9/10/2023 0 Comments Luminar neo problems![]() ![]() However, it is currently still very much beta and it remains to be seen whether the bugs and errors could be eliminated until the official release. The Panorama extension to Luminar Neo is a logical step and it gives hope. Here is another function, which should make it possible to create a panorama from a video.Can be useful in some places, however, here also something does not seem to work, the after the start I have canceled function after just under 30 minutes. At least such a function seems to be implemented. In specialized programs like PTGui and Pano2VR, this works very well. Here the Luminar NEO extension already has problems in principle. Only 4 shots were needed from the monopod to image the complete sphere. I used to take a lot of spherical panoramas with a 10.5mm fisheye on the Caonon. those that show the whole room with 360×180°.īut there are still problems just like with the Fisheye panoramas ![]() The panorama function seems to be intended for spherical panoramas as well, i.e. And as you can see in the preview, there is a part hanging on the right edge. You can zoom into the preview with the mouse wheel (discovered by accident), but you can’t find a button to resize the panorama preview to the size of the window. Surely due to the beta status there are also problems, either the preview is displayed much too small. Now this was a quite simple panorama, but there are also Problem areas the slowness with no GPU acceleration in Luminar AI is an issue Skylum recognizes publicly in. Obviously, we need to 'invest' time with useful apps, not 'waste' time with slow and buggy apps. If so, I would not touch it even if Skylum gives Neo for free. After that the image can be edited normally in Luminar NEO. Of course, it is even easier if you would tell me if Luminar Neo is just as slow as AI. The finished image as usual with the extensions saved in a separate collection in the format 16-bit Tiff. of the biggest problems in digital photography the dynamic range of an image sensor cant yet match that of the human eye (or rather. When the panorama has been assembled, you are offered to crop the image directly accordingly: I don’t know if this is due to the beta version or to the fact that in my panoramas there are very few moving objects like people, cars or even moving objects. A correction of ghosting caused by moving objects is available as a menu item, but could not be activated in the beta. The other settings are chromatic aberration correction and lens correction. Problems started if I had Photoshop or LR opened at the same time as Luminar Neo. There extension behaves like all the others, I can make further settings via a menu and of course also start the process to assemble a panorama. The people from Skylum now want to take a close look at my DNG files.Of course, the extension has to be installed first and then you can already start dragging corresponding photos to the extension. I have already reported the problem to DXO (so far without feedback) and Skylum (Luminar). The RAW engines of Adobe Photoshop, Luminar 4, Photolemur, Aurora HDR 2019 and Apple Core Engine have no problems. This currently applies to the RAW Engine from Affinity Photo (Serif RAW Engine), Luminar AI, RawTherapee and Darktable. If you activate the Apple Core Engine in Affinity Photo on a MAC computer, the problem does not occur.Īll in all, I conclude from this that there are RAW converters that don't quite get along with the DNG file that DXO generates, because it deviates from the conventions of a DNG file. And that in turn leads me to conclude that there is also a problem with the serif RAW Engine there. This leads me to suspect that the RAW engine and the implementation of the recognition of a DNG file by Luminar AI is different from the RAW engine of Luminar 4. What puzzles me is that in the predecessor of Luminar AI, namely the Luminar 4, none of these problems occur with the DNG file generated by DXO. I conclude that the DNG file generated by DXO does not adhere to the DNG conventions and, depending on the RAW converter, problems then arise. And then when I open this DNG file in Affinity Photo (or Luminar AI, which I also use) there are no purple spots in the burned out lights. ![]() In this case only the Bayer interpolation is carried out. have not yet been changed and are fully available for editing.Īnd this is where the DNG file generated by DXO differs from a DNG file generated by the Adobe DNG Converter. The other areas such as brightness, colors, white balance etc. This is a linear DNG in which the Bayer interpolation, application of the lens profiles, noise reduction and sharpening have already been carried out and noted in the DNG file. I agree that there is a problem with the DNG file created by DXO. First of all, thank you very much for all the advice. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |