StarTools

I'm not sure if this is the case with anyone else or if I need to do more experimenting, but does anybody else find that the "Temporary AutoDev" setting in Wipe is giving a better image than what actually comes up when using the AutoDev module after Wipe?

I know to tweak the "Fine Detail" and "ROI" [or all the parameters if using Dev]; but frequently I still don't get as good a result.

Ivo - is there some technical reasoning as to why we can't simply "accept" the AutoDev that the Wipe module supplies?

Thanks!

Hi Michael,

Sorry for the delay in answering.

The AutoDev in Wipe uses an inverse 2.2 gamma correction. It makes it a little easier to evaluate Wipe's effectiveness without being distracted by the noise that AutoDev can sometimes bring out (which is then brought under control using ROI/Fine Detail as you point out). If you really like what AutoDev does in Wipe, you can use AutoDev as normal and launch Develop (don't select 'redo stretch'!) to do a reverse gamma correct of approx 0.45 (= 1 / 2.2) to achieve the same effect.

In theory, Wipe's Courtesy/Temporary AutoDev does not allocate enough dynamic range to the darker parts of the image, e.g. there may be detail lurking in the darker areas that is not brought out.

Hope this helps!

Ah, I see. That makes a lot of sense actually.

If you really like what AutoDev does in Wipe, you can use AutoDev as normal and launch Develop (don't select 'redo stretch'!) to do a reverse gamma correct of approx 0.45 (= 1 / 2.2) to achieve the same effect.

Time for some experimenting! Thanks Ivo