Hi, TL;DR - using masks in a 2.8 scheme script works as intended to extract parts of an image, but after converting it for 2.9 it does much less. One of my interests is photos - particularly trains, and for that I like to resurrect as much detail as possible. Fortunately, I've been taking raw photos for several years. Towards 2 years ago I found out how to use three versions of the same raw image : correct exposure (for the intended subject), overexposed to add shadow detail, similarly underexposed to restore the highlights. For the overexposed image I make a mask from itself, desaturated and inverted, and for the underexposed one I just desaturate the mask. At that time I was doing it all manually (and that still worked fine when I last tried it in 2.9.4). There is of course a problem with this approach which may make it unsuitable for some uses - the resulting image lacks contrast, but there are ways around that. Eventually I decided that I wanted to script this. By that stage I had started to use 2.9. I got the script working ok on another machine using 2.8, but after making changes for 2.9.4 it seemed to do almost nothing. At that stage I was still hoping to make the masks from the "correct" exposure (it sounded like the right thing, but turns out to give "too much of everything"). I then simplified the 2.8 script, used it, decided it was ok. Somebody sent me fixes for 2.9 (change NORMAL to NORMAL-MODE, and gimp-desaturate-full to gimp-drawable-desaturate). The 2.8 version, and some examples (with a faulty process! - I had assumed the G'MIC tone mapping was similar to Advanced Tone Mapping, Doh!) are at http://zarniwhoop.uk/three-exposures.html - the plugin for 2.8 is linked from the bottom of that page. BUT (at last!) this still does much less than in 2.8. I've been using git 14795c1f72 from 26th June. By turning off the undo group I've been able to look at steps along the way. The problem shows in the attached 800x602 example pngs when I do the shadow layer: The overexposed image, and the desaturated and inverted images I'm going to use as the masks look the same, but when I apply the mask not very much happens. Originally I was going to attach some 800x602 pngs, but the list would not let me do that (mail too big), so instead I've created a temporary page showing the good 2.8 side by side with 2.9 : http://zarniwhoop.uk/problem.html The files are: x-2.{8,9}-three.png - what the plugin produces. In 2.9 it is not very different from the base image without the plugin. x-2.{8,9}-shadow-mask.png - the masks for the shadow layer (i.e. for the overexposed image). These appear to be similar, so the different desaturate command is probably not an issue. x-2.{8,9}-overexp.png - the overexposed image, after masking, with the other layers deleted and then superimposed on a white background to see it more clearly. In 2.9 there is seems to be less of everything. I've also put links to the 2.8 and 2.9 scripts at the bottom left of that page. I notice that the file sizes of pngs from 2.9 are a lot bigger, but I'm sure that you already know that. >From looking at the script you can probably tell that I don't understand scheme, so maybe I'm doing things wrong - this was just an attempt to convert my manual steps into a script. Any suggestions, please ? ĸen -- I live in a city. I know sparrows from starlings. After that everything is a duck as far as I'm concerned. -- Monstrous Regiment _______________________________________________ gimp-developer-list mailing list List address: gimp-developer-list@xxxxxxxxx List membership: https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer-list List archives: https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gimp-developer-list
