Make step size of numerical values variable


the step size of the up/down arrows is way too fine for several numerical settings. Therefore these arrows are useless because you don’t want to click so often to get a result.

For example, I doubt that 0,01° rotation steps are really needed by anyone. 0.1° are fine enough in most cases. Many other settings are also affected.

I suggest to:

  • Make larger default steps when clicking the up/down arrows,
  • Use Shift, Ctrl and/or Alt to get finder steps.

In addition, the default step size could be made configurable. But I’m afraid DxO doesn’t want to impose such “complicated” settings on its users.


Pourquoi vouloir changer ce qui fonctionne très bien?

Les curseurs peuvent se régler de trois manières différentes :

  • le réglage rapide en postionnant la pointeur de la souris sur le curseur et en le faisant glisser à la valeur désirée (ou une valeur proche)
  • le réglage par pas (généralement de 5) en cliquant sur le curseur puis en utilisant la molette de la souris (ou par une succession de clic droit sur côté désiré du curseur).
  • le réglage avec les flèches haut/bas qui permet si nécessaire d’affiner les réglages précédents avec une grande précision.

A mon sens, modifier les pas des valeurs des flèches serait une régression.

Google translate:

Why want to change what works very well?

The sliders can be set in three different ways:

  • quick adjustment by placing the mouse pointer on the cursor and dragging it to the desired value (or a close value)
  • the adjustment in steps (usually 5) by clicking on the cursor and then using the mouse wheel (or by a succession of right click on desired side of the cursor).
  • the setting with the up / down arrows which allows, if necessary, to refine the previous settings with great precision.

In my opinion, to modify the steps of the current values of the arrows would be a regression.

Did you ever need a finer than 0,1° step for the rotation (“horizon”)?

My request still enables people to make fine adjustments with the arrows.

It’s about adding functionality of using Shift or Ctrl as modifier. It’s not about restricting anything.

I prefer the up/down arrows as primary interface over the sliders.

Let’s be precise: unless I’m mistaken, the horizon cursor is the only one whose step is so small. In all other cases, the value of the step is greater (0.1 - 1 - 5 …) and depends on the type of setting: this value is not arbitrary, but adapted to each case.

So yes, I often use the slider horizon very low values. For a very simple reason: in most cases we use the horizon tool, or the automatic horizon. And it is necessary to refine then with the arrows to have a perfect result. This is especially useful when the horizon is used with ViewPoint Tools, with wide angle shots.

I doubt that you will notice a 0.05° deviation so 0.1 is enough.

YES, arrows are useful for fine adjustment as a last resort.
Start by clicking on the cursor (and then using the mouse wheel) the adjustment grow up by 0.1 steps.


You should know the arrows are pretty much useless anyway.

When you click and drag the horizon slider the further away vertically you move the mouse pointer the slower the slider drags. That allows you to easily set the horizon anywhere between +/- 45 degrees with 0.01 degree resolution with a single mouse click and drag. I don’t ever use the up/down arrows.


The relevant question is: Would it disturb your work if the arrow step would be 0.1° or 1° while Shift/Ctrl is held?

To satisfy my curiosity: Did you ever need to adjust the rotation finer than in 0.1° steps?

The resulting worst case error of 0.05° equals an inclination of 0,09% or 1 pixel in 1100 pixels. Or 0,3mm over a 400mm wide print.

That’s below the perception threshold in the vast majority of cases, and certainly not routinely needed.

Therefore the default step size should be 0.1°, reduced to 0.01° by the Ctrl or Alt key and increased to 1° while the Shift key is pressed.



indeed, they are currently useless because their step size is so small. That’s what I wrote in the OP and what I want to improve.

As I wrote, I prefer the up/down arrows as primary interface over the sliders. I can hit them very quick yet make precise adjustments.

I also use “click slider - turn mouse wheel” routinely, but if you work fast, this imposes the risk that you are still moving the mouse. Then it’s not a click but a drag. I have to slow down my work do click the slider.

Generally, I do not understand the purpose of all the postings describing the advantage of the sliders:

This thread is not about changing the sliders but about improving the arrow buttons to make them more useful.


With the tool Horizon Automatic PL calculates with an accuracy of 0.05 °
With the Horizon tool (2-point alignment) PL calculates with an accuracy of 0.01
So the standard minimum calculation step is 0.01.

Now, if clicking 10 times on the arrows to get a value of 0.10 is a problem for you, you can simply let the click be pressed while the values are incremented. (Windows version, Mac I do not know)
It works very well and quickly.

Don’t confuse resolution with accuracy. The auto horizon tool is not 0.05° accurate.

Regardless of this, describing the resolution currently used by Photolab doesn’t answer the question cited above.