It matters beacouse the pixel density of even low end cameras is greatly more than the vast majority of computer displays.
On 30 July 2013 16:19, Robert Hickman <[email protected]> wrote: > If you do a lot of burst mode shooting you end up with a number of > repeat shots, I need to be able to quickly sort through them to find > the sharpest one. The maximum zoom on the light table does not give > enough detail to do this. > > On 30 July 2013 09:15, Willem Ferguson <[email protected]> > wrote: >> I hope I am not missing the point? In LT, why not decrease the number of >> images on the light table by rotating the thumb wheel on the mouse until >> one image fills the whole central part of the screen? That is what I do >> to perform a quick screening of a collection of images. Then I use the >> arrow keys to move among the different images. It is certainly not >> pixel-for-pixel, but if one wants to look at the type of detail at a >> pixel-by-pixel basis, it is not a quick screening any more. >> Kind regards, wf >> >> On 30/07/2013 08:48, [email protected] wrote: >>> Canon DPP has a 50% mode in quick check mode and although it can take >>> a few seconds to flip between images, I don't find this to be a >>> problem. It's still verry fast being able to arrow keys between a set >>> of 5 to 20 or so burst shots to rate them. And I generally have many >>> cases like this in a set of 1000 or more images. It takes far to long >>> to be messing with switching modes constantly just sorting out the >>> better ones. >>> >>> It should not be difficult to implement a simple level of detail >>> system such that when the light table mode is set to single image >>> display the whole image is processed, perhaps in anouther thread so as >>> not to slow the front end. And only cache a small number of these like >>> current plus and munus 3 or so. >>> >>> Or possably a 'quick check' like canon DPP has. >>> >>> Being able to see image detail when sorting through a large set is a >>> vital feature, the lack there makes darkroom unuseable for these >>> cases. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Get your SQL database under version control now! >> Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent >> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under >> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out. >> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk >> _______________________________________________ >> Darktable-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get your SQL database under version control now! Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
