>> Can you provide an example image to confirm this?
> Sure.  Let's use the clouds photo since it is a more modern Sony
> format and pretty dramatically shows the loss of information.  Point
> your browser here:
> http://smallthoughts.com/photos/misc/GIMP/clouds.arw

Looks like a normal image when opened here (fbsd, ufraw 0.19.2).
Underexposed, but can be brought up to 1.49 w/out any overexposure
blinkies.  Clouds have lots of definition.  WB (Camera WB) looks fine.
A little *tiny* bit of purple fringing; I'd be delighted if all
mine had that little.

You don't have the color profile, gamma, and linearity set to something
strange, do you?  If I set to no profile, gamma=0.45, linearity 0.1
all looks good.
gimp-user-list mailing list
List address:    gimp-user-list@gnome.org
List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-user-list
List archives:   https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-user-list

Reply via email to