Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Darktable - free open source photography workflow app/RAW developer

editor

hiraethified
This is interesting and the price is very right.





Darktable is a powerful RAW image processor – there’s no question about that – and for the price of $0.00 it is an attractive alternative to Lightroom. It’s not going to replace Lightroom for me and probably won’t for anyone who currently uses Lightroom, but if you’re absolutely set on paying nothing for a RAW file processor, Darktable might be the perfect choice for you.
Darktable vs Lightroom - Does it measure up?
https://petapixel.com/2017/12/27/darktable-brings-free-open-source-lightroom-alternative-windows/

Lightoom and Darktable: the verdict two years after switching: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
 

editor

hiraethified
Anyone using this? I'm interested as I'm never going to commit to a lifetime of Lightroom subscriptions.
 

Bernie Gunther

Fundamentalist Druid
I tried it a few years back. Was pretty RAW (see what I did there?)

I ended up with Phase One's thing but might have a look at where Darktable has gotten to before I commit to buying the latest version of Capture.
 

sim667

Licking windows on the 303 bus.
Is it any good?

I'm still running aperture currently. But I need to look at what I'm doing with my photo editing. I'm repeatedly running out of room on my mac.

Out of interest when you're all going through photos, do you delete the ones you're not going to edit and use as finals?
 

editor

hiraethified
Is it any good?

I'm still running aperture currently. But I need to look at what I'm doing with my photo editing. I'm repeatedly running out of room on my mac.

Out of interest when you're all going through photos, do you delete the ones you're not going to edit and use as finals?
My process so far is:
1. Import images into folder with date details (e.g. 03_2018_brixton, 03_2018_oxford etc).
2. Copy all the images into a temp sub folder
3. Delete duff images and dit usable ones and then run batch file to resize for web use
4. Run batch renaming tool
5. Copy to local folder and upload onto server for website
6. Run copy and paste over <img src="..."> template in Homesite to change file names and description
7. Copy and paste the code into Wordpress and edit

I'm going to try and give Luminar a run through later this week. I may just dust off an old Photoshop CS4 instead mind.
 

FridgeMagnet

Administrator
Out of interest when you're all going through photos, do you delete the ones you're not going to edit and use as finals?
With digital I do - I'm pretty ruthless. I triage them and delete all the ones which are obviously shit or duplicates (before importing) then I go over them again and delete the ones which are fine but seem pointless and aren't saying anything to me. Often then I'll pare them down even more while looking through them. This is made a bit easier because I have them all in iCloud so can browse through and delete stuff on my phone when I'm bored.
 

weltweit

Well-Known Member
My process is pretty simple.

Delete quite a lot of obvious duds in the camera as I go along.
Import (Jpegs and Raws) into PC from memory card into folder e.g."1803 snow"
Look at with Faststone Viewer, delete some more duds
Might look at with Nikon NX for the full exif
Process the ones I like with PS Elements9
Save to "1803 snow/output" folder appendixed "p" for print or "w" for web.

Edited to add, sometimes I shoot jpeg sometimes raw. I don't shoot raw+jpeg
 
Last edited:

sim667

Licking windows on the 303 bus.
Ok thats interesting....

I learnt photography on the basis of "never bin your negatives".... and had applied that idea to digital, but when your RAW images are 70 meg each it kills computer space.

I need to do some deleting.
 

FridgeMagnet

Administrator
Ok thats interesting....

I learnt photography on the basis of "never bin your negatives".... and had applied that idea to digital, but when your RAW images are 70 meg each it kills computer space.

I need to do some deleting.
I don't delete shots I've scanned from film - I use them as contact sheets and cross-reference them with the negative sheets - but then they are way smaller, and there are fewer of them. Even a colour PNG scan of a 6x4.5 frame is only around 20 meg from my scanner, and a lot of the time I just scan to JPEG. I'll also regularly take 5x the number of digital shots as I would 35mm film in the same situation... I can't stop myself, but I don't get any more keepers.

The negatives themselves just sit in piles and boxes around my flat and don't do any harm apart from gathering dust. I suspect this is how people have been storing negatives forever.
 

editor

hiraethified
Ok thats interesting....

I learnt photography on the basis of "never bin your negatives".... and had applied that idea to digital, but when your RAW images are 70 meg each it kills computer space.

I need to do some deleting.
Computer space is super cheap though. Unless something is completely out of focus or an obvious dud I keep them. You never know when even a background detail might be useful.
 

sim667

Licking windows on the 303 bus.
Computer space is super cheap though. Unless something is completely out of focus or an obvious dud I keep them. You never know when even a background detail might be useful.
It is, but it also means more backup space.
 

weltweit

Well-Known Member
Ok thats interesting....

I learnt photography on the basis of "never bin your negatives".... and had applied that idea to digital, but when your RAW images are 70 meg each it kills computer space.

I need to do some deleting.
Sounds like you may have a Nikon D8XX with that 70mb. I am shooting 12bit compressed raw (when I shoot raw that is) and they are about 30mb. Still enough for me to wonder though.
 

RoyReed

Must fly!
I've been watching Darktable's progress for a while. Of all the RAW editors it seems to be the best rival to Lightroom (which I'd love to be able to drop, as I hate Adobe's rent-a-software policy - I've stuck with the last version you could actually buy - 6.14). It wasn't there when I tested version 2.0, but it looks like it might be there now. It can import some Lightroom settings so long as these have been exported to XMP sidecar files (i.e. it won't read the Lightroom database) so for me that would mean a massive export before I could even start to import from Lightroom.

Metadata
• tags and hierarchical tags
• color labels
• ratings
• GPS information

Develop settings
• crop and rotate (crop and rotate)
• black level (exposure)
• exposure (exposure)
• vignette (vignette)
• clarity (local contrast)
• tone curve (tone curve)
• HSL (color zones)

Probably as many as 25% of my photos have had perspective correction applied (I used to be an architectural photographer) and those settings won't get imported which is a drag.

I'm hoping to be getting a new PC in the next few months, so I won't be installing it to test out version 3.0 until then.

If you only (or mainly) shoot JPG then the importing of the develop settings might not matter, and if you're not a Lightroom user then maybe not at all.
 
Top