On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Oliver Bedford <[email protected]> wrote: > Roman, > > I appreciate your work, but that's not an excuse for being rude.
> In this context I've used the hot pixel module and I see a reduction of > otherwise distracting artefacts (whatever their technical origin may > be). I've in no way implied that this is the ultimate solution, but in > difficult cases the result is - in my experience - better than without > using this module (although perhaps technically a exposure time of 1/125 > should not lead to dead/hot pixels). None of which was specified in your original mail https://xkcd.com/1172/ :) Maybe i should go back to read-only mode. > Oliver Roman. > Am Donnerstag, den 03.11.2016, 22:00 +0300 schrieb Roman Lebedev: >> On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Oliver Bedford <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > It seems the profiled denoise does produce some artefacts, which look >> > like hot pixels (and aren't visible in the original image or are buried >> > under the extreme colour noise). You can combat this side effect with >> > the dead pixel module. >> .. Except you can't. >> Hot pixels module is located earlier in the pipe than the denoise profiled. >> >> Providing invalid suggestions seems to be the new normal for mail-lists... > ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
