In my opinion, a web based UI for something like an image editor is a bad idea. It will be slow and resource intensive.
RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
31–40 of 127 posts
Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like this one its simple and easy to use
May I ask why choose to shoot raw given simplicity and ease of use are priorities?
Those are certainly not mutually exclusive! The point of shooting raw is not to painstakingly tweak super-technical details, it’s to get processing latitude to make photos the way you want. Often that involves simple adjustment of shadows, highlights, saturation and so on, applied to a large number of photos in bulk.
Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like this one its simple and easy to use
May I ask why choose to shoot raw given simplicity and ease of use are priorities?
There's no inherent usability issue with shooting RAW. My experience has been that none of the open source tools can hold a candle to the proprietary ones.
RawTherapee I uninstalled almost immediately because it crashed a few times and the UI didn't seem to jive with what I wanted to do.
Despite DarkTable's horrific interface and hostile developers I keep it around because I can often beat it into submission (but what a chore that is). And that's the thing. Even if I were shooting JPEGs DT's interface would still be a problem.
Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
#34The best raw image processing tool I know is called “RawTherapee”. It was developed by one or more absolute colour science geeks, it is CLI-scriptable, its companion RawPedia is a treasure trove of information (I learned many basics there, including how to create DCP profiles for calibration, dark frames, flat fields, etc.), and not to make a dig (fine, to make a bit of a dig) you can see the expertise starting with…
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.
IME GUI is mainly important when you craft a new profile. In many workflows, you don’t do it very often. I create a profile once and then apply it to hundreds of frames without launching the GUI at all or mostly using it just to preview how the profile works with a particular frame and make a couple of minor tweaks.
Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
May I ask why choose to shoot raw given simplicity and ease of use are priorities?
There's no inherent usability issue with shooting RAW. My experience has been that none of the open source tools can hold a candle to the proprietary ones. RawTherapee I uninstalled almost immediately because it crashed a few times and the UI didn't seem to jive with what I wanted to do. Despite DarkTable's horrific interface and hostile developers I keep it around because I can often beat it into submission (but wha…
I fought darktable for two years before feeling right at home. I had used Lightroom since it's inception. I'm happy now I invested the time. I much prefer the control darktable gives me now.
Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
May I ask why choose to shoot raw given simplicity and ease of use are priorities?
Those are certainly not mutually exclusive! The point of shooting raw is not to painstakingly tweak super-technical details, it’s to get processing latitude to make photos the way you want. Often that involves simple adjustment of shadows, highlights, saturation and so on, applied to a large number of photos in bulk.
The priorities are mutually exclusive: delegating scene data conversion to in-camera engine grants you the most simplicity and ease of use at the expense of control; the territory of technical details grants you the most ability to make the photos looks the way you want at the expense of simplicity. You dial one up, you dial the other down.
For example, your choice of demosaicing method can make a tangible difference in finer details: some methods would make them less noisy (better for some styles), others would better preserve finer details (better for other styles). Abstracting it behind one “more detail—less detail” slider isn’t going to work because “detail” can mean a multitude of things, of which sometimes you want one and not the other, and inventing new sliders with user-friendly but inscrutable labels a la “brilliance”, “texture”, and so on, can only get you so far.
There are shades between simplicity vs. control, of course, and so I am curious to know the answer from the horse’s mouth so to speak: to what end they choose to compromise simplicity.
Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
May I ask why choose to shoot raw given simplicity and ease of use are priorities?
There's no inherent usability issue with shooting RAW. My experience has been that none of the open source tools can hold a candle to the proprietary ones. RawTherapee I uninstalled almost immediately because it crashed a few times and the UI didn't seem to jive with what I wanted to do. Despite DarkTable's horrific interface and hostile developers I keep it around because I can often beat it into submission (but wha…
It’s just “raw”, it’s not an acronym.
Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
#38In my opinion, a web based UI for something like an image editor is a bad idea. It will be slow and resource intensive.
Check out color.io for reference. It is a color grading focused app but nevertheless has bells and whistles for many workflows regarding raw photos. The thing is that it is offline, runs on browser, and is much faster than Rawtherapee or Darktable on my aging PC.
Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Local adjustments are really difficult though, as it only supports the good ole "Nik u point" tech. For this reason only I use darktable instead. Would really like to be able to use RawTherapee's dual-illuminant DCPs (not available in darktable).
I can see that it would not work well for cases like painting over parts of the image, which Lightroom et al. allow with ease. If you try to be “holistic” in your raw treatment and like me at most do a graduated filter or mask by colour, RT works well enough (the latest versions improved it a lot, too).
I do a lot of mild re-lighting. If RawTherapee had the path masks from darktable I'd be more than happy.
Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor
#40What is the difference between RAW and Bitmap. I thought Bitmap had no compression