High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement

More
5 years 8 months ago #61 by Martigen
Replied by Martigen on topic High Pass Sharpening

throumbas wrote: I love this, i use it to sharpen Witcher3 while im playing it at a lower res than my native and this does some work!

Yeah it's quite different. I was playing around with this with Pillars of Eternity and I think, subjectively, lumasharpen from SweetFX was doing a better job on fine detail than the high pass sharpen, however the contrast sharpening was an excellent compliment, so I was using luma with contrast :) I haven't tried it since Ioxa added the midtone sharpening however.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #62 by Ioxa
Replied by Ioxa on topic High Pass Sharpening

throumbas wrote: I love this, i use it to sharpen Witcher3 while im playing it at a lower res than my native and this does some work!

Glad you like it, thanks for the feedback!

Martigen wrote: Yeah it's quite different. I was playing around with this with Pillars of Eternity and I think, subjectively, lumasharpen from SweetFX was doing a better job on fine detail than the high pass sharpen, however the contrast sharpening was an excellent compliment, so I was using luma with contrast :) I haven't tried it since Ioxa added the midtone sharpening however.

I haven't compared the two but I would guess lumasharpen picks up the smaller details because of the blurring pattern used. I was using gaussian blurring with a ~7 pixel radius where lumasharpen uses ~1/2 pixel radius depending on the pattern and offset bias. The larger blur radius losses the finer detail, which is basically how the contrast enhancement works, the large blur radius makes the bigger details stand out.

But I've changed the blurring pattern used for the sharpening, I'm using a 3x3 mask now instead of the gaussian blur, the gaussian was over kill for sharpening and not worth the performance cost. I hope it still looks different from lumasharpen, no need for redundancy.

I'm also wondering what a mix of lumasharpen and highpass sharpening would look like, different radii may bring out different details, similar to how sharpening and contrast enhancement work together.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #63 by Ioxa
Updated the Reshade + Framework Version.

-Changed the blurring technique used for sharpening. The new one has a much lower performance cost.

-Added options to curve the dark halos only or bright halos only. This article gives a pretty good overview on sharpening, halos, and why you may want to use stronger dark halos.

-Removed all the performance options and made the better performing settings the defaults.

Download for ReShade + Framework Version
The following user(s) said Thank You: BillyAlt, Ganossa

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago - 5 years 8 months ago #64 by Marty McFly
Replied by Marty McFly on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement
You can do something that might speed up preprocessing a bit:

#if CE_MaskQuality == 1 || CE_MaskQuality == 2 || CE_MaskQuality == 3 || CE_MaskQuality == 4 || CE_MaskQuality == 5
#if CE_MaskQuality == 2 || CE_MaskQuality == 3 || CE_MaskQuality == 4 || CE_MaskQuality == 5
#if CE_MaskQuality == 3 || CE_MaskQuality == 4 || CE_MaskQuality == 5
#if CE_MaskQuality == 4 || CE_MaskQuality == 5
#if CE_MaskQuality == 5

why not:

#if CE_MaskQuality >= 1
#if CE_MaskQuality >= 2
#if CE_MaskQuality >= 3
#if CE_MaskQuality >= 4
#if CE_MaskQuality >= 5


?

Oh and I'm not sure that X passes with low radius gaussian blur is effective for big blur, you might consider increasing the gaussian tap count instead. Plus you can increase offset the more passes you have, i.e. if you go further than 1 pixel in first pass, you get artifacts but when you sample an already blurred image, you can shift the offsets by 10 pixels instead of 1 and you won't see any artifacts.
Last edit: 5 years 8 months ago by Marty McFly.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ioxa

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago - 5 years 8 months ago #65 by Martigen
Replied by Martigen on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement

Ioxa wrote: Updated the Reshade + Framework Version.

-Changed the blurring technique used for sharpening. The new one has a much lower performance cost.

-Added options to curve the dark halos only or bright halos only. This article gives a pretty good overview on sharpening, halos, and why you may want to use stronger dark halos.

-Removed all the performance options and made the better performing settings the defaults.

Download for ReShade + Framework Version

I can understand removing the performance options to minimise complexity, but... there's quite a difference in the low-fi and high-fi version of the contrast mask, at least that I can see. It might be nice to keep this. And I presume the default options use 5 samples for each? I marginally noticed differences in quality with these disabled.

Also two questions:

1. The mid-tone versions are a great idea, I can see why you added them, especially on the contrast mask which tends to brighten everything. However, comparing screenshots using just 'mid-tone' and 'off', the mid-tone results seemed to apply *only* to brightened (and possibly dark, but hard to see there) areas. I expected mid-tone to be adjusted without brights being overly affected. Is this intentional, or did I misunderstand the purpose?

2. The CE mask width... help me understand how this should be used :). At low levels (~1) it's clear the mask is, for want of a better phrase, low-accuracy. At the default of 3, it appears to look good, and doubling this to 6 seems to improve quality even further. But here's the rub: at 6 it shows what looks like a pretty accurate contrast mask, as some areas that are 'light' in 6 and representative of the source image are 'dark' at 3. I'm inclined to use 6 then, however given the end-result is blended and the goal is to create definition through contrast, the dark areas of '3' would actually -- I think, if understand this right -- create more definition. Is a higher value supposed to improve quality further, or does it get to a stage where higher values would be counter-productive?

That's all a bit wordy, so some images:

Source image (no effects):


MaskWidth = 3.0


MaskWidth = 6.0


Notice how, just for example in the three character portraits, when compared to the original image '3' is darkening the background of the portrait on the left, and on the right the male elf's face is dark whereas on '6' it is light, and closer to the source. You see it too in the final blended image but I'm undecided which looks better...

Settings used:
// ---- Contrast Enhancement Settings ----
#define CE_Mask               1 //[0|1|2|3] 0 = Off, 1 = Contrast Enhancement, 2 = Contrast De-enhancement?, 3 = Mid-tone Contrast Enhancement
#define CurveCE_Mask          1 //[0 or 1] 0 = Off, 1 = On.
#define CurveCE_Strength   0.20 //[0.00 - 1.00] Higher #'s = stronger effect.
#define CE_MaskWidth       3.00 //#'s > 1 = bigger radius, #'s < 1 = smaller radius
#define CE_MaskQuality        4 //[0 to 5] Higher #'s = more blur passes (Wider, smoother blur). Higher performance cost.
#define ViewCE_Mask           0 //Set to 1 to view the CE_Mask. Helpful when adjusting mask settings. 
#define CE_BlendMode          2 //1 = Soft Light(weak), 2 = Overlay(neutral), 3 = Multiply, 4 = Hard Light, 5 = Vivid Light, 6 = Soft Light#2(lighter), 7 = Soft Light#3(darker) 
#define CE_Strength        0.45 //[0.00 - 1.00]Strength of the Contrast Enhancement effect.

// ---- Performance and Misc Settings ---- (I recommend viewing the respective masks when adjusting these settings)
#define TextureFormat         0 //[0|1|2] 0 = RGBA8, 1 = RGBA16F(shows a little more detail than RGBA8), 2 = RGBA32F
#define SharpTexScale         0 //[0 or 1] 0 = Off, 1 = Scaled up texture for sharp mask. (Higher performance cost, slightly better quality.) 
#define SharpSamples          1 //[0 or 1] 0 = 3 samples, 1 = 5 samples. Setting to 0 slightly lowers performance cost and quality.
#define CETexScale            1 //[0 or 1] 0 = Scaled down texture for contrast enhancement mask (lower performance cost), 1 = No scaling. 
#define CE_Samples            1 //[0 or 1] 0 = 3 samples, 1 = 5 samples. Setting to 0 slightly lowers performance cost and quality.

Marty McFly wrote: Oh and I'm not sure that X passes with low radius gaussian blur is effective for big blur, you might consider increasing the gaussian tap count instead. Plus you can increase offset the more passes you have, i.e. if you go further than 1 pixel in first pass, you get artifacts but when you sample an already blurred image, you can shift the offsets by 10 pixels instead of 1 and you won't see any artifacts.

This is well above my head, but I did notice an improvement with more passes (which is why it's set to 4 above) but then I was also playing with the larger radius. Also thanks for all your work Marty!
Last edit: 5 years 8 months ago by Martigen.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #66 by Ioxa

Marty McFly wrote: You can do something that might speed up preprocessing a bit:

#if CE_MaskQuality == 1 || CE_MaskQuality == 2 || CE_MaskQuality == 3 || CE_MaskQuality == 4 || CE_MaskQuality == 5
#if CE_MaskQuality == 2 || CE_MaskQuality == 3 || CE_MaskQuality == 4 || CE_MaskQuality == 5
#if CE_MaskQuality == 3 || CE_MaskQuality == 4 || CE_MaskQuality == 5
#if CE_MaskQuality == 4 || CE_MaskQuality == 5
#if CE_MaskQuality == 5

why not:

#if CE_MaskQuality >= 1
#if CE_MaskQuality >= 2
#if CE_MaskQuality >= 3
#if CE_MaskQuality >= 4
#if CE_MaskQuality >= 5


?

Oh and I'm not sure that X passes with low radius gaussian blur is effective for big blur, you might consider increasing the gaussian tap count instead. Plus you can increase offset the more passes you have, i.e. if you go further than 1 pixel in first pass, you get artifacts but when you sample an already blurred image, you can shift the offsets by 10 pixels instead of 1 and you won't see any artifacts.

Well, the reason I did it that way is because I don't know shit. I will change that for sure. For the passes, I think I see what you're saying. If I blur the image once without the CE_MaskWidth then apply the MaskWidth to the following passes it'll be smoother? Maybe even step up the width with each pass?

Warning: Spoiler!

Yeah, I removed the performance options to make things less confusing. It was my plan from the start to get rid of them once I decided which settings were the best mix of quality and performance. I may put those options back in when the mediator is released though, along with a bunch of other options that are just too confusing to use in a config file. I actually made 3 samples the default because like you said, the difference was marginal, and I think it's something like 40% less texture fetches. For the low-fi and high-fi versions, are you talking about the texture format or the scaling? I made the lowest quality of both of those settings the default. If you want to change them you can do it in the .h file, in the future I'll try to add comments in the code for this stuff.

The mid-tone options use a mask which blocks pixels below ~0.3 and pixels over ~0.8 from the effect so it will look different depending on what the darkest and brightest pixels in the scene are. I would like to make the mask dynamic so it adjusts from scene to scene but I don't know how to do that, someday maybe. And it could probably use a little more adjusting but it's tough to decide on the perfect setting. You could probably use the curve option to adjust it though, try increasing the strength of the dark halos only.

The CE_MaskWidth... This might help. If you reduce the width to < 1 you're basically sharpening. As you get closer to 0 you will see finer details stand out. When you increase the width those fine details start to disappear, they basically get blurred away. But now the larger details start to stand out, building edges, shadow edges, etc. Try using the gaussian blur in the framework and set the strength to 1.00. Start at 0 quality and see which details are still noticeable then bump the quality up to 12 and see which ones are still noticeable. This is basically what is happening when you adjust the MaskWidth but it gets a lot blurrier. So as the width gets larger only the larger details are noticeable until a certain point where everything is just a blurred mess. There is a sweet spot for the contrast enhancement and it's probably between 3 and 6, what looks best is up to you.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #67 by Marty McFly
Replied by Marty McFly on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement
I didn't look so much into your code, but as far as I remember, the CE_MaskQuality only determines how often gaussian blur runs, right?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #68 by Ioxa
Yeah, its just the number of times the gaussian passes are repeated. 0 is one time, 1 is two times, etc.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #69 by throumbas
Replied by throumbas on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement
Any chance for a SweetFX download of the new version?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago - 5 years 8 months ago #70 by Martigen
Replied by Martigen on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement

Ioxa wrote: Yeah, I removed the performance options to make things less confusing. It was my plan from the start to get rid of them once I decided which settings were the best mix of quality and performance. I may put those options back in when the mediator is released though, along with a bunch of other options that are just too confusing to use in a config file. I actually made 3 samples the default because like you said, the difference was marginal, and I think it's something like 40% less texture fetches. For the low-fi and high-fi versions, are you talking about the texture format or the scaling? I made the lowest quality of both of those settings the default. If you want to change them you can do it in the .h file, in the future I'll try to add comments in the code for this stuff.

Could you maybe add a single toggle for 'HQ mode' that enables 5 samples for both high-pass and contrast shader, and the full res CE tex scale (no scaling)? I didn't see any noticeable difference for the high-pass sharpener upscaled mode in my limited testing, and I imagine that's the most demanding toggle, so that could be left as is.

The mid-tone options use a mask which blocks pixels below ~0.3 and pixels over ~0.8 from the effect so it will look different depending on what the darkest and brightest pixels in the scene are.

I'll have to test it with more games, but when playing around with it in Pillars what I noticed was *only* the brightest pixels being affected (they became brighter, while mid-tones seemed unaffected), hence wondering if it's working correctly. This was for mid-tone contrast, hadn't played with mid-tone sharpening yet.
Last edit: 5 years 8 months ago by Martigen.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago - 5 years 8 months ago #71 by Ioxa

throumbas wrote: Any chance for a SweetFX download of the new version?

I think I may have gone one step forward and two steps back with the last update. I'm going to make some changes before I update the SweetFX version.

Martigen wrote: Could you maybe add a single toggle for 'HQ mode' that enables 5 samples for both high-pass and contrast shader, and the full res CE tex scale (no scaling)? I didn't see any noticeable difference for the high-pass sharpener upscaled mode in my limited testing, and I imagine that's the most demanding toggle, so that could be left as is.

Yeah, I'm changing it back to 5 samples for default, it looks too choppy with 3. And I'm putting the tex scaling option back in for contrast enhancement.

Martigen wrote: I'll have to test it with more games, but when playing around with it in Pillars what I noticed was *only* the brightest pixels being affected (they became brighter, while mid-tones seemed unaffected), hence wondering if it's working correctly. This was for mid-tone contrast, hadn't played with mid-tone sharpening yet.

Something isn't quite right with it. I know it affects dark pixels but using it in Dead Space 2 I'm noting the same thing you're talking about. It could be an issue with the blend modes, I'm going to look into that. I'm also trying to come up with an easy way to adjust the mid-tone mask. For now it seems like blend mode 7 has the least impact on bright pixels.
Last edit: 5 years 8 months ago by Ioxa.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #72 by Martigen
Replied by Martigen on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement

Ioxa wrote: Something isn't quite right with it. I know it affects dark pixels but using it in Dead Space 2 I'm noting the same thing you're talking about. It could be an issue with the blend modes, I'm going to look into that. I'm also trying to come up with an easy way to adjust the mid-tone mask. For now it seems like blend mode 7 has the least impact on bright pixels.

Good to know I'm not going mad! I don't think it's in the blending though, as if you turn on ViewCE_Mask you can see the result we're seeing before the blend pass (at least, I presume this is the case as changing blend mode has no effect on what's displayed by ViewCE_Mask), so perhaps it's the equation.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #73 by Ioxa

Martigen wrote: Good to know I'm not going mad! I don't think it's in the blending though, as if you turn on ViewCE_Mask you can see the result we're seeing before the blend pass (at least, I presume this is the case as changing blend mode has no effect on what's displayed by ViewCE_Mask), so perhaps it's the equation.

When ViewCE_Mask is set to 1 it bypasses the blend modes, what you see is the image that will be blended with the original. But I think I found a solution, I added an adjustable clamp for bright and dark pixels in the mask. This way you can completely remove any pixels above 0.5 from the mask if you wanted to and bright pixels wouldn't be affected at all. Although different blend modes may still affect the brighter pixels differently, I'll have to test them out.
The following user(s) said Thank You: jas01

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago - 5 years 8 months ago #74 by Wicked Sick
Replied by Wicked Sick on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement
Hey, ioxa, I am trying the Gauss bloom and I am happy with it. I didn't recall it being like this (the glow in the trees's trunk):

i.imgur.com/UwFVHf4.jpg

I really like it

i.imgur.com/lBIC06T.jpg

I am still struggling with debaing, tho

Thank you.
Last edit: 5 years 8 months ago by Wicked Sick.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ioxa

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #75 by Ioxa

Wicked Sick wrote: Hey, ioxa, I am trying the Gauss bloom and I am happy with it. I didn't recall it being like this (the glow in the trees's trunk):

i.imgur.com/UwFVHf4.jpg

I really like it

i.imgur.com/lBIC06T.jpg

I am still struggling with debaing, tho

Thank you.

Thanks Wicked, glad you like it! I tried to get it like the original but it just didn't look right. So I changed some things so it didn't look broken then adjusted it until I thought it looked good.
The debanding shader has worked very well for me, I don't have Witcher 3 though so I don't know how well it works in that game. It made Dead Space 2 playable for me though, the horrible banding in that game used to distract me to the point that I couldn't play it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago - 5 years 8 months ago #76 by Wicked Sick
Replied by Wicked Sick on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement
"the horrible banding in that game used to distract me to the point that I couldn't play it"

Reading this, I can think about how I also get distracted by this kind of stuff in similar way, somehow. For example, my PC sucks, but I cannot afford to play in any other settings if not on ultra, even with low fps... And I also cannot find peace if I am not playing a game on the hardest difficulty, even if it means that I will suffer...

It's like a voice keep whispering inside my head "It's not maxed, it's not" and "It's not on the hardest, it's not" and it will affect no one but myself whether I play it on the highest difficulty or at the max settings even if I can't support it, I just can't find a way around it. It's quite bothersome.

Before I didn't know what was "banding". The only time that it really bothered me was with Skyrim long ago. With the TW3, it's starting, but not as much. In another thread in here, SunBro said that enabling Dither together should help with it.

Warning: Spoiler!



Also, what are the values that you are using for the debanding?

Ah yes, I should not forget. Thank you for picking the Gauss and porting it to ReShade since long ago. When Crosire announced this forum at Guru 3D, asking for Gauss was the first thing I did here and you made it real shortly after.

You speak about how your bloom isn't quite as good as it were when boulotaur2024 made it for the original Gauss. Well, for me, the bloom in your port as it is now, I think it's more appealing to my eyes than the original once were. Not meaning to belittle or to sound ungrateful, but I think you did a splendid job as well. Thank you and him for that and this and all, working with this great shader.

When I get a job, I will repay you.
Last edit: 5 years 8 months ago by Wicked Sick.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ioxa

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #77 by Martigen
Replied by Martigen on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement
Hey Ioxa,

I just wanted to thank you so much for making this shader :) The contrast sharpener is fantastic for all the detail that high-pass and lumasharpen miss (or rather, aren't best suited for) -- it brings out detail that isn't a function of hard lines or geometry, this is especially true for any games that use of artistic textures. For example, the contrast sharpener is fantastic for:

  • The Borderlands series of games
  • Pillars of Eternity
  • Divinity: Original Sin
  • Sunless Sea
  • Shadowrun: Dragonfall
  • Telltale game series
And that's just what I've tested. Most of these are isometic games, but Borderlands is awesome with it, and presumably Bioshock will be too (on my to-do list!). This needs to be part of vanilla Framework and SweetFX, asap!

On that note, with 0.19 and the Framework update, do you have an updated package to work with Luciferhawk's new tool? It's not that important at the moment, but in time I imagine it will be necessary.

For those interested, these are the settings I'm using for the contrast sharpener in the above games. I may tailor them further per-game but, at the moment, just been testing with it loaded:
// ---- Contrast Enhancement Settings ----
#define CE_Mask               1 //[0|1|2|3] 0 = Off, 1 = Contrast Enhancement, 2 = Contrast De-enhancement?, 3 = Mid-tone Contrast Enhancement
#define CurveCE_Mask          1 //[0 or 1] 0 = Off, 1 = On.
#define CurveCE_Strength   0.20 //[0.00 - 1.00] Higher #'s = stronger effect.
#define CE_MaskWidth       3.00 //#'s > 1 = bigger radius, #'s < 1 = smaller radius
#define CE_MaskQuality        4 //[0 to 5] Higher #'s = more blur passes (Wider, smoother blur). Higher performance cost.
#define ViewCE_Mask           0 //Set to 1 to view the CE_Mask. Helpful when adjusting mask settings. 
#define CE_BlendMode          2 //1 = Soft Light(weak), 2 = Overlay(neutral), 3 = Multiply, 4 = Hard Light, 5 = Vivid Light, 6 = Soft Light#2(lighter), 7 = Soft Light#3(darker) 
#define CE_Strength        0.55 //[0.00 - 1.00]Strength of the Contrast Enhancement effect.

// ---- Performance and Misc Settings ---- (I recommend viewing the respective masks when adjusting these settings)
#define TextureFormat         0 //[0|1|2] 0 = RGBA8, 1 = RGBA16F(shows a little more detail than RGBA8), 2 = RGBA32F
#define SharpTexScale         0 //[0 or 1] 0 = Off, 1 = Scaled up texture for sharp mask. (Higher performance cost, slightly better quality.) 
#define SharpSamples          0 //[0 or 1] 0 = 3 samples, 1 = 5 samples. Setting to 0 slightly lowers performance cost and quality.
#define CETexScale            1 //[0 or 1] 0 = Scaled down texture for contrast enhancement mask (lower performance cost), 1 = No scaling. 
#define CE_Samples            1 //[0 or 1] 0 = 3 samples, 1 = 5 samples. Setting to 0 slightly lowers performance cost and quality.
Note I'm not using the high-pass sharpener, I'm combining Lumasharpen from SweetFX with the Contrast Sharpener above. Also note it uses the Overlay blend mode to reduce the impact of brightening, it will be interesting to test the mid-tone mode again once Ioxa has fixed it.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ioxa, ninjafada

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #78 by Ioxa
@Wicked Sick
For Dead Space 2 I have DEBAND_RADIUS set at 32.0 and DEBAND_THRESHOLD at 0.024. But since the game has so much banding in it those settings killed a lot of the detail. So I used an idea from the deband shader I was working on to help bring some of that detail back.
And I remember that post! I was in the same boat as you, trying to get the gaussian shader working. I thought it would be so easy, little did I know... So now almost 6 months later its finally in a state that I don't feel is broken. I'm glad you like the way its turned out! I wanted to go with something that was subtle but strong enough that it was easy to spot the difference between it being on and off. And I wanted to stick close to Boulotaur2024's original neutral, warm, and foggy/hazy settings. You don't have to worry about repaying me, you were the one that always let me know the file I had just uploaded was broken, haha.

@Martigen
Yeah, I'm working on porting it to the Mediator. Its pretty much done, there are just a couple settings I'm trying to smooth out, they aren't doing what I was expecting them to do. Shouldn't be much longer though. And thanks for the feedback, especially the games you use it in and the settings you use! Its tough to decide what to change when I don't know how people are using the shader, so that helps a lot. It also reminded me that I own Shadowrun, I'll do some testing in that to see how the mid-tone settings are working now.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #79 by Ioxa
Updated the version for ReShade + Framework and the version for ReShade + SweetFX / MasterEffect.

Download High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement for ReShade + Framework

Download High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement for ReShade + SweetFX and MasterEffect

Updated the ReShade + Framework version for compatibility with the Framework Mediator.

Added some advanced settings to both sharpening and contrast enhancement to give more control over the effects.

Brought back the texture scaling options for contrast enhancement.

Changed the quality for contrast enhancement. 0 is now 3 passes with gradually increasing widths. Increasing the quality adds 1 more blur pass for each step up.

Added a quality setting to sharpening.

Added a way to adjust the mid-tone mask.

And I may have changed or added some other things that I'm forgetting right now. But I'm still working on it, still learning, so let me know if any of the changes I made are good or bad or if there is anything else you would like to see changed or added.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Wicked Sick, ninjafada, BillyAlt, Ganossa, jas01, NotAgOat, juankyskys, HarveyKrumpet, teringlijer

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
5 years 8 months ago #80 by NotAgOat
Replied by NotAgOat on topic High Pass Sharpening / Contrast Enhancement
Thanks for all your efforts. I'm giving the new version a shot. I'll report back later.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Ioxa

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.