IME in photo post-processing, good UX, smooth multi-photo workflow and intuitive controls beat technical details every time.
RawTherapee is better than Darktable. But that’s a pretty low bar to clear. There are reasons people pay for Lightroom.
RawTherapee is better than Darktable. But that’s a pretty low bar to clear. There are reasons people pay for Lightroom.
I threw darktable and rawtherapee on the table but without technical grit you get nowhere really fast.
It's no my wheelhouse so they are mostly in there own.
Be sure to take a close look at Nitro, created by a former Apple lead of Apple's Aperture, iPhoto, RAW Camera and Core Image engineering teams: https://www.gentlemencoders.com/nitro-for-macos/index.html
So when I mistakenly copy into the wrong folder, it's obvious which image files don't belong. So I don't need to delay while I think of the best descriptive folder name. So I don't need to sort yesterdays photos into a different folder than todays photos.
Secondly it's a matter of deleting image files. I take a look with some viewer app and use the file system to delete whatever doesn't seem worth any more attention.
Thirdly whatever trial photo software is available is probably good enough to start learning.
Another thing I noticed with RawTherapee after LR was the sloooowness. Lightroom has been super optimized to show all edits (or their preview versions anyway) in real time.
Those tools you really need for properly edit raws are hidden in blated features (multiple demosaic algorithms) or completely missing (AI masking). And UI is not user friendly.
Please explain why photographers need 20 differnet sharpening methods, 5 demosaicing algorithms, many colour corrections that are almost useles if AI masking is not present?
Coders often lost in all kind of geeky features that missing actual usability by targeted audience. Bloated software is not what I would expect from alternative to commercially used proprietary software.
You can ignore features that aren't made for you, and actually I think they're mostly hidden by default in DT (make a preset if you don't like the default tool selection). All these features were added because somebody needed them at some point, the DT/RT/ART communities are chaotic and lack vision but they're actually using their stuff.
>Coders
As I said, this is not software made by coders for coders. This is exactly how the software made by photographers would look if they lacked organization, focus, and UX skills. If it was made by coders (and UI designers), it would probably have looked like Lightroom and had AI selection.
Another terrible design in darktable is default settings. I have no problem with options, but then you need carefully choose defaults that are selected questionable here - pure exhibitionism right after opening software.
I don't agree with your statement about developing by photographers. If so, there is higher probability that they would focus on UI with more aesthetic care than coders would do.
Lack of AI masking is too expensive to use by professionals. You simply cannot afford to mask manually bunch of images. Wider adoption among photographers is simply impossible.