Other Software > Found Deals and Discounts

Sagelight Image Editor - pay what you want promo (Apil 2010)

<< < (31/32) > >>

JavaJones:
Excellent, tooltips working great. Thanks for the quick fix!

- Oshyan

Rob Nelson:
I am not a user, but I just want to say it is awesome how supportive you are of your users. A few days back I took a bit of a gander over your website and the product, and I think that you and Sagelight are an excellent example of the way software is supposed to work. If I hear of family or friends needing a photo-touchup tool, I'll definitely give a pointer towards your product. :)

Keep up the good work.  :Thmbsup:
-worstje (January 20, 2011, 04:31 AM)
--- End quote ---

Thanks so much for that.  It definitely makes the hard work more worth it! 

Thanks again,

Rob

Rob Nelson:
Oh, good -- I'm glad the tooltips are working on XP now... Shame they don't fade in and all, but, oh well. ha.

cyberdiva:  Thanks for the note about the uninstall.

Oh, I also fixed a bug.  If you load a RAW file and see "There was an Unknown Error", this is fixed in the latest release. (it was caused by an error in the EXIF routine).  (The latest version is on the blog at http://sagelighteditor.wordpress.com)

I think a lot of people here are partial to RAW, right?  I just added an update that does a slight graduated-edge-sharpen on the C*I*E L channel, which really seems to make a difference, especially when used with the Definition Sliders (a very slight sharpen that doesn't hurt the data seems to give the Definition Sliders nice starting point "push").  You can turn it off, but I think, for most people, that's going to more of a plus (since the images just look better throughout the entire editing process).

I'm piecing together the next level of RAW functionality right now, including a staging area where you can select the demosaicing, sharpening, etc. -- and see it all happen in more-or-less realtime.  I'm curious as to what demosaicing algorithms people here prefer.  They tend to be different from camera-to-camera, and it would be nice to get some ideas on that.

Also, someone asked me a while back if there was a way for people to do their own demosaicing -- I can see it being an issue because of the different ways in which cameras put out their data.  It would be easy for me to add a .DLL interface if I thought the demand was high enough.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.

Rob

Curt:
-forgive my ignorance, but I had to look that one up:


To reconstruct a full color image from the data collected by the color filtering array, a form of interpolation is needed to fill in the blanks. The mathematics here is subject to individual implementation, and is called demosaicing.


A demosaicing algorithm is a digital image process used to reconstruct a full color image from the incomplete color samples output from an image sensor overlaid with a color filter array (CFA). Also known as CFA interpolation or color reconstruction, another common spelling is demosaicking.


Most modern digital cameras acquire images using a single image sensor overlaid with a CFA, so demosaicing is part of the processing pipeline required to render these images into a viewable format. However, a Bayer image can be also seen as a grayscale image.

Many modern digital cameras can save images in a raw format allowing the user to demosaic it using software, rather than using the camera's built-in firmware.


Goal:
The aim of a demosaicing algorithm is to reconstruct a full color image (i.e. a full set of color triples) from the spatially undersampled color channels output from the CFA. The algorithm should have the following traits:

    * Avoidance of the introduction of false color artifacts, such as chromatic aliases, zippering (abrupt unnatural changes of intensity over a number of neighboring pixels) and purple fringing
    * Maximum preservation of the image resolution
    * Low computational complexity for fast processing or efficient in-camera hardware implementation
    * Amenability to analysis for accurate noise reduction


Use in computer image processing software:
When one has access to the raw image data  from a digital camera, one can use computer software with a variety of different demosaicing algorithms instead of being limited to the one built into the camera. A few raw development programs, such as Raw Therapee, give the user an option to choose which algorithm should be used. Most programs, however, are coded to use one particular method. The differences in rendering the finest detail (and grain texture) that come from the choice of demosaicing algorithm are among the main differences between various raw developers; often photographers will prefer a particular program for aesthetic reasons related to this effect.

The color artifacts due to demosaicing provide important clues for identifying photo forgeries.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing
-Wikipedia, on 'demosaicing'
--- End quote ---

excerpts

CWuestefeld:
Here's a good page for comparison of various demosaicing algorithms: http://www.rawtherapee.com/RAW_Compare/

From that page, it seems clear that RawTherapee's EAHD is the best, but of course these things vary from photo to photo. Unfortunately you can't just pick up the algorithm, though. In many cases they're proprietary, or perhaps even patented.

Rob, I wonder if your work on color spaces could be leveraged here. I wonder if the non-proprietary non-patented algorithms might work better when they're operating in alternate color spaces.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page