Hdr Agc 1.8.7 - 10.09.2006

[videoFred]

Originally posted by paviko

By lowering avg_lum you influence gain calculation and force to not change bright areas, maybe better would be using coef_gain parameter (lower it instead lowering avg_lum)


Yes, I try this at home and report later.


Instead doing it by hand (these analises) it would be better to implement it to the plugin. Examples please ;), so maybe some pattern can be discovered.


Ah! You give me something to do ,this weekend :p
Monday is a free day, here in Belgium.
I come back here with lots of examples next Tuesday, OK?


But maybe your device is completely different.


Yes it is. It's a machine vision cam. 1024x768 pixels. All settings are done with the software, the iris of the lens must be set manual.
Every parameter can be set: gain, hue, sat, shutter speed etc.. independent from each other.

Here is the camera:
http://www.1394imaging.com/products/cameras/dfk31f03/?sid=08a3357210529170192ad0ec56307c87

Thank you for the follow up, and I report Tuesday, OK?

Fred.

[paviko]

@ videoFred
Ah! You give me something to do ,this weekend
Monday is a free day, here in Belgium.
I come back here with lots of examples next Tuesday, OK?
Please don't hurry. Do it only if you are bored, there is a lot of other more important things to do in free time ;)
And only a few (3-4) specific examples would be great, so please don't overwork.

Here is the camera:
http://www.1394imaging.com/products...92ad0ec56307c87
It's really interesting.

Regards

[videoFred]

Originally posted by paviko
@ videoFred

Please don't hurry. Do it only if you are bored, there is a lot of other more important things to do in free time ;)
And only a few (3-4) specific examples would be great, so please don't overwork.Regards

Hi Paviko again!

Don't worry, I like to work with video in my free time.

:D Here are the results of the Belgian jury :D

First, some fine results:
General settings where: max_sat=1, avg_lum=100, coef_gain= 0.50/1.50, sigma=2, min_gain=2.5, max_gain=15.

http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/testmap/autogain_01.jpg

http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/testmap/autogain_02.jpg

http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/testmap/autogain_03.jpg

http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/testmap/autogain_04.jpg


But on human face, it goes wrong, sometimes.
It removes too much shadows:

http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/testmap/autogain_05.jpg


Reducing coef_gain does not help, then I have no effect at all.
Setting avg_lum very low (20) is the solution for this.

http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/testmap/autogain_06.jpg


General results are very promising, but the picture looks a little artificial, as if is was painted. I think we must take a better look at the shadow parts of the picture. Good shadows are making a picture realistic, right?

I have this idea: next time, I overlay the result clip with the original, then maybe I can get the shadows back. I could tweak brightness etc. of the original, and make the overlay very transparant, of cource. Just enough to have some shadows back.

Fred.

[communist]

Great plugin - big "Thank you" from here :)

The only thing needed is speed - though I could live with the current speed aswell because the magic this plugin does on my footage is worth the time :D

[paviko]

@videoFred

Great. Thank you for examples.
Now I see your captures are quite specific. The image covers whole birghtness range (0-255), it's daylight and large portion of dark areas need contrast to be increased.
Changing coef_gain didn't help because you've set min_gain to 2.5.
I'll try to explain how it works. Let's assume shadow on face has brigthness value of 50, and good lit part of face has about 180. When avg_lum is set to 128 then, simplifing, every darker part of picture than 128 is magnified to the avg_lum value. HDR AGC pluging calculates maximum possible gain for pixel, you can change this calculation by min_gain (so calculated value won't be less than it), max_gain, coef_gain. If pluging calculates that paticular scene needs 2.0 gain then if you set coef_gain to e.g 0.6 it will take 0.6 * 2.0 (=1.2), but now if you also set min_gain to 2.5 then it will be 2.5 at last.
So shadow of face (50) is magnified to 128. Because gain is 2.5, then it will be 125 (50 * 2.5). Bright part of face is left with 180 brightness. So contrast on face is lost (there is only diffrence between 125 and 180, previously 50 - 180) :(
When you set avg_lum to 20, shadow of face is above it (50), so it remains untouched. Again simplifing (not all is totally true ;) ) only part of pictures darker than 20 will be gained.
It looks like for your capture device it's best to play with low avg_lum values.
Here is example of what it looks like with default parameters and max_sat = 1.0 and coef_gain = 0.7. Face is to bright, but constrast is not so much lost. Better result is with lower avg_lum I think ;)
http://img102.echo.cx/img102/5879/trainhdr3ec.jpg
It looks like the second algorithm I'm working on should process these kind of pictures much better from scratch (without tuning). But now it's still on paper, lets wait for a true results :)

@communist
The only thing needed is speed Maybe with later releases some speed can be achived. It looks like it won't be from SSE or YV12 as I previously thought. But also it could be a bit slower but with better quality. We will see how it progress :D

Regards

[Backwoods]

Originally posted by paviko
But also it could be a bit slower but with better quality.

I can live with that.

[videoFred]

Originally posted by paviko
It looks like the second algorithm I'm working on should process these kind of pictures much better from scratch (without tuning). But now it's still on paper, lets wait for a true results :)

@communist
Maybe with later releases some speed can be achived. It looks like it won't be from SSE or YV12 as I previously thought. But also it could be a bit slower but with better quality. We will see how it progress :D

Aha! This is very good news! Thank you also for the explanation.

Fred.:cool:

[paviko]

By going through new algorithm I was enlighted how to improve speed of current algorithm :) So here it is new version which is 4 times faster and reduces significantly halo artifacts of previous version.


Version 0.1.5 alpha - 21.05.2005:
- improvments - 4 times faster with reduced halo artifacts (if you want old behaviour use parameter mode = 0)

HDR AGC 0.1.5 alpha version (http://www.klient.neostrada.pl/HDRAGC0.1.5.zip)

PS. I will update images on the first post later. I'm too lazy now ;)

Regards

[communist]

Originally posted by paviko
- improvments - 4 times faster with reduced halo artifacts
No kiddin - quick test results: Old version ran at steady 1fps while this one runs at exactly 4fps (sometimes 6) (when just doing 'Run video analysis pass' in VDub 1.6.5). Great plugin just got better :)

Will do some more testing later.

[paviko]

By the way. I've forgotten to write that now it's somehow possible to overcome those nasty plastic look (e.g. the sample videoFred posted - boy at the train). By increasing "circle" parameter more local contrast can be preserved. It will slow down, but with e.g circle 32 it's still much faster than previous implementation with circle 7.
Here is result with new implementation and changing circle from 7 to 32 (with VideoFred parameters - avg_lum = 100, sigma = 2.0, ...):
http://img268.echo.cx/img268/5387/trainhdr0hs.jpg

I recommend as default value for circle to be 12. I'll change it in next version, because now default is still 7.

Regards

[rfmmars]

Originally posted by videoFred
Please remember 8mm filmframes are in fact just tiny 6x4mm pictures! Regular 8mm film was the 'mother' of all home filmsystems. Then, in 1965, Kodak launched Super-8 and Fuji Single-8 (the best).

On paper this is true but rarely happens in the real world. I have only two Super8mm films that have surpassed the best Kodak 8mm, and I have had many great 8mm films to telecine.

Here's some of the reasons.

Nothing can comparaed to the satruated Kodachrome 8mm ASA 10. Tight grain and super sharpness.

When Super 8 came into the market other things were happening at the same time. Kadachrome II asa 40 was interduced with, more grain with less color satuation, with the isea that you didn't need to use the floodlights anymore, big mistake that couldn't be reversed in the furture.

Also "auto Focus" & "Auto Exposure" were interduced which work just like their modern day counterparts, they don't! Vertial jitter was a major problem with Super 8 which hasn't been solved yet today. This only happen in the poorest cameras of the 8mm era.

So in the day of 8mm, starting in the late 30's, film was very expensive and the photographer took care in setting the focus and exposure as compared to the point and shoot of the Super 8 days.

And last was the explosion of non-kodak processing, some good, and many not. Adding then poor storage, to the equation, I stll love 8mm.

richard
photorecall.net

[videoFred]

Originally posted by paviko
By going through new algorithm I was enlighted how to improve speed of current algorithm :) So here it is new version which is 4 times faster and reduces significantly halo artifacts of previous version.Regards

Now you have worked in the weekend!:devil:
Thank you for the new version!
I test it at home and report later.

Fred.

[videoFred]

Originally posted by rfmmars
On paper this is true but rarely happens in the real world. I have only two Super8mm films that have surpassed the best Kodak 8mm, and I have had many great 8mm films to telecine.

You are absolutely right. But when I mentioned "the best" I was refering to Single-8, not to Super-8.

I bet, now in digital age, many people can not imagine how "cool" these old -clockwork!- regular-8 cameras where!:cool:

Fred.

[rfmmars]

I have never seen single 8, was that Fuji's format?

richard

[videoFred]

@Paviko:

The new version works fine! A lot faster, and almost no halo effect anymore. Plastic look is also much better. With overlay() of the original, with opacity=0.3, the result is perfect! Can I offer you a Belgian beer?:D

http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/testmap/Fuji.jpg

@Richard:
The above picture is Fuji Single-8 (1975). Single-8 was very popular here in Europe.
Quality was very good, as you see. Fuji used the same principles as Regular-8.
The pressure plate was on the camera, not on the cartridge.
But the film format was the same as Super-8.

@Anyone who can help me :D
Please take a look at the picture above: the left picture is the not manipulated original, the right one is sharpened with MSharpen() and unfilter(). Now, if you enlarge the picture, you see artifacts, caused by sharpening, not by the HDR filter.

Does anyone have a suggestion for a good sharpening filter for this kind of pictures?

Thank you in advance,
Fred.

[Didée]

videoFred:

I'd say LimitedSharpen() is at least worth a try :) - Also, have you tried sharpening >before< HDRAGC? The result should be somewhat different - either better or worse ...

Looking closely, you can see that the sharpening has not introduced too much new artefacts, but mainly did amplify existing artefacts. So, you definetly should use some denoising in the process: sharpening without any denoising is a bad idea most times. Or not a good one at least.

Another possibility to try:

- apply a lowpass filter with sharp transition band, to erase high(est) frequencies only
- sharpen the lowpassed source
- re-apply the difference source/lowpass'd source

The latter is ~somewhat~ similar to MSharpen. However doing all steps manually, you've much more freedom to play around with all possible settings.

[videoFred]

Originally posted by Didée
videoFred:

I'd say LimitedSharpen() is at least worth a try :) - Also, have you tried sharpening >before< HDRAGC? The result should be somewhat different - either better or worse ...

This must be telepathy.... I'm testing limitedSharpen() right now!:p
It looks very promising on my old machine, here. I must test this more at home, on my better machine. There I can work in full resolution.

Yes, I have done tests before and after HDRAGC, after is better.
And yes, I do use denoising: MVdenoise(). But this is film, there is always some filmgrain. I can remove all the grain with MVdenoise(), but than it looks to artificial.

Fred.

[communist]

Hi, has there been any new developement on this filter? I've been using it a lot lately with mg262's CompareVersions (http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=679687#post679687) function (with added subs) to play with the parameters.
However the problem is if I set debug=1 I cant see the whole value - would it be too difficult to allow for alignment (like in Subtitle()) or place it somewhere else (preferably in the upper right corner)? :)

[Raziel6969]

Hello, :)

There is a filter like HDRAGC for photo? i have many pictures taken with my digital camera at night that have low-poor ilumination (exposition) because of the poor flash. I've already used gamma, levels, etc; but i still feel unlucky with this approach, i've read than working with layers help a bit, but your filter looks better than anything.

Bye :P

[videoFred]

OK, I did *LOTS* of tests with HDRAGC. I have the best results if I overlay the original clip with an amount of the HDRAGC clip, using a mask to cover the bright parts.

Here is my simple script:

Loadplugin("HDRAGC.dll")

clip1=AVISource("Myclip.avi")
masker=greyscale(invert(clip1)).tweak(bright=-90,cont=1.2)

converttoRGB(clip1)

clip2=HDRAGC(max_sat=1,avg_lum=100,sigma=1.5,coef_gain=2.5,circle=9,max_gain=14,min_gain=0.5)

clip3=overlay(clip1,clip2,opacity=0.3,mask=masker)

clip3

With opacity you can play with the amount of the overlay.

Fred.

[videoFred]

Hello, :)

There is a filter like HDRAGC for photo?

Bye :P

You can import photos in Avisynth, then apply the filter, then export the photos again.


You need ImageReader / ImageWriter for this.

Fred.

[E-Male]

(shameless plug)
or immaavs, which will read many more formats
(end of shameless plug)

[paviko]

has there been any new developement on this filter? I've implemented algorithm I mentioned a few post above. It provides really good (I would say great) image, but unfortunatelly is not quite usable for moving pictures (video). When some areas of different luminance are moving this algorithm can cause the sudden change of the gain, so some parts are flickering (it's interesting that not a whole frame is flickering but only some objects!). I was deeply investigating the cause and concluded it can't be defeated because picture is create from derivatieves that are not integrable :(
So I'm back to current algorithm with some thoughts how to improve it :) Shortly: adaptive radius size and use of logarithm tone mapping. But first I need to end my thesis at University and then can take on this plugin :(
However the problem is if I set debug=1 I cant see the whole value - would it be too difficult to allow for alignment (like in Subtitle()) or place it somewhere else (preferably in the upper right corner)? It shouldn't be a problem - debug parameter is using Subtitle code :)

@Raziel6969
There is a filter like HDRAGC for photo? I've recently discover that Photoshop (CS, CS2, Elements 3.0) with "Shadow/Highlights..." filters provides similar functionality. It differs a bit - you need to do first some leveling if image is dark and then "Shadow/Highlights...".
I'm thinking of doing plugin for photo editor. Especially the one that is using algorithm described above. For which program do you think should I do it? Photoshop or some free one ?

@videoFred
Here is my simple script...
Thanks a lot.

Regards

[DeepDVD]

There is a filter like HDRAGC for photo? i have many pictures taken with my digital camera at night that have low-poor ilumination (exposition) because of the poor flash.

There is a similar function in Photoshop since CS (v8). Also AutoFX AutoEye 2 and Shadow Illuminator of Intrigue Technologies can make this.

The Blueness-error is well known in these older filters btw.



It would be cool if there will be a function which could control the best lightening of shadows in each frame. The backlight-problem is well known in older homemade videos.

[Raziel6969]

Hello again,

Thanks for the quick answers.
Paviko, i will very happy :) with a photo plugin!
I like GIMP a lot (freeware), i love to have your plugin there.
Photoshop is very used, and Paintshop Pro can use his plugins (i think).

Thanks DeepDVD & videoFred (when you have too many photos is unpractical) for the tips!

Bye

[mkanel]

I've implemented algorithm I mentioned a few post above. It provides really good (I would say great) image, but unfortunatelly is not quite usable for moving pictures (video). ...
So I'm back to current algorithm with some thoughts how to improve it :)
Paviko,

When time permits would you consider posting the filter with the above mentioned algorithm? I sometimes use Avisynth to make a quick collage with various frames from a video, the collage is a single frame so the flickering shouldn't be a problem.

Thanks for the filter.

Mike.

[paviko]

OK mkanel.
I'll post it, but I'll have to change code so setting parameters will be allowed. I was doing it quickly and everything was hardcoded. Currently I spending all free time doing my thesis, I can be late with it :(
Strange I didn't get any notifiaction that there was a reply to this thread ??

As far as working on this filter is concerned . Before I had to break developing it for some time I've implemented everything I wanted. I think it's working well :) The halos have been defeated as much as possible (almost not existent), plastic look minimized also. I need to clean the code and some MMX, SSE optimization would be also recommended, because now it runs with about 2fps.

Regards

[mkanel]

Thanks Paviko,

Please take your time, I'm in no hurry, and good luck with your thesis.
Mike.

[Video Dude]

Wow. This filter is amazing.

:thanks:

[vcmohan]

I have a photo which looks washed out. Can HDRAGC help out? I tried it with some parameters but looks I could not get proper values.
http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/3833/ariel9tp.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Thanks

[paviko]

You can't do anything with already blown highlights. The information is lost forever :( Is it only picture or video?

Regards

[vcmohan]

Its a picture. I tried windowed histogram equalization and levels. It becomes slightly better but other artifacts come out strongly.

[paviko]

If you want to darken some parts of picture you can try invert() function before HDRAGC and then set min_gain to value grater than 1.0 (eg. 1.5) and finally invert() again to revert back.
Highlights will be processed in the next release of HDRAGC, but of course blown areas can't be recover.

Regards

[paviko]

HELLO!
So long, that I've almost forgotten what was planned to do ;) For now new version with lots of new changes.

Version 0.2.0 - download at my homepage (http://strony.aster.pl/paviko/)

Version 0.2.0 - alpha - 23.10.2005:
- completely new lighting routin (sigma parameter not needed)
- new mode (mode = 2) in which radius is adaptively choosen, this removes artifacts as much as I was able to do. Slow, but faster and much, much better than mode = 0
- mode = 1 is again 2 times faster (and will be faster later, still no MMX, SSE optimization)
- new parameter - protect - for value = 1 it can help in some situation with blowing highlights (default on)
- new parameters - contrast, limit - for denoising/sharpening, almost for free - no slow down (experimental)

Notes:
It looks like the algorithm behind HDRAGC can be used for denosing or sharpening. I've written only 5 lines to implement them. Sharpening/denoising are almost not using additional CPU time - so are for free! :D For now it's a bit experimental, because I need to read more about denoising/sharpening to improve it.
New mode (mode = 2) that remove artifacts and is final algorithm. Now I'll look closer to optimization (MMX, SSE) and YUV colour formats. Mode 2 on my Althon 2GHz is 2fps, mode 1 is now faster and goes 8fps.

Comparision (old version / new version)
http://img10.echo.cx/img10/7668/backlighthdr7cu.th.jpg (http://img10.echo.cx/my.php?image=backlighthdr7cu.jpg)http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/3795/backlightnew6wf.th.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/my.php?image=backlightnew6wf.jpg)

http://img122.echo.cx/img122/2853/shadowhdr9rq.th.jpg (http://img122.echo.cx/my.php?image=shadowhdr9rq.jpg)http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/4325/shadownew2ww.th.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shadownew2ww.jpg)

Sharpening with contrast set quite high to 1.6 (before / after)
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/3795/backlightnew6wf.th.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/my.php?image=backlightnew6wf.jpg)http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/1866/backlightsharp7gk.th.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/my.php?image=backlightsharp7gk.jpg)

http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/4325/shadownew2ww.th.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shadownew2ww.jpg)http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/1627/shadowsharp8yr.th.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/my.php?image=shadowsharp8yr.jpg)

Denoising with contrast set to 0.5 (before / after)
http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/3347/lowlightnew4lv.th.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lowlightnew4lv.jpg)http://img441.imageshack.us/img441/6881/lowlightdenoise3px.th.jpg (http://img441.imageshack.us/my.php?image=lowlightdenoise3px.jpg)

[videoFred]

Thank you for further developing this interesting filter, Paviko! :thanks:
I try this new version as soon as possible and report back here.

But I can already say the HDR filter gives better results if you use FFT before.

HDR is a very fine filter indeed..
Sometimes it does miracles.
But I prefer to mix it with the original. :D

Fred.

[paviko]

Thank you videoFred. With new version you can try also how it works without blending. With new lighting routing blending should be similar to decreasing half coef_gain (if gain is auto set) or min_gain/max_gain (if set manually). Using FFT probably help, because by gaining you are increasing noise (grain), which comes visible in dark areas of picture.

New version 0.2.1 that corrects bug with denoising/sharpening when gain reachs maximum.

Version changes:
Version 0.2.1 - alpha - 25.10.2005:
- fixed sharpening/denoising (they were turned off when gain was not applied to image)
- fixed protect mode

Version 0.2.1 - download at my homepage (http://strony.aster.pl/paviko/)

[Pookie]

I was hoping we'd see an update to this great filter. Thanks :)

[paviko]

HDR AGC Version 1.8

What's new:
- huge jump in version, huge jump in quality ;)
- improved old algorithm from version 0.2.1 (mode = 0), new algorithm (mode = 1) that even for high gains give natural picture
- added support for YV12 and YUY2, removed RGB32
- 3 times faster (but still without MMX, SSE, SSE2 optimizations)
- 10 times less memory usage
- better handling of saturation
- new parameters for subtle color correction (shift_u, shift_v)

Lots of parameters have changed, check help file.

Small comparision for forced very high gain - min_gain = 5.0
(original picture / old version / new version with corrector = 0.8)
http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/8356/flowernormal03dg.th.jpg (http://img463.imageshack.us/my.php?image=flowernormal03dg.jpg)http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/1623/flowerold00wo.th.jpg (http://img463.imageshack.us/my.php?image=flowerold00wo.jpg)http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/4241/flowernew01vs.th.jpg (http://img98.imageshack.us/my.php?image=flowernew01vs.jpg)

Regards

[Boulder]

Thanks, the YUY2/YV12 support is very much appreciated :)

[Boulder]

Hmm, VirtualDubMod vanishes immediately when trying to load a script with HDRAGC in it.

[paviko]

What parameters have you used? What's the clip size and color space?

[Edit]
I can't find any parameter that can casue crash. Maybe you've downloaded "old" 1.8 version, because I've been uploading it rigth just when writing post.

Regards

[Boulder]

Nope, even the "new" 1.8 crashes.

This script doesn't work:

AVISource("e:\temp\captures\dv_1.avi")
Trim(6875,7655).FadeIn(25).FadeOut(5)
AssumeBFF()
TDeint(mode=1)
HDRAGC()
AssumeBFF()
SeparateFields()
SelectEvery(4,1,2)
Weave()


This does work:

AVISource("e:\temp\captures\dv_1.avi")
Trim(6875,7655).FadeOut(5)
AssumeBFF()
TDeint(mode=1)
HDRAGC()
AssumeBFF()
SeparateFields()
SelectEvery(4,1,2)
Weave()

That is, if I use FadeIn in the script, VDubMod vanishes. Weird..

The clip is 720x576 ffdshow HuffYUV, YV12 colorspace. I'm using tsp's latest Avisynth build (based on 2.5.6) if that's of any help.

[paviko]

Thank you Boulder for detailed explanation. The crash is because of completely black frame. I've encouter it previously and fixed, but it looks like it has come back ;) Will fix it in a few minutes.

Thanks

[paviko]

Version 1.8.1
Fixed crash for black frame thanks to Boulder.

Regards

[Mtz]

Is possible to select the range where HDRAGC to be applied? Example: from between frame 1000 and 2000.

enjoy,
Mtz

[tsp]

ApplyRange (http://www.avisynth.org/Animate)

[Mtz]

Thanks but if I'm using this:

#HDRAGC(coef_gain=0,coef_sat=1)
ApplyRange(3570,3575,"HDRAGC")

if have different results than this:

HDRAGC(coef_gain=0,coef_sat=1)
#ApplyRange(3570,3575,"HDRAGC")

And the desired result of HDRAGC is in the second example, but I don't have the range.

enjoy,
Mtz

[Alain2]

why not
trim(0,1000)++trim(1001,2000).HDRAGC(coef_gain=0,coef_sat=1)++trim(2001,0)
?

[Backwoods]

Looking forward to testing this.

[videoFred]

Paviko,

Great improvement!:thanks:

First test: (1976 Super-8 film frame)
http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/HDR/HDR_Doom_001.jpg


Conclusion: The new HDRAGC is very very good:) :) :)



Another test: (1968 Super-8 film frame)
http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/HDR/HDR_Doom_005.jpg


Histogram HDRAGC frame:
http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/HDR/HDR_Doom_006.jpg


Histogram HDRAGC + ColorYUV(autogain=true):
http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/HDR/HDR_Doom_007.jpg


Histogram
HDRAGC + ColorYUV(autogain=true)+ LimitedSharpenFaster:
http://users.telenet.be/ho-slotcars/HDR/HDR_Doom_008.jpg


It looks like LimitedSharpenFaster is fixing the histogram!!:cool:
Can someone explain this? :confused:

Fred.