Is anyone here using Wipe without temporary autodev? If most people set it always "Yes", perhaps it should be the default? Or remember the last thing we set (that would be useful for Mask tools as well).
On the subject of autodev, usually temporary autodev gives me a pretty good image usually. Going then to actual autodev, I would expect it to be the same algorithm, but it tries to bring up way too much most of the time, so I use a ROI. How come temporary autodev manages it without a ROI? Perhaps it is on purpose, i.e. since you cannot use a ROI on temporary autodev, it is more careful? I am asking because beginners seem to get confused with autodev (after wipe) showing way too much stuff (and tend to forget it is as simple as dragging a rectangle around your object), so it would be more beginner friendly if by default it was a bit more careful like temporary autodev - but perhaps give you a button for "full" to get current algorithm as well if it is useful in some images.
Temporary AutoDev
Re: Temporary AutoDev
The way I understand it Wipe will take either stretched or unstretched data as input. So if you do an initial AutoDev and then run Wipe the results shown will be stretched.
In this case you may not want to do Temporary Autodev because it will alter the view.
Usually I do AutoDev before Wipe and may keep the result. So in this case I can see the image while using Wipe and I don't use Temporary AutoDev.
My data often looks bad using Temporary AutoDev - but that is perhaps when it is too noisy. Maybe your data is better so Temporary Autodev works well with it.
Initially my data always looks bad in AutoDev because, to quote Ivo, "It's AutoDev's job to show you everything that's 'wrong' with your image until you've fixed it, after which you can use it to perform stretching of the 'real' signal". Maybe that is why Temporary AutoDev looks better than AutoDev for your data.
Does this make sense?
Guy
In this case you may not want to do Temporary Autodev because it will alter the view.
Usually I do AutoDev before Wipe and may keep the result. So in this case I can see the image while using Wipe and I don't use Temporary AutoDev.
My data often looks bad using Temporary AutoDev - but that is perhaps when it is too noisy. Maybe your data is better so Temporary Autodev works well with it.
Initially my data always looks bad in AutoDev because, to quote Ivo, "It's AutoDev's job to show you everything that's 'wrong' with your image until you've fixed it, after which you can use it to perform stretching of the 'real' signal". Maybe that is why Temporary AutoDev looks better than AutoDev for your data.
Does this make sense?
Guy
Re: Temporary AutoDev
Huh, I always do autodev before Wipe and I always need temp autodev to see anything. Perhaps because I am under light polluted skies, the original autodev gets saturated easily?
Re: Temporary AutoDev
Ok - so that theory goes out the window. 
Can you see the subject OK in Wipe before you do the Wipe?
If you want to upload an example image I'd be happy to have a look.
Guy
Can you see the subject OK in Wipe before you do the Wipe?
If you want to upload an example image I'd be happy to have a look.
Guy
Re: Temporary AutoDev
Well, I think you have already looked at an example, the one I had uploaded in the whitebalance thread with the heart nebula. All my images behave the same in that respect, so that one too:
After first autodev:
Wipe+temp autodev:
After Wipe:
Agh, I ran out of attachments...
After first autodev:
-
- Screen Shot 2016-11-29 at 9.20.13 PM.png (478.68 KiB) Viewed 11016 times
-
- Screen-Shot-2016-11-29-at-9.22.37-PM.jpg (337.79 KiB) Viewed 11016 times
-
- Screen-Shot-2016-11-29-at-9.22.54-PM.jpg (147.63 KiB) Viewed 11016 times
Re: Temporary AutoDev
And the new autodev, worse than the temp autodev at first, I have to use a ROI:
It works like that in all my images and all images friends have sent me to help with, which, admittedly, are similar in the sense they are all Canons under the same LP. But I assumed everybody's like that, so temp autodev would always be on (or if it stays at your last setting, it doesn't matter what the default is).
-
- Screen-Shot-2016-11-29-at-9.23.06-PM.jpg (351.56 KiB) Viewed 11016 times
Re: Temporary AutoDev
I had another look at the original image.
When I did an AutoDev, selecting ROI and changing Ignore Fine Detail, I can get a bit more detail without Temporary AutoDev but not much.
I'm surprised at how good the Temporary AutoDev image is - I never get anything as good.
Like you, after the Wipe I had to select ROI and change Ignore Fine Detail in AutoDev to get similar results to the Temporary AutoDev - but for me this is normal - I never get a great result just by opening AutoDev.
So I don't always use Temporary AutoDev - but if I'm in a minority it wouldn't concern me too much if it defaulted to On - it would just take Wipe a bit longer to show results. Having Wipe store and use the previous setting, as you suggest, would be better though.
I hope this helps.
Guy
When I did an AutoDev, selecting ROI and changing Ignore Fine Detail, I can get a bit more detail without Temporary AutoDev but not much.
I'm surprised at how good the Temporary AutoDev image is - I never get anything as good.
Like you, after the Wipe I had to select ROI and change Ignore Fine Detail in AutoDev to get similar results to the Temporary AutoDev - but for me this is normal - I never get a great result just by opening AutoDev.
So I don't always use Temporary AutoDev - but if I'm in a minority it wouldn't concern me too much if it defaulted to On - it would just take Wipe a bit longer to show results. Having Wipe store and use the previous setting, as you suggest, would be better though.
I hope this helps.
Guy