Aw
Locked
12
12
 
|
I downgraded to 3.5, since digikam 4 is not usable on my system. Sharpening
does appearently not work at all, and previewing during editing is unusable. -- Anders _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
I use sharpening from 4.0.0 every day without any problem...
Gilles Caulier 2014-05-23 19:43 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: > I downgraded to 3.5, since digikam 4 is not usable on my system. Sharpening > does appearently not work at all, and previewing during editing is unusable. > > -- > Anders > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
Hi Gilles,
After converting from RAW, I try to make adjustments. The preview images have a diffetent size than the "before" image, I use mouse over switch. After using sharpen, the image I can see is awful - looks like a 100 px blown up to my 1600px screen. I have not been able in the short time I tried, to see a good looking image after the sharpening, so I see the function as broken. It may be that it works in the image file, but I need to be able to review my changes... These two things alone is enough that I decided to go back to 3.5, because I could not get on with my task - processing images. With 3.5, I can. It does not help that it works for some, so if there are things I can do to help identify the bugs, let me know. Kindly, Anders Lund Long time digikam fan and user On Fredag den 23. maj 2014 22:28:52, Gilles Caulier wrote: > I use sharpening from 4.0.0 every day without any problem... > > Gilles Caulier > > 2014-05-23 19:43 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: > > I downgraded to 3.5, since digikam 4 is not usable on my system. > > Sharpening > > does appearently not work at all, and previewing during editing is > > unusable. > > > > -- > > Anders > > _______________________________________________ > > Digikam-users mailing list > > [hidden email] > > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users -- Anders _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
2014-05-23 22:44 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>:
> Hi Gilles, > > After converting from RAW, I try to make adjustments. > > The preview images have a diffetent size than the "before" image, I use mouse > over switch. I use it too here. Look screenshot taken here, with 100% zoom. I raised up sharp effect to see effect applied to image (with noise rejected of course). It's a 16 bits color depth RAW file processed on my double WQHD screens https://www.flickr.com/photos/digikam/14255714125/ > > After using sharpen, the image I can see is awful - looks like a 100 px blown > up to my 1600px screen. I have not been able in the short time I tried, to see > a good looking image after the sharpening, so I see the function as broken. It > may be that it works in the image file, but I need to be able to review my > changes... Sharpen tool can be simple sharp, unsharped mask, or refocus. Which one do you use ? Note : i never seen this dysfunction here. I already seen a dysynchronization between before and after preview, in 5% use cases. I don't yet found where is the problem. > > These two things alone is enough that I decided to go back to 3.5, because I > could not get on with my task - processing images. With 3.5, I can. > > It does not help that it works for some, so if there are things I can do to > help identify the bugs, let me know. Share with me RAW file to try to reproduce the problem here... Gilles Caulier _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
2014-05-24 6:10 GMT+02:00 Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]>: 2014-05-23 22:44 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>:
In my case it doesn't matter which one I use. Same problem for all of them.
100% in my setup!
For me it happens for RAW as well as JPG files. For the moment I don't have 4.0.0 installed but I plan to install in again in parallel with 3.5.0. I assume that is possible if I use a different path!? Which KDE and QT versions are prefered to use? /Anders _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In reply to this post by Gilles Caulier-4
Hi Gilles,
I believe you, it just does not look anything like that here. I will try 4.1 when released, and hope for the best, as I can not easily have both versions installed. I was looking much forward to 4.0, with all the wonderful optimizations and new features, and I still do! One thing I noticed is that I did not have previews in the download window, which was a small regress compared to 3.5, but otherwise, 4.0 looked splendid until I tried to use the image editor. Kindly, Anders On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 06:10:29, Gilles Caulier wrote: > 2014-05-23 22:44 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: > > Hi Gilles, > > > > After converting from RAW, I try to make adjustments. > > > > The preview images have a diffetent size than the "before" image, I use > > mouse over switch. > > I use it too here. Look screenshot taken here, with 100% zoom. I > raised up sharp effect to see effect applied to image (with noise > rejected of course). It's a 16 bits color depth RAW file processed on > my double WQHD screens > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/digikam/14255714125/ > > > After using sharpen, the image I can see is awful - looks like a 100 px > > blown up to my 1600px screen. I have not been able in the short time I > > tried, to see a good looking image after the sharpening, so I see the > > function as broken. It may be that it works in the image file, but I need > > to be able to review my changes... > > Sharpen tool can be simple sharp, unsharped mask, or refocus. Which > one do you use ? > > Note : i never seen this dysfunction here. I already seen a > dysynchronization between before and after preview, in 5% use cases. I > don't yet found where is the problem. > > > These two things alone is enough that I decided to go back to 3.5, because > > I could not get on with my task - processing images. With 3.5, I can. > > > > It does not help that it works for some, so if there are things I can do > > to > > help identify the bugs, let me know. > > Share with me RAW file to try to reproduce the problem here... > > Gilles Caulier > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users -- Anders _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
Hi, For me it seems that it only happens on images I have resized before sharpening! Images with original size seem to behave, almost, as in 3.5.0.(I now have 4.0.0 in parallel and use a fresh configuration.) 2014-05-24 10:49 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: Hi Gilles, _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In reply to this post by Anders Lund
Hi Gilles,
I tried reinstalling 4.0, because I can not understand why it should not work here, if it works for you - and in fact it appears to work much better this time. Really odd, because first time, I tried with 3 images, with only bad results. But now my preview images in various of my favorite tools appears to work, except for a short blink when I activate tools, where the image is too small initially. For local contrast, the smaller initial preview is sticky, I have to do a ctrl + alt + e to get it right. This function is significantly faster than in 3.5, which is great! I hope it will keep working! :) Anders On Fredag den 23. maj 2014 19:43:09, Anders Lund wrote: > I downgraded to 3.5, since digikam 4 is not usable on my system. Sharpening > does appearently not work at all, and previewing during editing is > unusable. _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
Maybe there is a change in the unsharp mask tool, because I have to us a
significantly smaller radius setting to make it work properly - like 10 times smaller. AndersOn Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 11:42:03, Lund wrote: > Hi Gilles, > > I tried reinstalling 4.0, because I can not understand why it should not > work here, if it works for you - and in fact it appears to work much better > this time. Really odd, because first time, I tried with 3 images, with only > bad results. > > But now my preview images in various of my favorite tools appears to work, > except for a short blink when I activate tools, where the image is too small > initially. > > For local contrast, the smaller initial preview is sticky, I have to do a > ctrl + alt + e to get it right. This function is significantly faster than > in 3.5, which is great! > > I hope it will keep working! :) > > Anders > > On Fredag den 23. maj 2014 19:43:09, Anders Lund wrote: > > I downgraded to 3.5, since digikam 4 is not usable on my system. > > Sharpening > > does appearently not work at all, and previewing during editing is > > unusable. > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users -- Anders _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
2014-05-24 11:48 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>:
> Maybe there is a change in the unsharp mask tool, because I have to us a > significantly smaller radius setting to make it work properly - like 10 times > smaller. No code has changed to process sharpening. I just parallelized code, but this have no incidence about settings. Parallelizing of code is simple. I cut image in equal size depending of core available and each part is processed in parallel. Gilles Caulier _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
There is an important setup to check on your computer.
I see dysfunction and time latency introduced in digiKam when you use exotic widget style with KDE application A lots of widget styles are bugous. Here i always used Oxygen style which is official and default used by KDE. And here all is fine. For ex, Non KDE distro (as Ubuntu) do not use Oxygen widget style. This can introduce problems... Gilles Caulier 2014-05-24 12:11 GMT+02:00 Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]>: > 2014-05-24 11:48 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: >> Maybe there is a change in the unsharp mask tool, because I have to us a >> significantly smaller radius setting to make it work properly - like 10 times >> smaller. > > No code has changed to process sharpening. I just parallelized code, > but this have no incidence about settings. > > Parallelizing of code is simple. I cut image in equal size depending > of core available and each part is processed in parallel. > > Gilles Caulier Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:15:10, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> There is an important setup to check on your computer. > > I see dysfunction and time latency introduced in digiKam when you use > exotic widget style with KDE application > > A lots of widget styles are bugous. Here i always used Oxygen style > which is official and default used by KDE. And here all is fine. > > For ex, Non KDE distro (as Ubuntu) do not use Oxygen widget style. > This can introduce problems... I use QtCurve, is that exotic? > Gilles Caulier > > 2014-05-24 12:11 GMT+02:00 Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]>: > > 2014-05-24 11:48 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: > >> Maybe there is a change in the unsharp mask tool, because I have to us a > >> significantly smaller radius setting to make it work properly - like 10 > >> times smaller. > > > > No code has changed to process sharpening. I just parallelized code, > > but this have no incidence about settings. > > > > Parallelizing of code is simple. I cut image in equal size depending > > of core available and each part is processed in parallel. > > > > Gilles Caulier > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users -- Anders _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
2014-05-24 12:17 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>:
> On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:15:10, Gilles Caulier wrote: >> There is an important setup to check on your computer. >> >> I see dysfunction and time latency introduced in digiKam when you use >> exotic widget style with KDE application >> >> A lots of widget styles are bugous. Here i always used Oxygen style >> which is official and default used by KDE. And here all is fine. >> >> For ex, Non KDE distro (as Ubuntu) do not use Oxygen widget style. >> This can introduce problems... > > I use QtCurve, is that exotic? If i remember well, yes. I see some words about in KDE mailing list. Change widget style from digiKam config panel through MISC Settings page... Gilles Caulier _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:30:33, Gilles Caulier wrote:
> 2014-05-24 12:17 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: > > On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:15:10, Gilles Caulier wrote: > >> There is an important setup to check on your computer. > >> > >> I see dysfunction and time latency introduced in digiKam when you use > >> exotic widget style with KDE application > >> > >> A lots of widget styles are bugous. Here i always used Oxygen style > >> which is official and default used by KDE. And here all is fine. > >> > >> For ex, Non KDE distro (as Ubuntu) do not use Oxygen widget style. > >> This can introduce problems... > > > > I use QtCurve, is that exotic? > > If i remember well, yes. I see some words about in KDE mailing list. > > Change widget style from digiKam config panel through MISC Settings page... This has no appearent effect on the missizing of the previews, or the stickyness of them, nor on the intepretation of the radius parameter in the unsharp mask tool - it just makes digikam look like I use oxygen... -- Anders _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
2014-05-24 12:43 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: In my case it's even sometimes not working to push "Try", nothing happens.
Switching style has no effect in my setup! And I have tested even more now and it always problems with images that has been resized and it always works on images with original size.
Should I try with KDE 4.13 instead? What QT is preferred? /Anders S _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
2014-05-24 13:03 GMT+02:00 Anders Stedtlund <[hidden email]>:
> 2014-05-24 12:43 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: > >> On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:30:33, Gilles Caulier wrote: >> > 2014-05-24 12:17 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: >> > > On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:15:10, Gilles Caulier wrote: >> > >> There is an important setup to check on your computer. >> > >> >> > >> I see dysfunction and time latency introduced in digiKam when you use >> > >> exotic widget style with KDE application >> > >> >> > >> A lots of widget styles are bugous. Here i always used Oxygen style >> > >> which is official and default used by KDE. And here all is fine. >> > >> >> > >> For ex, Non KDE distro (as Ubuntu) do not use Oxygen widget style. >> > >> This can introduce problems... >> > > >> > > I use QtCurve, is that exotic? >> > >> > If i remember well, yes. I see some words about in KDE mailing list. >> > >> > Change widget style from digiKam config panel through MISC Settings >> > page... >> >> This has no appearent effect on the missizing of the previews, or the >> stickyness of them, nor on the intepretation of the radius parameter in >> the >> unsharp mask tool - it just makes digikam look like I use oxygen... > > > Switching style has no effect in my setup! > > In my case it's even sometimes not working to push "Try", nothing happens. > > And I have tested even more now and it always problems with images that has > been resized and it always works on images with original size. > > Should I try with KDE 4.13 instead? What QT is preferred? This has no incidence here Do you use Color Management ? Gilles Caulier _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
I have tested with and without color management with the same result 2014-05-24 13:29 GMT+02:00 Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]>: 2014-05-24 13:03 GMT+02:00 Anders Stedtlund <[hidden email]>: _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
Hum, no idea anymore...
If i understand, your 4.0.0 come from a dedicated packaging. Perhaps it's compiled with debug symbols, which can introduce some time latency at editor core and prevent some di-synchronization... Here as developer it's compiled like this... Why not to compile and install current code yourself ? The advantage is to use last changes/fix that you can try in live following my work. It can be done in parallel of official release (3.5.0). Look here for details : https://projects.kde.org/projects/extragear/graphics/digikam/digikam-software-compilation/repository/revisions/master/entry/README.LOCAL Gilles Caulier 2014-05-24 16:24 GMT+02:00 Anders Stedtlund <[hidden email]>: > I have tested with and without color management with the same result > > > 2014-05-24 13:29 GMT+02:00 Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]>: >> >> 2014-05-24 13:03 GMT+02:00 Anders Stedtlund <[hidden email]>: >> > 2014-05-24 12:43 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: >> > >> >> On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:30:33, Gilles Caulier wrote: >> >> > 2014-05-24 12:17 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: >> >> > > On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:15:10, Gilles Caulier wrote: >> >> > >> There is an important setup to check on your computer. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> I see dysfunction and time latency introduced in digiKam when you >> >> > >> use >> >> > >> exotic widget style with KDE application >> >> > >> >> >> > >> A lots of widget styles are bugous. Here i always used Oxygen >> >> > >> style >> >> > >> which is official and default used by KDE. And here all is fine. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> For ex, Non KDE distro (as Ubuntu) do not use Oxygen widget style. >> >> > >> This can introduce problems... >> >> > > >> >> > > I use QtCurve, is that exotic? >> >> > >> >> > If i remember well, yes. I see some words about in KDE mailing list. >> >> > >> >> > Change widget style from digiKam config panel through MISC Settings >> >> > page... >> >> >> >> This has no appearent effect on the missizing of the previews, or the >> >> stickyness of them, nor on the intepretation of the radius parameter in >> >> the >> >> unsharp mask tool - it just makes digikam look like I use oxygen... >> > >> > >> > Switching style has no effect in my setup! >> > >> > In my case it's even sometimes not working to push "Try", nothing >> > happens. >> > >> > And I have tested even more now and it always problems with images that >> > has >> > been resized and it always works on images with original size. >> > >> > Should I try with KDE 4.13 instead? What QT is preferred? >> >> This has no incidence here >> >> Do you use Color Management ? >> >> Gilles Caulier >> _______________________________________________ >> Digikam-users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
In my case I have built it myself. I do like this (form root of unpacked digikam-4.0.0.tar.bz2):
cmake -DDIGIKAMSC_USE_PRIVATE_KDEGRAPHICS=on -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=release -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=<install path> -DENABLE_LCMS2=on -DDIGIKAMSC_COMPILE_DOC=on -DDIGIKAMSC_CHECKOUT_PO=off -Wno-dev . make -j 4 make install This have worked for all the latest releases. /Anders S 2014-05-25 8:54 GMT+02:00 Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]>: Hum, no idea anymore... _______________________________________________ Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
|
|
Clean up all and replace -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=release by
-DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=debugfull This is what i use here. The advantage when a crash appear is to have a suitable backtrace as well... Gilles Caulier 2014-05-25 11:50 GMT+02:00 Anders Stedtlund <[hidden email]>: > In my case I have built it myself. I do like this (form root of unpacked > digikam-4.0.0.tar.bz2): > cmake -DDIGIKAMSC_USE_PRIVATE_KDEGRAPHICS=on -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=release > -DCMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX=<install path> -DENABLE_LCMS2=on > -DDIGIKAMSC_COMPILE_DOC=on -DDIGIKAMSC_CHECKOUT_PO=off -Wno-dev . > > make -j 4 > > make install > > > This have worked for all the latest releases. > > /Anders S > > 2014-05-25 8:54 GMT+02:00 Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]>: > >> Hum, no idea anymore... >> >> If i understand, your 4.0.0 come from a dedicated packaging. Perhaps >> it's compiled with debug symbols, which can introduce some time >> latency at editor core and prevent some di-synchronization... Here as >> developer it's compiled like this... >> >> Why not to compile and install current code yourself ? The advantage >> is to use last changes/fix that you can try in live following my work. >> >> It can be done in parallel of official release (3.5.0). Look here for >> details : >> >> >> https://projects.kde.org/projects/extragear/graphics/digikam/digikam-software-compilation/repository/revisions/master/entry/README.LOCAL >> >> Gilles Caulier >> >> 2014-05-24 16:24 GMT+02:00 Anders Stedtlund <[hidden email]>: >> > I have tested with and without color management with the same result >> > >> > >> > 2014-05-24 13:29 GMT+02:00 Gilles Caulier <[hidden email]>: >> >> >> >> 2014-05-24 13:03 GMT+02:00 Anders Stedtlund <[hidden email]>: >> >> > 2014-05-24 12:43 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: >> >> > >> >> >> On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:30:33, Gilles Caulier wrote: >> >> >> > 2014-05-24 12:17 GMT+02:00 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>: >> >> >> > > On Lørdag den 24. maj 2014 12:15:10, Gilles Caulier wrote: >> >> >> > >> There is an important setup to check on your computer. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> I see dysfunction and time latency introduced in digiKam when >> >> >> > >> you >> >> >> > >> use >> >> >> > >> exotic widget style with KDE application >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> A lots of widget styles are bugous. Here i always used Oxygen >> >> >> > >> style >> >> >> > >> which is official and default used by KDE. And here all is >> >> >> > >> fine. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> > >> For ex, Non KDE distro (as Ubuntu) do not use Oxygen widget >> >> >> > >> style. >> >> >> > >> This can introduce problems... >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > I use QtCurve, is that exotic? >> >> >> > >> >> >> > If i remember well, yes. I see some words about in KDE mailing >> >> >> > list. >> >> >> > >> >> >> > Change widget style from digiKam config panel through MISC >> >> >> > Settings >> >> >> > page... >> >> >> >> >> >> This has no appearent effect on the missizing of the previews, or >> >> >> the >> >> >> stickyness of them, nor on the intepretation of the radius parameter >> >> >> in >> >> >> the >> >> >> unsharp mask tool - it just makes digikam look like I use oxygen... >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Switching style has no effect in my setup! >> >> > >> >> > In my case it's even sometimes not working to push "Try", nothing >> >> > happens. >> >> > >> >> > And I have tested even more now and it always problems with images >> >> > that >> >> > has >> >> > been resized and it always works on images with original size. >> >> > >> >> > Should I try with KDE 4.13 instead? What QT is preferred? >> >> >> >> This has no incidence here >> >> >> >> Do you use Color Management ? >> >> >> >> Gilles Caulier >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Digikam-users mailing list >> >> [hidden email] >> >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users >> > >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Digikam-users mailing list >> > [hidden email] >> > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Digikam-users mailing list >> [hidden email] >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > Digikam-users mailing list > [hidden email] > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users > Digikam-users mailing list [hidden email] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users |
«
Return to digikam-users
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |