There is an Australian guy named Bruce Williams who does a very good job trying to explain and make sense of darktable. Because of the ridiculous complexity of so many of the darktable development modules you can't blame him that his explanations and demonstrations are long, complex, and tedious. He does a better job than many others. Anyway, here is a new one on the filmic 4 module. I have it cued up to the 13:30 mark where he starts talking about the new, improved highlight reconstruction (which definitely needed improvement):
darktable ep 067 - Filmic v4
Watch for the next 9 minutes or so as he explains the mind-boggling complexity of how to do highlight reconstruction. It takes your breath away that Aurélien Pierre and the others released this as it is without any simpler, more automatic way with a simple slider such as Highlights in Lightroom. Again, I understand that using the crazy number of controls that interact with each other in this highlight reconstruction module that you have to set manually you can probably get the best of the best results if you have hours to play with it for each image and know what you are doing, but why not have a simpler way that does as well or close to as well with a simple automatic control? Many of the things Bruce describes are things that darktable already knows internally and it is what computers are good at. As just one example, he describes a long, convoluted process to create a mask to target the blown pixels before you move to the next step and it is clear that darktable could/should have created that mask automatically since the process to create it involves what darktable already knows.
I was a software engineer for a few decades. I know that this is stuff that they could do and the fact that they don't is probably because of a serious lack of vision. Mental blinders. Obvious stuff.
And the whole filmic module, I gather from comments I have read and heard in videos, is meant as a replacement for the base curve module and some of the other modules. They say it is the recommended module to use now. A different way of processing images. They say some of the other modules are not meant to be used with the filmic module and vice versa. Yet all the modules appear and nothing prevents you from using them together. It is up to you to know which of the dozens and dozens of modules should or should not be used together. A total clusterf*k -- as we used to say in the USMC. This is also something that is blindingly obvious, but not obvious to the developers. The whole filmic module is an extremely complex thing. A solution in search of a problem.
Oh well, I wish it would get better, but I don't care enough to spend years of my life learning the internals of the code, studying color science, etc. to fix it myself. I have Lightroom, ACDSee Pro, and other programs that are quite good.
Here is another of his video tutorials. I haven't watched it, but I wonder if it talks about what you want?bfitzgerald wrote:Just a shame that lacks basic tools like spot healing etc.
darktable ep 027 - The Retouch module
Looks like a major update. Also there is a new manual.
Exposure X6 software review: Faster than ever and even more capable
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/exposu ... are-review
I've given up entirely on Darktable it for me is king of un intuitive software. I'd rather use RawTherapee for conversion if I needed to, way easier to get to grips with and superior results IMO. There is a vague hope that one of them eventually will be good enough to use 100% for workflow. It might take time to get there, I'll check out exposure and report back
ART is a fork of RawTherapee, and contains all the power of RT, without the complexity. The author continues to be very aggressive in refactoring the tools in RT to be more user friendly, and more logical. He has done a great job. It's amazing how much one, obviously skilled, coder can do.
A cursory review (i've spent about as much time in ART as I have in writing this message) shows a face that, to me, makes a lot more sense. The browser is just that, a browser. You navigate to the folder desired, pick a photo and edit. That simple. The editing tools include masking and such so are on par with darktable.
Note that the Windows version is now 18.104.22.168 because a serious regression bug was found in the Windows version of 3.4.1. 22.214.171.124 is now available at the link above.bakubo wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 11:33 pm darktable 3.4.1 bug fix release has been made:
https://github.com/darktable-org/darkta ... ease-3.4.1
I still don't like the rental model, of course. Stop renting and much of your work is inaccessible, especially long term. I also am annoyed somewhat that I have to pay for Lightroom and Photoshop, but I never use Photoshop. Before the rental model, my recollection is that Lightroom was $150 (although often discounted to $100) and Photoshop was $700. Including tax I pay about $11/month for both. As long as the price stays that way then it isn't a bad deal, but I would be happier if I could get only Lightroom for $3-4/month.
Last year without warning Adobe raised the price to $20/month, but got so much blowback that they changed it back to $10/month. It was clearly a trial balloon to see if people would accept $20 though. I think it wasn't just bad comments from people that got them to go back to $10. Clearly so many people canceled that Adobe decided $20 would lose them money rather than make them money. But, we all know that one of these days the price will go up.
I am very happy that there is some competition from ACDSee, On1, Exposure X6, darktable, and Aftershot Pro. Then there are also raw processors that do not include a DAM (or a very limited one) such as DXO, C1, Rawtherapee, ART, etc. I hope the competition will be enough to keep Adobe from raising the price. Also, competition for Photoshop from Affinity, Paint Shop Pro, Gimp, etc. Sure, Adobe still has the biggest market share, but maybe they don't have so much that they can easily raise prices.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest