Removal of unwanted object

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@JoPoV

Does the huge computer slowdown when lot of correction curves are used is solved in V7 ?

Unfortunately, it is not solved. And, another problem is that, when repotting a print at around 200% zoom, when moving to another part of the image can cause the first set of spots to be offset. We have reported this but, since it takes a between 100 and 200 repairs to produce the fault, DxO were unable to replicate it.

What we have taken to doing is, after about half an hour work, we export to TIFF and then restart spotting on that TIFF. Then don’t work on that copy for more than about half an hour before going the same thing and export to yet another TIFF. Repeat as many times as necessary

[JoPoV]

@Joanna

since it takes a between 100 and 200 repairs to produce the fault, DxO were unable to replicate it

is this too much work for them ?

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@JoPoV

is this too much work for them ?

I got that impression. It can take an hour or so to get a sufficient number of repairs in place but there is no predictability as to whether the zoom level is the culprit.

My feeling is that the offsets for every repair are calculated to take account of the zoom factor and the there is a miscalculation somewhere along the line.

I just did seven corrections and then read the DOP file…

InpaintingMask = {
						{
						FeatherIntensity = 48,
						Opacity = 100,
						PasteMode = "Heal",
						Strokes = {
							{
							Path = {
								0.91594612598419189,
								0.073432832956314087,
								0.91596764326095581,
								0.073447376489639282,
							},
							Size = 27.600000381469727,
							Type = "Positive",
							},
						},
						},
						{
						FeatherIntensity = 48,
						Opacity = 100,
						PasteMode = "Heal",
						Strokes = {
							{
							Path = {
								0.90399742126464844,
								0.082944698631763458,
								0.90397799015045166,
								0.082944177091121674,
							},
							Size = 27.600000381469727,
							Type = "Positive",
							},
						},
						},
						{
						FeatherIntensity = 48,
						Opacity = 100,
						PasteMode = "Heal",
						Strokes = {
							{
							Path = {
								0.88197773694992065,
								0.089830197393894196,
								0.88196581602096558,
								0.089829884469509125,
							},
							Size = 27.600000381469727,
							Type = "Positive",
							},
						},
						},
						{
						FeatherIntensity = 48,
						Opacity = 100,
						PasteMode = "Heal",
						Strokes = {
							{
							Path = {
								0.88313114643096924,
								0.10875007510185242,
								0.88312828540802002,
								0.10878132283687592,
							},
							Size = 27.600000381469727,
							Type = "Positive",
							},
						},
						},
						{
						FeatherIntensity = 48,
						Opacity = 100,
						PasteMode = "Heal",
						Strokes = {
							{
							Path = {
								0.87022793292999268,
								0.11202637851238251,
								0.87024658918380737,
								0.1120738610625267,
							},
							Size = 27.600000381469727,
							Type = "Positive",
							},
						},
						},
						{
						FeatherIntensity = 48,
						Opacity = 100,
						PasteMode = "Heal",
						Strokes = {
							{
							Path = {
								0.85529118776321411,
								0.12489172071218491,
								0.85533356666564941,
								0.12490846961736679,
							},
							Size = 27.600000381469727,
							Type = "Positive",
							},
						},
						},
						{
						FeatherIntensity = 48,
						Opacity = 100,
						PasteMode = "Heal",
						Strokes = {
							{
							Path = {
								0.86191266775131226,
								0.13798148930072784,
								0.8619232177734375,
								0.13799363374710083,
							},
							Size = 27.600000000000001,
							Type = "Positive",
							},
						},
						},
					},

Now, imagine how large the DOP file is going to become after a couple of hundred repairs and the time it takes to read and render all those repairs. Need I say more?

[JoPoV]

@Joanna

My experience is that diffraction at smaller apertures, even f/14 (calculated with a 30µm blur circle) can affect overall perceived sharpness for the worse, especially at long distance.

focal lenght play an other role too : long focal lenght magnify atmospheric distorsion at such distances. (don’t know which focal lenght was used for this image).

[JoPoV]

@Joanna

Now, imagine how large the DOP file is going to become after a couple of hundred repairs and the time it takes to read and render all those repairs

Seing speed other applications I use maintain on huge amount of datas reading and processing, I don’t think reading 200 items like those should slow down any modern computer. But this has to be develloped with this purpose in mind.
Render is an other thing. It needs to use graphic cards the right way.

[mwsilvers (Mark - New Jersey, USA)]

@Joanna

Unfortunately, it is not solved. And, another problem is that, when repotting a print at around 200% zoom, when moving to another part of the image can cause the first set of spots to be offset. We have reported this but, since it takes a between 100 and 200 repairs to produce the fault, DxO were unable to replicate it.

I have not seen this myself in Windows 10. Although I don’t often apply between 100 and 200 corrections to a single image, I have done it on multiple occasions. I don’t recall seeing any offset issues. Maybe I was just lucky or maybe it is a Mac only issue.

I think Retouch related slowdowns may additionally be affected to some degree by the number and type of non-Retouch edits applied to the image. I have done a lot of testing but unfortunately have so far been unable to find a repeatable set of variables.

Mark

[JoPoV]

@mwsilvers

I have not seen this myself in Windows 10

It does on windows too. Even on powerfull worstations.

@mwsilvers

I think Retouch related slowdowns may additionally be affected to some degree by the number and type of non-Retouch edits applied to the image

Probably probably to some degree.

Will see soon what on a theadripper pro 60 core and 2 graphic cards (3090ti or 4090). Not bought for photolab of course. I still have samples of unfinished and unmanageable with photolab work. just out of curiosity.
But I don’t think this will change anything.

[mikemyers]

We had a problem in India of a car that was parked in a photo, and we wanted to remove the car. Photoshop’s AI powered “content aware fill” created a completely plausible image. Apparently it is now more powerful:

Photoshop AI tool

Topaz supposedly has their version:
Topaz AI Tool

With the Photoshop AI tool, you paint over whatever you want removed, and the software knows what to delete, leaving a very plausible looking image.

We did this a year or so ago, but apparently the software is now much more powerful.

Maybe these links will be useful - not sure. The AI is supposed to know what to leave alone, and what to replace.

[justinwyllie]

Thanks @mikemyers - Topaz looks interesting but is out of my price range given I would only use it for this. The clone/repair took in PL7 is quite good - but hard work. For example, a cable across an image means lots of separate and painstaking cloning operations. I need the kind of tool you mention. I am currently putting my faith in Affinity Photo (which I will buy once certain logistical problems are overcome).

[mikemyers]

Have you heard of “DarkTable”? It is “open source” image editing, meaning there is no cost, but also meaning there is no “support” other than in the various forums.

Try this link, and see if it is useful:

Darktable Tutorial - How to retouch, Clean up and remove objects

I had DarkTable installed on my computer several years ago, but my version expired and I need to download it again. Maybe I can do that this coming week.