On dimanche 4 août 2019 15:55:21 CEST Willy Williams wrote: > Frankly, the only one that looks anywhere near real is the .NEF file. > The other two look utterly like crap. Both look like overblown and > poorly done HDR shots. Have to ask what processing you did to achieve > these results.
But that's not the point of OP's question. His problem is that the two jpegs look *different*, which indeed shouldn't happen (unless there's something OP hasn't told us, like some style applied on output). If you want to see his processing, just import the NEF with associated sidecar in DT. (Though I agree that a somewhat lighter touch might have given a better image.) As to why the two exports differ, hard to say. For me in DT *both* of the jpegs look different from the processed NEF. That does make me wonder if a style has been applied on output: once to the reduced jpeg (exported first, according to metadata), and *twice* to the full-szed jpg. Remco. PS. In this kind of images I find it impossible to remove the distance haze while keeping a somewhat natural look, there's just too much haze. In addition, the haze is what conveys the depth in the landscape... ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
