Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

channelmixerrgb: change the saturation control #7839

Merged

Conversation

aurelienpierre
Copy link
Member

introduces an alternative cross-talk saturation change that behaves more predictably

bump the legacy params and handle conversion

remove GUI RGB params swapping for the v1 and handle it in commit_params()

introduces an alternative cross-talk saturation change that behaves more predictably

bump the legacy params and handle conversion

remove GUI RGB params swapping for the v1 and handle it in commit_params()
@aurelienpierre aurelienpierre added the feature: enhancement current features to improve label Jan 14, 2021
@kofa73
Copy link
Contributor

kofa73 commented Jan 14, 2021

Erm, I need a bit of git help?
Both gh pr checkout 7839 and git fetch origin pull/7839/head:channelmixerrgb-fix-rgb fail with

! [rejected]            refs/pull/7839/head -> channelmixerrgb-fix-rgb  (non-fast-forward)

I've never seen this message in my years of using git daily. According to cli/cli#562, this can happen after a force-push, which we never allow on our repos.

@matt-maguire
Copy link
Contributor

Just fetch it onto a branch with a different name, eg.:

git fetch origin pull/7839/head:channelmixerrgb-fix-rgb-v2
git checkout channelmixerrgb-fix-rgb-v2

Copy link
Member

@TurboGit TurboGit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code looks good, not tested yet.

@TurboGit TurboGit added this to the 3.6 milestone Jan 14, 2021
Copy link
Member

@TurboGit TurboGit left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All good, ready for merging.

@dterrahe
Copy link
Member

Just so I am sure I understand the purpose here:
The old conversion method needs to be supported (and even be selectable) because some people may have grown to prefer it? Or because the same results for an old saved version cannot be achieved with a one-off conversion in legacy_params? I haven't followed the whole discussion around this issue, but I thought it was just a bug and that getting the same results for existing images could be done once so it would look the same. Do we all agree that for new users (who've never been exposed to the initial version) having comboboxes with versions in many modules doesn't add value but does add confusion? Unless there's really an advantage to the old algorithm in some cases (which ideally would then be explained somehow).

@aurelienpierre
Copy link
Member Author

The 2 versions need to be supported because they look very different and edits will be lost. The pixel code is actually different, it's not just a matter of massaging user params. Both versions are in-house R&D so there is no reference implementation or anything that could be used as ground-truth.

The combobox is mostly there to allow migrating old edits to new version while retaining the rest of the parameters.

@TurboGit
Copy link
Member

Works for me. Thanks!

@TurboGit TurboGit merged commit 616308c into darktable-org:master Jan 15, 2021
@aurelienpierre aurelienpierre deleted the channelmixerrgb-fix-rgb branch December 12, 2022 00:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature: enhancement current features to improve
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants