Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 127 posts

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#61

Post by t0bia_s »

Sharlin wrote: post #28
strogonoff wrote: post #16

The 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.

Because those open-source editors are made by coders, not photographers.

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.

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#62

Post by actionfromafar »

mikae1 wrote: post #17
strogonoff wrote: post #16

The 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…

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).

https://github.com/aurelienpierreeng/ansel there's also a fork to play with

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#63

Post by vladvasiliu »

strogonoff wrote: post #48
inferiorhuman wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about not "feeling right at home". I've detailed this in other comments but it's just that DT has an abysmal interface and that the devs insist that it needs to be complex. This sort of hostile attitude is part of what spawned Ansel. I much prefer the control darktable gives me now. This is a bit of a myth. One of my complaints dealt with how unintuitive the sliders are. There's no additional control gained…

First, let me concur that Darktable is not great. I found it to be neither quite as simple as Lightroom, nor as powerful as RawTherapee, and severely lacking in documentation. > Another dealt with trying to set color temperature. There are two places color temperature can be set and they'll both conflict with each other. There are at least three colour temperature / white balance controls in RT; more if you count out…

> I’m not sure I see any particular conflict between them.

I don't have DT under hand to check, but there are two controls which, if active at the same time, will produce a warning along the lines of "wb is already set in [the other control]".

edit: I think [0] describes the issue

[0] https://discuss.pixls.us/t/white-balance-applied-twice/34949

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#64

Post by mkl »

brcmthrowaway wrote: post #40

What is the difference between RAW and Bitmap. I thought Bitmap had no compression

They are different lossless image formats. What is called "raw" is quite a few different formats from different manufacturers, and they contain lossless image data from the camera sensor without significant postprocessing. They usually need some postprocessing to look "good". A "bitmap" is just pixel data, not a file format, but .bmp is a file format, which does support some compression, and usually won't contain raw camera sensor data but something ready to be displayed on a screen.

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#65

Post by strogonoff »

Mashimo wrote: post #56
strogonoff wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May I ask why choose to shoot raw given simplicity and ease of use are priorities?

I have the same approach. I really like "easy to use, hard to master" tools in general. If you look at CaptureOne you can see how easy it is to edit a raw image. Most of the time it looks like the camera jpeg without having to tune anything. But then you have the options to go in depth. Sometimes I have a photo session where everything is to my liking, just a bit of exposure and crop. Other times I shoot in night clu…

This tracks with my RawTherapee experience. I copy in base settings corresponding to the camera and the lens and then make tweaks. After a while often one of the pre-made profiles is good enough.

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#66

Post by strogonoff »

Mashimo wrote: post #57
strogonoff wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Shooting raw is a huhe and obvious improvement if you want to post-process in almost any way. See, you are saying “want to post-process”, which to me says that there is a different priority present rather than just “simplicity and ease of use”. If the priority is “making the photos look the way you want them to look”, then we are in a territory where it is not as simple as “this tool is easy to use and therefore a…

It's not binary. You can want post-processing, but also don't want to spend 50 hours to learn a tool. Sometimes you just want "make it look close to the in camera jpeg, but let me adjust to exposure" It's not that complex.

It’s not binary is the point and the whole reason I asked the original commenter why put premium into simplicity and ease and then immediately violate that by shooting raw.

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#67

Post by orbital-decay »

t0bia_s wrote: post #61
Sharlin wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Because those open-source editors are made by coders, not photographers. 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.

They are made by and for photographers. This software is designed for many use cases, not just creative photography - hence multiple demosaicing algorithms. AI masking is missing exactly because it's made by photographers - they don't have the required expertise. UI is not intuitive because a) it's designed by photographers' committee, not UI designers, and b) you are familiar with a completely different workflow.

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#68

Post by strogonoff »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #63
strogonoff wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, let me concur that Darktable is not great. I found it to be neither quite as simple as Lightroom, nor as powerful as RawTherapee, and severely lacking in documentation. > Another dealt with trying to set color temperature. There are two places color temperature can be set and they'll both conflict with each other. There are at least three colour temperature / white balance controls in RT; more if you count out…

> I’m not sure I see any particular conflict between them. I don't have DT under hand to check, but there are two controls which, if active at the same time, will produce a warning along the lines of "wb is already set in [the other control]". edit: I think [0] describes the issue [0] https://discuss.pixls.us/t/white-balance-applied-twice/34949

I see, that explains why DT is confusing in this regard.

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#69

Post by Mashimo »

strogonoff wrote: post #66
Mashimo wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not binary. You can want post-processing, but also don't want to spend 50 hours to learn a tool. Sometimes you just want "make it look close to the in camera jpeg, but let me adjust to exposure" It's not that complex.

It’s not binary is the point and the whole reason I asked the original commenter why put premium into simplicity and ease and then immediately violate that by shooting raw.

Do you understand him now?

Re: RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

#70

Post by inferiorhuman »

strogonoff wrote: post #54
Nergg wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I try to daily drive Linux but can't find a simple / nice to use RAW editor. I had high hopes for Darktable but I was astonished how bad the GUI is. When trying to delete photo, it deletes the photo under the pointer, not the photo I selected... WTF ?!? And the whole app feels so complicated... Then there's forks emerging and the dev forces are diluted in multiples applications and Adobe continues to milk its users b…

If you seek a GUI for managing/cataloguing photos, my advice would be to look for that and not a raw image processing tool that incidentally happens to also handle cataloguing (inevitably in a half-baked way). I have never seen Lightroom (or C1, for that matter) as compelling at all ever since I started using RawTherapee. Unlike, say, InDesign, which is legitimately a difficult to replace professional tool with incre…

  my advice would be to look for that and not a raw image processing tool
  that incidentally happens to also handle cataloguing (inevitably in a
  half-baked way).
Eh. No? Lightroom is a pretty darn good DAM. Maybe digiKam is at least as good, but I wouldn't know as it crashed the first time I launched it. I want to use my tools, not debug them. DT's asset management is, to put it charitably, an after thought.

About the worst thing I can say about Lightroom is that it didn't reliably work with my iPhone. Otherwise it did everything I needed in terms of tagging, presets, and organizing the pictures on the file system.

Meanwhile darktable creates freaking sidecars for every picture while it relies on an SQLite database for tracking history just like Lightroom does.

  I have never seen Lightroom (or C1, for that matter) as compelling at all ever since
  I started using RawTherapee.
Conversely Darktable is the best advert I've seen for Lighgtroom.
Post reply on HN