4 ms·

I hate to shit on your parade because this is pretty dope, but the title is disingenuous at best. But I use Lightroom every day, and you might be faster but yo

by jawngee 12y ago

I hate to shit on your parade because this is pretty dope, but the title is disingenuous at best. But I use Lightroom every day, and you might be faster but you aren't working at the same level of quality. I loaded up a 16-bit TIFF and got an 8-bit JPEG as a result, which leads me to assume that you are downsampling to 8-bit to work. Also, the results in polarr are way harsher then Lightroom, which is pretty common for non Adobe products. GIMP is especially harsh in contrast to Photoshop. But even before getting into the color correcting stuff, you're already shifting color (I'm assuming you are ignoring the embedded color profile in the TIFF): http://i.imgur.com/QKb42l5.png http://i.imgur.com/QKb42l5.png Also, Lightroom is way faster making adjustments. I can see polarr "thinking" when I make adjustments (it gets pixellated and then clears up), while Lightroom does them in real time. I couldn't get your curves to work. No split toning. Lens correction should be automatic and profile based. Lightroom will automatically fix distortions based on Camera and Lens model. Same with basic color calibration. Again, I don't want to be discouraging, but I find the hyperbole kind of frustrating.

bwang29 12y ago
Awesome comment. TIFF is not officially supported now and so far we can only output 8bit JPEG in html canvas through downsampling. The downsampling is process "the thinking" part is controlled to be not hurting the user experience and it's different depending on your machine. For faster machines we can remove the thinking part but it would take up more memory (right now the footprint during processing is less than 20mb, consider this is a web app) I agree Adobe is doing better in interpolation (the harshness) and we are working to improve that. What OS and browser you're using? The curves and split toning works well on Mac Desktops. We only have two developers working on this right now. Do you know where we can get lens correction profiles, is it publicly licensed?
- jawngee 12y ago
  Using Safari 8 on Yosemite. Clicking on the curve points doesn't do anything. I just retried it thinking maybe I had done something wrong, but still no love. Re: correction profiles, I'm not sure. Darktable has some, though not as many as Lightroom, so there must be some public source for some of them. This is actually a pretty big deal (for me at least). I'm not a photographer, but I publish a digital/ipad magazine and do most of the retouching work. http://www.darktable.org http://www.darktable.org (Not a fan of darktable, but they do some things pretty well).
  - bwang29 12y ago
    Mouse move event on scaled element on Safari Yosemite seems to be broken, we're looking for a fix now.
- meelooo 12y ago
  IIRC the lens profile format adobe uses for Camera Raw and Light Room is human readable and editable so you may be able to use it directly.
simonmales 12y ago
If I was developing this, I would be stoked with this kind of feedback.
alkonaut 12y ago
What is supposed to be faster? If there is downsampling to 8bit then of course it is easier. If you can't load the full res image then it's easier (and so on and so forth). Impressive, sure. But faster? Lightroom?
- bwang29 12y ago
  Try loading two 24mb 8 bit JPEG files into Polarr and Lightroom. Then try adjust knobs such as exposure and temperature. The rendition in Polarr is apparently faster due to its use of downsampling on the fly but still it uses fully sampled images after the user stops the interaction. I believe Lightroom is doing downsampling in one way or the other.
  - alkonaut 12y ago
    Awesome. Like I said, impressive, but you'll catch a lot of flak for an otherwise impressive application by using the lightroom hyperbole. I don't think many people use lightroom to edit 8bit jpgs (changing exposure on a jpg is a bit disappointing!)
jarun 12y ago
Unlike some other fortunate users who reached the editor, I never did: http://tuxdiary.com/2014/10/28/polarr/ http://tuxdiary.com/2014/10/28/polarr/
- dazzledpenguin 12y ago
  I did re-visit after a rather harsh review because of the loading issues and I am pleased with what Polarr has to offer. The review is updated now! :)

by jawngee 12y ago

bwang29 12y ago

Awesome comment. TIFF is not officially supported now and so far we can only output 8bit JPEG in html canvas through downsampling. The downsampling is process "the thinking" part is controlled to be not hurting the user experience and it's different depending on your machine. For faster machines we can remove the thinking part but it would take up more memory (right now the footprint during processing is less than 20mb, consider this is a web app) I agree Adobe is doing better in interpolation (the harshness) and we are working to improve that. What OS and browser you're using? The curves and split toning works well on Mac Desktops. We only have two developers working on this right now. Do you know where we can get lens correction profiles, is it publicly licensed?

jawngee 12y ago
Using Safari 8 on Yosemite. Clicking on the curve points doesn't do anything. I just retried it thinking maybe I had done something wrong, but still no love. Re: correction profiles, I'm not sure. Darktable has some, though not as many as Lightroom, so there must be some public source for some of them. This is actually a pretty big deal (for me at least). I'm not a photographer, but I publish a digital/ipad magazine and do most of the retouching work. http://www.darktable.org http://www.darktable.org (Not a fan of darktable, but they do some things pretty well).
- bwang29 12y ago
  Mouse move event on scaled element on Safari Yosemite seems to be broken, we're looking for a fix now.
meelooo 12y ago
IIRC the lens profile format adobe uses for Camera Raw and Light Room is human readable and editable so you may be able to use it directly.

simonmales 12y ago

If I was developing this, I would be stoked with this kind of feedback.

alkonaut 12y ago

What is supposed to be faster? If there is downsampling to 8bit then of course it is easier. If you can't load the full res image then it's easier (and so on and so forth). Impressive, sure. But faster? Lightroom?

bwang29 12y ago
Try loading two 24mb 8 bit JPEG files into Polarr and Lightroom. Then try adjust knobs such as exposure and temperature. The rendition in Polarr is apparently faster due to its use of downsampling on the fly but still it uses fully sampled images after the user stops the interaction. I believe Lightroom is doing downsampling in one way or the other.
- alkonaut 12y ago
  Awesome. Like I said, impressive, but you'll catch a lot of flak for an otherwise impressive application by using the lightroom hyperbole. I don't think many people use lightroom to edit 8bit jpgs (changing exposure on a jpg is a bit disappointing!)

jarun 12y ago

Unlike some other fortunate users who reached the editor, I never did: http://tuxdiary.com/2014/10/28/polarr/ http://tuxdiary.com/2014/10/28/polarr/

dazzledpenguin 12y ago
I did re-visit after a rather harsh review because of the loading issues and I am pleased with what Polarr has to offer. The review is updated now! :)