From 8673c8b4d52a4c6088f1ce54811bac31ee7a768b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Victor Forsiuk Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 14:50:56 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/5] OS names are trademarks, their spelling cannot be changed --- content/special-topics/opencl/problems-solutions.md | 2 +- content/special-topics/opencl/setting-up.md | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/special-topics/opencl/problems-solutions.md b/content/special-topics/opencl/problems-solutions.md index a17d3b7769..fb5533a53a 100644 --- a/content/special-topics/opencl/problems-solutions.md +++ b/content/special-topics/opencl/problems-solutions.md @@ -26,6 +26,6 @@ Here are a few cases that have been observed in the past: - darktable fails to compile its OpenCL source files at run-time. In this case you will see a number of error messages looking like typical compiler errors. This could indicate an incompatibility between your OpenCL implementation and darktable's interpretation of the standard. In that case please raise an issue on [github](https://github.com/darktable-org/darktable/issues/new/choose) and we will try to assist. Please also report if you see significant differences between CPU and GPU processing of an image. -- you have installed a number of OpenCL drivers meant for the same hardware, this will always lead to severe problems and must strictly be avoided. On windows systems you often have the `Microsoft OpenCLon12` driver installed via the `OpenCL Compatibility Pack`. Inspect and check at [preferences > processing > OpenCL](../../preferences-settings/processing#cpu--gpu--memory) +- you have installed a number of OpenCL drivers meant for the same hardware, this will always lead to severe problems and must strictly be avoided. On Windows systems you often have the `Microsoft OpenCLon12` driver installed via the `OpenCL Compatibility Pack`. Inspect and check at [preferences > processing > OpenCL](../../preferences-settings/processing#cpu--gpu--memory) - A few emulated-on-CPU implementations of OpenCL also exist, coming as drivers provided by INTEL or AMD. We have observed that they do not provide any speed gain versus the compiler-optimized CPU code. Therefore darktable simply discards these drivers / devices by default. diff --git a/content/special-topics/opencl/setting-up.md b/content/special-topics/opencl/setting-up.md index 6fb56020b4..b855c59d8f 100644 --- a/content/special-topics/opencl/setting-up.md +++ b/content/special-topics/opencl/setting-up.md @@ -42,4 +42,4 @@ ocl-icd ocd-icd-devel ``` -On linux systems you might also want the `clinfo` package giving you a lot of information about your OpenCL system and settings. +On Linux systems you might also want the `clinfo` package giving you a lot of information about your OpenCL system and settings. From 0aff0f24ef1f92052bc288656ee13796e54e36b8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Victor Forsiuk Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:11:23 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/5] Spelling of "LMMSE refine" changed in GUI, changing to match --- content/module-reference/processing-modules/demosaic.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/content/module-reference/processing-modules/demosaic.md b/content/module-reference/processing-modules/demosaic.md index 9dcaea07ab..6b81105434 100644 --- a/content/module-reference/processing-modules/demosaic.md +++ b/content/module-reference/processing-modules/demosaic.md @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ method edge threshold (_PPG_ only) : The threshold for an additional median pass. Defaults to “0” which disables median filtering. -lmmse refine (_LMMSE_ only) +LMMSE refine (_LMMSE_ only) : Refinement steps for use with the LMMSE demosaic algorithm. Median steps average the output. Refinement steps add some recalculation of red and blue channels. While the refinement options work well for luma noise, they may decrease quality on images with heavy chroma noise. color smoothing From c46e694f20bf06c8503bbb8be2475c87fdc44d9b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Victor Forsiuk Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:16:21 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 3/5] "Letter" as a paper size name should be capitalized --- content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md b/content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md index 1461d0c910..6d473e8b38 100644 --- a/content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md +++ b/content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md @@ -211,4 +211,4 @@ It should be noted that global contrast (using simple tone curves or black/white Part of the aging process is a loss of eyesight. The amount of sharpening that people over 50 find pleasing may not be the same as for people in their 20s. It is worth considering sharpening to obtain a _plausible_ result (matching your everyday perception) rather than a _pleasing_ result (that may look good only to people with the same eyesight as yours). -Finally, assessing the sharpness of images zoomed to 1:1 (100%) or more is a foolish task. In museums, exhibitions and even on screen, the general audience looks at images as a whole, not with a magnifying glass. Moreover, in most practical uses, photographs rarely exceed a resolution of 3000×2000 pixels (roughly a 300 DPI print at A4/letter dimensions) which, for 24 Mpx sensors, means downscaling by a factor of 4. When examining a 24 Mpx file at 1:1, you are actually looking at an image that will never exist. Sharpening at pixel level, in this context, is a waste of time and CPU cycles. +Finally, assessing the sharpness of images zoomed to 1:1 (100%) or more is a foolish task. In museums, exhibitions and even on screen, the general audience looks at images as a whole, not with a magnifying glass. Moreover, in most practical uses, photographs rarely exceed a resolution of 3000×2000 pixels (roughly a 300 DPI print at A4/Letter dimensions) which, for 24 Mpx sensors, means downscaling by a factor of 4. When examining a 24 Mpx file at 1:1, you are actually looking at an image that will never exist. Sharpening at pixel level, in this context, is a waste of time and CPU cycles. From b7c27cf4734107ad9e838495aba8346bd870b54e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Victor Forsiuk Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2024 15:40:36 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 4/5] Mpx is not a commonly accepted abbreviation for megapixel, the full term is better here --- content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md b/content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md index 6d473e8b38..71d717caec 100644 --- a/content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md +++ b/content/module-reference/processing-modules/diffuse.md @@ -211,4 +211,4 @@ It should be noted that global contrast (using simple tone curves or black/white Part of the aging process is a loss of eyesight. The amount of sharpening that people over 50 find pleasing may not be the same as for people in their 20s. It is worth considering sharpening to obtain a _plausible_ result (matching your everyday perception) rather than a _pleasing_ result (that may look good only to people with the same eyesight as yours). -Finally, assessing the sharpness of images zoomed to 1:1 (100%) or more is a foolish task. In museums, exhibitions and even on screen, the general audience looks at images as a whole, not with a magnifying glass. Moreover, in most practical uses, photographs rarely exceed a resolution of 3000×2000 pixels (roughly a 300 DPI print at A4/Letter dimensions) which, for 24 Mpx sensors, means downscaling by a factor of 4. When examining a 24 Mpx file at 1:1, you are actually looking at an image that will never exist. Sharpening at pixel level, in this context, is a waste of time and CPU cycles. +Finally, assessing the sharpness of images zoomed to 1:1 (100%) or more is a foolish task. In museums, exhibitions and even on screen, the general audience looks at images as a whole, not with a magnifying glass. Moreover, in most practical uses, photographs rarely exceed a resolution of 3000×2000 pixels (roughly a 300 DPI print at A4/Letter dimensions) which, for 24 megapixel sensors, means downscaling by a factor of 4. When examining a 24 megapixel file at 1:1, you are actually looking at an image that will never exist. Sharpening at pixel level, in this context, is a waste of time and CPU cycles. From 684caf08295e7159a0e64d96c193eec40570c078 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Victor Forsiuk Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 17:08:40 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 5/5] The word megapixel must not be capitalized --- content/special-topics/opencl/background.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/content/special-topics/opencl/background.md b/content/special-topics/opencl/background.md index 35b7c17f9e..0905e06ba0 100644 --- a/content/special-topics/opencl/background.md +++ b/content/special-topics/opencl/background.md @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ draft: false author: "people" --- -Processing high resolution images is a demanding task requiring a modern computer. In terms of both memory and CPU power, getting the best out of a typical 15, 20 or 25 Megapixel image can quickly take your computer to its limits. +Processing high resolution images is a demanding task requiring a modern computer. In terms of both memory and CPU power, getting the best out of a typical 15, 20 or 25 megapixel image can quickly take your computer to its limits. darktable's requirements are no exception. All calculations are performed on 4 x 32bit floating point numbers. This is slower than “ordinary” 8 or 16 bit integer algebra, but eliminates all problems of tonal breaks or loss of information.