC profiles, or other LUT-based modules, and to help gamut mapping and chromatic adaptation. Fixing it later is a nasty hack that may work for people as long as they do lightweight editing with little exigence, but is not safe in general. Technics are not a democracy, they are dictated by the tools you use, and if you don't adapt to them, they will not adapt to you. Workflows are not a matter of opinion or personal preference, but a way to cope with technical requirements in the least painful way. Having more choices to shoot yourself in the foot is only having the illusion of choice. Cheers, Aurélien. Le 11/06/2020 à 20:54, Alexander Rabtchevich a écrit : > You presume a user chooses one of the approaches and uses it full time. > In that case the expose is added automatically. And what if a user > mostly uses basecurve approach and time after time wants to make a > scene-referred variant? He needs to turn off the basecurve, turn on the > filmic module (it is logical) and to add + 1EV exposure shift. The first > two actions can be done easily via custom style, but if one adds > exposure to the style, the previous exposure value will be replaced by > the value from the style (1.0). And the image will require to adjust the > exposure again. > > Why can't the module itself make signal boost of +1EV at its input just > as the +1EV exposure does in the pipeline before the filmic. Is there a > difference in the results? > > With respect, > Alexander Rabtchevich > > Aurélien Pierre wrote: >> >> The required +1 EV exposure boost is now applied automatically in >> exposure module for new edits if you choose the scene-linear workflow >> in preferences -> processing -> auto-apply pixel workflow default. >> >> Filmic v4 imposes 18% scene to be remapped to 18% display no matter >> what, resulting in preservation of overall brightness through the >> process. Previous Filmic v3 remapped 9% scene to 18% display to better >> match OOC JPEG, which creates problems with the curve (contrast >> behaviour degrades if grey is not more or less centered on the graph). >> >> Current v4 behaviour is to slide the image dynamic range along the >> luminance axis with exposure module, to anchor scene grey to display >> grey. Once this is done, filmic compresses the bounds of the dynamic >> range by rolling *around* the grey value, used as a reference, and >> therefore preserving the overall brightness of the image. This makes >> the transform more predictable and remove the scene grey param in GUI, >> which has confused too many users. >> >> See : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=leZVK2s68QA >> >> Cheers, >> >> Aurélien. >> >> Le 10/06/2020 à 08:19, David Vincent-Jones a écrit : >>> >>> The change that I see in v. 4.0 is that all of my images appear 1 >>> stop underexposed as compared to the previous version. Earlier I did >>> not need to adjust exposure at all, now I must boost the exposure on >>> all images. >>> >>> David >>> >>> On 2020-06-09 11:46 a.m., Alexander Rabtchevich wrote: >>>> Hm, as I understand, if I enable filmic plugin v 4.0 manually, I >>>> need to >>>> add +1.0EV manually too? That wasn't so with 3.0. >>>> >>>> With respect, >>>> Alexander Rabtchevich >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Aurélien Pierre wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> there is a +1 EV added by default in exposure if you enable the >>>>> scene-referred workflow. I don't understand what you mean. The >>>>> exposure bias is read in image EXIF, if the bias is 0 EV, then the >>>>> setting is 0 EV too. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Aurélien. >>>>> >>>>> Le 09/06/2020 à 19:46, Alexander Rabtchevich a écrit : >>>>>> Hello >>>>>> Exposure compensation bias for my Sony A99 is 0EV and images are too >>>>>> dark. They require to add +1EV to match filmic v.3 >>>>>> >>>>>> Current git master >>>>>> >>>>>> With respect, >>>>>> Alexander Rabtchevich >>>> > ___________________________________________________________________________ darktable developer mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
