Thanks, Andy. I've been tinkering with Colour Toning and getting some reasonable results ... and then I saw your last video and discovered I could employ more than 1 mask. Bloody hell. I had to change me shorts. And thanks for the last tip on dragging out the right hand panel. It makes a world of difference. RawTherapee rocks (as do you, fine sir)!
This video answers the question I didn't know I had - why the luminance mask in color toning was ineffective on some images. The answer - because I was using the tool incorrectly. Thank you for showing me the correct usage. Informative, as always.
Looking forward to watch a new Rawtherapee video. I saw you have a "Great Black and White Photographs in Lightroom" video, would you consider making something like "Great Black and White Photographs in Rawtherapee"?
Hi Andy, you never stop amazing me (thank you). It makes sooo much sense watching and hearing you go through the topic and yet when I return to my own [now] RT5.9 it sometimes feels like my head is about to explode 🙂When out and about I always set WB manually and take a picture of my color checker. Cannot find a procedure in RT where I can apply the color checker directly. Does it exist ?
@@AndyAstbury Thank you Andy but it was more the color corrections part. If or not RT could 'read' a color checker passport similar to what is being announced in e.g. LR.
HI Andy. Apologize for my English but I expect you will able to catch my queries. Colour management in Rawtherapee is awesome but sometimes I am easily lost by getting results at the end of treatment different from my expectations. May be is coming from my workflow. I’ve a full Adobe RGB monitor (Hardware profil inside the display monitor) and I’m setting in rawtherappe the screen color accordingly. But in ICM module, you can set your output color profile as you want (ex : RTv4-sRGB). Obviously, the result in JPEG or TIFF is showing difference with what you had on your screen during the development stage. So, what is your advice concerning the screen setting versus ICM output profile? Do we have to set the same ? I’m lost.. thanks for your support.
Interesting how the different functions render the R-G-B columns. I need to replay the video a couple of times to assimilate it all. Great tutorial, Andy. Keep them coming. As far as I can see, RT is an endless resource for learning. My god it goes deep. I was taken by surprise today when I - without being aware of it - loaded a RAF file (Fujifilm). The Raw tab now showed a main entry called "Sensor with X-Trans Matrix", and for long five minutes! I didn't understand why RT would do this to me. Now "Method" under the Demosaicing entry showed values like "3 pass (Markesteijn)" or "3 pass fast" in stead of the well known algorithm names for the Bayer Matrix. Maybe the Fuji enthusiasts have only been given one single demosaicing algorithm, Markesteijn, which sounds more Holland-ish than Japanese?
Cheers - and yes it is 🍻🍻 Funnily enough, Fuji don't employ their X-Trans sensor tech in their epic medium format bodies Eigil - they revert back to sensible Bayer tech.
Cheers matey🍻🍻 You could do this in Ps with the colour range selector tool, but it would be way more faffing around. Don't forget the tip at the end about making the EQ panel very big for best control Mark.
You're doing a fine job Andy, thank you! Have you covered the "Dynamic Processing Profiles" in Rawtherapee so far? I do not really understand the Rawtherapee docs related to the "Dynamic Processing Profiles".
Hi Andy, GREAT VIDEO! Any idea when this 5.9 version will finally be released? You have been talking about the release for months now, but still nothing. Do you have the inside scoop on what is going on? Looking forward to your new videos in 2021! Happy New year! :)
Andy did you ever figure out what the blue and yellow boxes and lines are when you select a control point on a curve..I thought they were bezier controls maybe but I can't seem to put them to any use??
Hi Todd - yes, and I've used them in the previous 2 videos. But they are easier to use if you pull that tool panel right out and make the curve panel BIG 👍
Used DarkTable and LR for years, I never liked DT's interface, thank you SOO much for showing me around RT. It's interface may be "older" but I find it easier to use. Now I need to try and create some presets to speed up my WF. In LR I used to have some "basics" for Portraits and Landscapes and then fine tune. Can you point me to which sharpness settings would be preferential for both? I briefly skimmed over "focus" masks and wasn't sure what it was.
When editing the curves, why not make use of the edit point tool which is right below the other option to select a point from the image? Wouldn’t that make fine tuning the curves much easier?
Andy, why are you skeptical regarding DNG files from Adobe's converter. I understand a reservation against the Topaz created "DNG", which is a seriously enlarged package with a strange appearance in my raw converter, but a DNG file from the Adobe DNG Converter should be the top gun among raw files. It's an interesting question to me because I can save 50% disk space from such a conversion of my native raw files, and up till now I have not been able to peek any difference.
I'm not so much anti-DNG as anti anything that's not original camera data! If I have to use a DNG it MUST come from Adobe Convertor. But I fail to understand why anyone would 'convert to DNG' - other than to bring a raw file into a raw processor that doesn't support the raw extension. DNG offers 'bugger all' in terms of image quality improvement, so why do it unless you *have to* for the above reason. DNG is a supposedly lossless compression file format. DNG strips away ALL data that IT THINKS is unnecessary - focus point data etc - and this is where I have my biggest problem with it. Because all changes are written into the DNG file, you need to back up the entire DNG file every time you make changes to it. Throwing away the original camera data is madness beyond compare, so the DNG convertor will allow you to embed the original raw within the DNG - let's see how much disk space that saves you Eigil!!!!
@@AndyAstbury Hi Andy. In all perceptual aspects there's no difference - not to my eyes at least. Also, if I paste the settings from the DNG file to the ARW file from inside RT the result is identical. I would of course not "save disk space" by including the original raw file in the dng! You know that - you joker. There's an option to avoid that in the Adobe DNG converter. The gain of the 50 pct file is primarily in loading within a ram challenged environment like mine running Photoshop 2021 in the background. The original raw file is still taking space up on an external drive. And btw, even a DNG file gets a sidecar file in RT, so no need to back the DNG up, unless you primarily do your raw editing in Lightroom or ACR (Update: No, you can choose to only use XMP in ACR and probably also in Lightroom). Finally I have heard a lot about what DNG files may be missing, but I have not yet seen any official documentation for exclusion of data that would be important for a loyal rendering of the raw data from the native camera raw file. That would be like Adobe shooting themselves in the foot. Update, December 5 - I think this article deals with pros, cons and myths in a fair way: blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2015/12/07/dng-pros-cons-and-myths.html#gs.n9ddhy Passages I like: #1 "Raw files that have been converted to DNG tend to be smaller in size compared to the original raws. This is because the lossless compression method Adobe uses is generally more efficient compared to that implemented by most proprietary raw formats. In some instances the file size savings can be really dramatic." - From my arw to dng, 50 pct smaller size. #2 "Whenever you open a raw image in Camera Raw/Lightroom the raw data is internally converted to the DNG format regardless of whether the file being read is a DNG file or not. In other words, DNG is the internal format for Camera Raw/Lightroom. If you can open an image normally using Camera Raw or Lightroom there will be no difference if you convert to DNG. It is true to say though that the raw data is converted in as much as the lossless compression used is different. The DNG format is based on the TIFF 6 spec, which is an industry standard file format." #3 "The ability to read the raw data on a DNG is therefore only limited by the implementation of the DNG spec. When a DNG file is read correctly, the result will be IDENTICAL to reading the proprietary raw format version the DNG was converted from." (my caps)
No, it's a raw processor not a RIP - no raw processor can print without making a rastorised image to send to a printer. Print RT output from Ps, GIMP, Lightroom or whatever.
Thanks, Andy. I've been tinkering with Colour Toning and getting some reasonable results ... and then I saw your last video and discovered I could employ more than 1 mask. Bloody hell. I had to change me shorts. And thanks for the last tip on dragging out the right hand panel. It makes a world of difference. RawTherapee rocks (as do you, fine sir)!
Glad to help; though with my weight, I tend to roll more than rock! Cheers!
Mind blown. Should have searched for this months ago.
🍻🍻
Splendid. Watched the whole series. Thank you!
Glad you like them!
This video answers the question I didn't know I had - why the luminance mask in color toning was ineffective on some images. The answer - because I was using the tool incorrectly. Thank you for showing me the correct usage. Informative, as always.
Cheers Charles, glad it helped 🍻🍻
Hello Andy, You are a TRUE ambassador for RawTherapee. Thanks a bunch for your videos. Please, keep them coming :-)
Thanks, will do!
Would you be able to do tutorials for astro image processing please❤️🙏
Did you check out this one ua-cam.com/video/B7uXmLuOJyY/v-deo.html
Looking forward to watch a new Rawtherapee video. I saw you have a "Great Black and White Photographs in Lightroom" video, would you consider making something like "Great Black and White Photographs in Rawtherapee"?
Phenomenal! I got one...
I bought my friend an elephant for his room.
He said “Thanks”.
I said “Don’t mention it”.
Cheers Mark - and that's a belter, so definitely going on the next one! 🍻😂
Hi Andy, you never stop amazing me (thank you). It makes sooo much sense watching and hearing you go through the topic and yet when I return to my own [now] RT5.9 it sometimes feels like my head is about to explode 🙂When out and about I always set WB manually and take a picture of my color checker. Cannot find a procedure in RT where I can apply the color checker directly. Does it exist ?
In the top menu under white balance, just select Camera - this will read the WB from the camera exif data that you've set manually.
@@AndyAstbury Thank you Andy but it was more the color corrections part. If or not RT could 'read' a color checker passport similar to what is being announced in e.g. LR.
Thanks Andy. Another video with genuine real-world applications. Can’t wait for an excuse to use these features.
Cheers, and I'm sure you will soon benefit from the power of this tool 🍻🍻
Would it be helpful if you could copy the first mask and then invert it for the second mask?
Yes, very much so! It's on my request list for the devs, but I'm keeping quiet about it until there is a new public release.
Hi Andy, long time no hear. Hope you're doing fine. Cheers.
HI Andy. Apologize for my English but I expect you will able to catch my queries. Colour management in Rawtherapee is awesome but sometimes I am easily lost by getting results at the end of treatment different from my expectations. May be is coming from my workflow. I’ve a full Adobe RGB monitor (Hardware profil inside the display monitor) and I’m setting in rawtherappe the screen color accordingly. But in ICM module, you can set your output color profile as you want (ex : RTv4-sRGB). Obviously, the result in JPEG or TIFF is showing difference with what you had on your screen during the development stage. So, what is your advice concerning the screen setting versus ICM output profile? Do we have to set the same ? I’m lost.. thanks for your support.
Interesting how the different functions render the R-G-B columns. I need to replay the video a couple of times to assimilate it all. Great tutorial, Andy. Keep them coming. As far as I can see, RT is an endless resource for learning. My god it goes deep.
I was taken by surprise today when I - without being aware of it - loaded a RAF file (Fujifilm). The Raw tab now showed a main entry called "Sensor with X-Trans Matrix", and for long five minutes! I didn't understand why RT would do this to me. Now "Method" under the Demosaicing entry showed values like "3 pass (Markesteijn)" or "3 pass fast" in stead of the well known algorithm names for the Bayer Matrix. Maybe the Fuji enthusiasts have only been given one single demosaicing algorithm, Markesteijn, which sounds more Holland-ish than Japanese?
Cheers - and yes it is 🍻🍻 Funnily enough, Fuji don't employ their X-Trans sensor tech in their epic medium format bodies Eigil - they revert back to sensible Bayer tech.
Really enjoyed that one Andy. A bit snazzier than using the tragic wand in photoshop thats for sure.
Cheers matey🍻🍻 You could do this in Ps with the colour range selector tool, but it would be way more faffing around. Don't forget the tip at the end about making the EQ panel very big for best control Mark.
You're doing a fine job Andy, thank you! Have you covered the "Dynamic Processing Profiles" in Rawtherapee so far? I do not really understand the Rawtherapee docs related to the "Dynamic Processing Profiles".
Cheers🍻🍻 No I haven't, and I think they are something of a waste of time - I'll do a video on why that is sometime.
@@AndyAstbury Thanks!
Hi Andy, GREAT VIDEO! Any idea when this 5.9 version will finally be released? You have been talking about the release for months now, but still nothing. Do you have the inside scoop on what is going on? Looking forward to your new videos in 2021! Happy New year! :)
I'm in the dark as much as you are! This is why is recommend everyone tries the nightly builds, as they are updated every day.
Andy, you are great genius and super teacher!!!
Cheers Vishy, many thanks 🍻🍻
Andy did you ever figure out what the blue and yellow boxes and lines are when you select a control point on a curve..I thought they were bezier controls maybe but I can't seem to put them to any use??
Hi Todd - yes, and I've used them in the previous 2 videos. But they are easier to use if you pull that tool panel right out and make the curve panel BIG 👍
@@AndyAstbury Thanks Andy its a rewatch for me....
Used DarkTable and LR for years, I never liked DT's interface, thank you SOO much for showing me around RT. It's interface may be "older" but I find it easier to use. Now I need to try and create some presets to speed up my WF. In LR I used to have some "basics" for Portraits and Landscapes and then fine tune. Can you point me to which sharpness settings would be preferential for both? I briefly skimmed over "focus" masks and wasn't sure what it was.
When editing the curves, why not make use of the edit point tool which is right below the other option to select a point from the image? Wouldn’t that make fine tuning the curves much easier?
I'm a bit confused - should we use this instead of lab adjustments?
If you want a selection based on Luminosity then use Lab, if you want a selection based on colour then use this method!
Inspired, Thanks Andy!
My pleasure!
Andy, why are you skeptical regarding DNG files from Adobe's converter. I understand a reservation against the Topaz created "DNG", which is a seriously enlarged package with a strange appearance in my raw converter, but a DNG file from the Adobe DNG Converter should be the top gun among raw files. It's an interesting question to me because I can save 50% disk space from such a conversion of my native raw files, and up till now I have not been able to peek any difference.
I'm not so much anti-DNG as anti anything that's not original camera data! If I have to use a DNG it MUST come from Adobe Convertor.
But I fail to understand why anyone would 'convert to DNG' - other than to bring a raw file into a raw processor that doesn't support the raw extension.
DNG offers 'bugger all' in terms of image quality improvement, so why do it unless you *have to* for the above reason.
DNG is a supposedly lossless compression file format.
DNG strips away ALL data that IT THINKS is unnecessary - focus point data etc - and this is where I have my biggest problem with it.
Because all changes are written into the DNG file, you need to back up the entire DNG file every time you make changes to it.
Throwing away the original camera data is madness beyond compare, so the DNG convertor will allow you to embed the original raw within the DNG - let's see how much disk space that saves you Eigil!!!!
@@AndyAstbury Hi Andy. In all perceptual aspects there's no difference - not to my eyes at least. Also, if I paste the settings from the DNG file to the ARW file from inside RT the result is identical. I would of course not "save disk space" by including the original raw file in the dng! You know that - you joker. There's an option to avoid that in the Adobe DNG converter. The gain of the 50 pct file is primarily in loading within a ram challenged environment like mine running Photoshop 2021 in the background. The original raw file is still taking space up on an external drive. And btw, even a DNG file gets a sidecar file in RT, so no need to back the DNG up, unless you primarily do your raw editing in Lightroom or ACR (Update: No, you can choose to only use XMP in ACR and probably also in Lightroom). Finally I have heard a lot about what DNG files may be missing, but I have not yet seen any official documentation for exclusion of data that would be important for a loyal rendering of the raw data from the native camera raw file. That would be like Adobe shooting themselves in the foot.
Update, December 5 - I think this article deals with pros, cons and myths in a fair way: blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2015/12/07/dng-pros-cons-and-myths.html#gs.n9ddhy
Passages I like:
#1 "Raw files that have been converted to DNG tend to be smaller in size compared to the original raws. This is because the lossless compression method Adobe uses is generally more efficient compared to that implemented by most proprietary raw formats. In some instances the file size savings can be really dramatic."
- From my arw to dng, 50 pct smaller size.
#2 "Whenever you open a raw image in Camera Raw/Lightroom the raw data is internally converted to the DNG format regardless of whether the file being read is a DNG file or not. In other words, DNG is the internal format for Camera Raw/Lightroom. If you can open an image normally using Camera Raw or Lightroom there will be no difference if you convert to DNG. It is true to say though that the raw data is converted in as much as the lossless compression used is different. The DNG format is based on the TIFF 6 spec, which is an industry standard file format."
#3 "The ability to read the raw data on a DNG is therefore only limited by the implementation of the DNG spec.
When a DNG file is read correctly, the result will be IDENTICAL to reading the proprietary raw format version the DNG was converted from." (my caps)
Is there a build that supports canon r6 raw files?
I'm still waiting for the developers to address this .cr3 problem myself.
Can we really use RawTherapee to print photos ?
No, it's a raw processor not a RIP - no raw processor can print without making a rastorised image to send to a printer. Print RT output from Ps, GIMP, Lightroom or whatever.
OMG stupid me, now i see there is a + for more then 1 mask haha