>>4445649
By not using it, lel. Ahoy, matey!

Installed it, high DPI support was fucky, lagged like hell, ass defaults, missing tons of lens and camera support
Uninstalled it and kept using capture one because $200 for a discounted perpetual license is less money than a chink prime and adds way more to your photography than said chink prime

File: darkt.jpg (40 KB, 1200x385)

40 KB JPG

I just managed to learn how to find all the important options in this fucking menu. Does the new version change the menu significantly?

Here's the change log
https://github.com/darktable-org/darktable/releases/tag/release-5.2.0

>>4445649
>opensores
Not thanks id rather open sores into my rectum

>sigmoid the new default
Makes sense. I swapped awhile ago and haven't looked back. I bet that discussion got slightly heated though.

>>4445649
>Add a new setting to change which images are taken into account for
>actions: By default, the image under the cursor takes priority. With
>this parameter enabled, the selected images will take priority
fucking finally
who the fuck thought that was a good UI design to begin with

>>4445649
I've been lazy to update. I use an AppImage. Am I going to lose my configs and whatnot when I download a new AppImage?
>>4445659
No.
>>4445698
This is a little frustrating. I feel like I've just got Filmic RGB decently figured out after reading docs on why it's the better and the default over Sigmoid. Why does it make sense to swap it now?
>>4445710
Yeah that was an obvious weakness. Darktable needs to do more changes like that.

All in all, I like Darktable. It is a little unergonomic sometimes, however.

I've been playing around with darktable for about an hour, pretty shocked by how much you can pull out of pictures with the tone equalizer. i need to do some more reading but i might make the switch and ditch piece of shit ass lightroom.

>>4445716
I use Appimage too, it transferred my module presets

How does everyone feel about RawTherapee? Curious what the opinion on the FOSS options are in general.

>>4445716
>This is a little frustrating.
You can change the default back in settings! It's just for beginners. Keep using filmic if you know how, it's more flexible.

>>4445649
Open source software is omly free if your time is worth nothing.

>>4445666
>>4445759
What is the appeal of being a corporate shill on principle?

>>4445760
Seethe freetard. Day of the Loonix desktop will never happen. Open source software will always be useless.

Why do you guys need software to edit the pictures you don't post,?

>>4445649
Darktable sucks. It's even worse than Rawtherapee. It's so frustrating to use, you can't find shit.

The whole Linux image editing ecosystem is so far behind Adobe in usability. And most frustrating is that linux-cultists pretend that it wasn't.

Even the "10€ one time purchase in Apples Appstore" category of programs are so much better

>>4445649
Darktable is allowed to be user unfriendly at the same time Adobe is for different reasons. Both suck in their own special way. I don't know why anyone needs to root for one or the other like it's their favourite sports team... actually scratch that, it lines up rather well with the gearfagging.
Darktable isn't *that* hard to figure out or use regularly. I'm still going to buy C1 when it goes on sale next though.

>>4445649
Same as before, it's absolute dogshit

>>4445750
>>4445737
Good to know. Thanks.

>>4445760
>noooo! businesses making money! EVIL!
lol you're a communist

why do communists always live comfy lives with purchased luxuries instead of starving in north korea like they want everyone else to do

So after trying this out for a few hours, I'm making the switch. The UI is the worst of all time, but this style modules jsut makes way more sense for photo editing, and I'm not contastly fighting against the software to get the shadow and highlight tonalities that I want like I am in Lightroom. The ability to quickly add LUTs is way better than having to make profiles in ACR to use in LR.

File: DSCF2506.jpg (3.19 MB, 3097x1295)

3.19 MB JPG

>>4446416
Nothing burger old snapshit, but I'm pleased with how quickly I got the Vision3 look I'm going for.

I like all the tools and editing workflow, lighttable needs work though. Why doesn't it have dual monitor support?

>>4445654
>discounted
When do they have discounts?

>>4446424
Usually twice a year, once in Spring, other in Fall. Last year was ~$180 around the end of august.
They did mostly get rid of the perpetual license upgrade discount though.

>>4446425
Cool, I'll keep an eye out.

>>4446423
Light table is absolute frustration; how selection behavior works makes no sense at all and does not adhere to common software conventions

>>4445649
I've only ever used it when threads here pop up. For free software it does have a lot of options and control. You can just ignore like 80% of the settings / tools, and realistically do all your editing with like 4-5 of them. All you really need are ways to adjust color, tone, and texture, and it has many options for those like other software.
For someone starting out, I can see how it would feel not very accessible. Even with +20 years of Photoshop, +15 years of Lightroom, many years with C1, etc, I still found it a bit unintuitive. For instance, middle click on the color equalizer chart will bring up traditional HSL sliders, but it's not really labeled anywhere and none of the other tool settings / adjustments enable it either (at least that I've seen).
I've been a big defender for it here, and I still think it's a very capable program, but I really wouldn't recommend it to anyone without prior editing experience.

>>4446544
>dodgy lens support
>404 camera profiles not found
>noise reduction is ass
>raw sharpening worse than fuckin gimp (lr/c1 seem to have actual detail reconstruction that operates off raw bayer data, dt does not seem to do this, if it does its bad at it)
darktable is ONLY for getting a neat histogram and taking a 16 bit tiff into a better program

>>4446552
>i must shit on something anytime someone says its okay
negative people are lame

>>4446584
photography is a negative person’s hobby

>>4445649
>darktable
I only use RAW images. Processed images are an abhorrent to nature.

>>4446587
fuck you I am a schizo

>>4446449
the light table is frustrating, yes. I find the "history" even worse: Why doesn't it let me click elements and delete them lol

>>4446587
for you
i actually like stuff

>>4445654
My RAW now comes out too magenta with my current RAW presets. Not really happy, but havent yet had the time to fix, since I made so many new photos and currently stuck in lighttable filtering, organizing and deleting. It like a full weeks work.

>>4446416
>quickly add LUTs
That's with the 3D LUT module right? I never have touched that but should.

I chose Darktable because it's free, but honestly, grading colors is a nightmare and the shadows/highlights sliders have almost no flexibility.
Does anyone know any other reliable alternative or should I just pay Lr?
I can afford it, but I think it's stupid they don't offer a one-time purchase license.

File: fg.jpg (6 KB, 225x225)

6 KB JPG

>>4446694
You should sail the seven seas matey

>>4446707
i'll never forget how she laughed at her boyfriend's shirmpdick while he was fucking her, are all french women such frigid whores?

File: sneed.png (163 KB, 485x360)

163 KB PNG

>>4446709
No idea of what you're talking about, I assume it's Amelie-related. Didn't watch the movie and don't plan to, but she's the face of a popular group in the scene.

>>4446587
This is a good joke

>>4446694
I just went back to LR. I tried all free options and most paid ones, Affinity Photo was promising but the workflow and the atrocious clunky user interface turned me away. I would not expect such opensource-like shittiness in a full price paid software. After Shot Pro was great and it worked on Linux and I might still get it for my Linux desktop. I also tried Luminar AI and Neo but it leans heavily on AI and has very little of the classic toolset. Most of it's workflow is to send it off to some AI to do something. No bueno.

The sad reality is that Adobe is so far unavoidable in a Linux/Mac setting with a few exceptions and lots of compromise. More so if you need Photoshop-like work as well. There is just no alternative for it.

>>4446707
I looked for it, but I only know websites for games lol

>>4446791
Well, gotta pay Lr then, eventually.
Just because it's quicker to work with.

>>4446816
Yep, no competing with that workflow, even with how bad the catalog system is

>>4446791
>Affinity Photo was promising but the workflow and the atrocious
those assholes jebaited me with the perpetually "Coming Soon™" lightroom alternative that has never materialized, i bought version 1 of both their photoshop and illustrator. then they kiked out and switched to subscription model and i saw no worth in continuing with that software. at least they didn't purposefully break the old programs. man fuck those guys. classic "startup company" overpromise underdeliver bullshit.

>>4446854
oh, maybe it looks like they didn't go subscription based after all, but they still fucked everyone over for buying V1 and not allowing migration to v2. gay.

>>4446709
Guess we know who had a shrimp dick now.

>>4446854
>>4446858
You're retarded. A business model based on one time payment for a new version every few years is exactly what we want.

I bought Photoshop cs3, cs4, and cs6 when they were sold as one time payments and said goodbye when they introduced subscriptions. I will buy Affinity v3 immediately when it comes out - for the sake of supporting them alone.

>>4447442
Interesting you like to pay more, the one time payments were 5-10x more the equivalent subscription price

>>4447449
I'd pay even more than 10x if it means ownership instead of renting

>>4447449
>>4447509
I also own a Fuji GFX 100 II and several lenses. And use it for 3-4 trips and 1 vacation per year.

I could rent this setup for like $350 for 4 days. It would be so much cheaper to just rent it a few years. And automatically rent the even newer model every 3 years. But i don't. Because I want to own.

darktable can load my camera's actual raw files without some bullshit conversion step, it doesn't gobble all my system resources making it difficult to use other applications at the same time, it isn't full of weird bugs that you'd think paying monthly for would somehow fix. i like it.

most people who hate it are idiots that don't want to admit they can't learn to use another piece of software.

>>4447518
every freetard
>it runs faster on my piece of shit thinkpad
>you just couldn't learn to use it
no, learning to work around a volunteer software developers autistic incompetence is just at the bottom of the priority list for non-autistic people

>>4447523
64GB RAM and 24GB VRAM and Lightroom absolutely has to use ALL of it.

>>4447534
what the fuck is a ram lol i think my mac has over 100 of those

>>4445649
I've been using it on and off for years on linux boxes. All I do is a few quick edits before exporting to other software lol. I ain't trying to manage large libraries with this shit, I've never used any linux apps that can do that without glitching and choking.

>>4447511
>>4447511
So you're dumb with your money, nice

>>4447523
If you can't figure out darktable with a few hours of learning, you are retarded

>>4447555
>open sores
>take a few hours to learn, still indaequate after those hours
>C1/LR
>up and running in minutes, professional results as expected fast and easy
the year of the linux desktop, SOON™

>>4447559
affinity is great, capture one is better, but only people with low shutter count and adobe pajeets defend the bloated shitmass that is lightroom

>>4447559
C1 is obviously better
Still retarded if darktable is too much for you to figure out

>>4447566
All linux users can do is accuse people of being too dumb to use their junk

Little do they know, this is 4chan. Everyone here has installed gentoo and used far more opaque software than darktable. Ever written you own emacs macros? I did that shit in highschool and my init.el had to include 20 other files all of which I wrote myself. I ended up getting extra credit because the professor thought my emacs setup was perfect. After that class I never programmed again because programming is gay and business degrees are where its at.

Darktable still isn't worth my time.

>>4447572
Sorry to hear you're too retarded to figure it out old man

>>4447575
The only retard is the darktable dev making it so there's something to figure out in the first place

All the modules should be removed and the default interface replaced with a lisp prompt

>>4447576
Not sure I'd trust a retards opinion of what's wrong with the program, sorry

>>4447579
Oh I see, you use arch linux. I use a mac because it's POSIX compliant. Not like you'd know what that means.

-Sent from my Thinkpad

>>4447580
>Not like you'd know what that means.
I don't but at least I know how to use darktable

>>4447583
You know how to accomplish the most basic things in darktable? So do I, but then it crashes, because it's poorly made and can't run on a real machine.

>>4447586
Sounds like a computer issue, mine doesn't crash
I wouldn't assume it's darktable though, who knows what other retard stuff you're into

>>4447559
AfterSHot Pro is native on Linux, I had good experience with it. It's like the basic CS4-CS6 era Lightroom with most of the bells and whistles. Good workflow. Doesn't mangle colors like Darktable.

File: trashpanda.jpg (377 KB, 1463x2048)

377 KB JPG

I use and enjoy darktable. This simple fact is enough to make someone seethe, cope, and shit everywhere.

When I use the Color Calibration module, if I change the illuminant drop down to "as shot in camera," I presume it's using something from the raw exif to calculate correction, but it's always too green. It felt like it was gaslighting me into thinking it was neutral, but I'm confident it's erroneously too green. I've gone through the docs, but don't feel like I have a handle on the dropdown. As such, I leave it on Planckian black body and just drop the temperature down until it feels good.

Am I missing something? I don't understand parts of that module.

>>4447592
Right, couldn't be darktable. Nothing but stable genius shit over there, right?
https://ansel.photos/en/news/darktable-dans-le-mur-au-ralenti/

>>4447633
>darktable sucks bro
does this look like the portfolio of someone who knows what they're talking about?
https://photo.aurelienpierre.com/portfolio-items/reportages/

>>4447643
he's a snapshitter like the rest of us, big deal. ansel is considerably better to use than darktable so he must be doing something right.

>>4447643
that's peak math major photography

Logically correct but composed without an ounce of feeling, because a math major can not imagine a shitty photograph having feeling. To a math major, photography can not be art. They do make decent and even excellent painters, but a math major by their nature rejects photography as an artistic pursuit except in the most basic terms that also makes riding bicycles an art.

Don't trust anyone with funky, hard to identify photos like daido moriyama to write software

>>4447633
Oh so that's why it always crashes and only generates usable colors and NR in very specific configurations

Love darktable and the new features are all going in the right direction. Its a funny bonus how darktable makes the part time wedding fotogs seethe. They cant admit the real reason tho: darktable includes no generative AI to fix their bad work so its "unusable" for them. Literally based

>>4447643
I regularly see photos like this get dunked on in /rpt/
utterly unremarkable photography but perhaps a decent businessman. buy an ad next time.

>>4447649
lmao get rekt Pierre you mediocre frog muncher
you are a shit artist and a mediocre programmer
your shit fork doesn't even follow proper release model kek

>>4447735
Interesting interpretation. Makes me feel a little guilty looking for a FOSS ML denoiser.

When you say "fix their bad work," what exactly are you referring to? Something beyond denoising? Where is the line, in your opinion, using AI programs?

>>4447737
If he was a good artistic photographer he would be too schizophrenic to write software. Every good photographer is mentally ill as all fuck and only mentally ill people can even appreciate them. Photography is angst adjacent. Unlike music and painting, it can no coexist with rational thought.

>>4447735
Capture one doesn't have generative AI either and is the #1 most recommended program here on "/p/ - if you use ANY GNU licensed software, fucking DIE"

All it has is AI masking so you can make a subject mask in 5 seconds instead of 1.5 hours

I am quite fond of Darktable for film processing, but RawTherapee is quicker and give nicer color when working digital.

>>4447805
skell issue SKIL ISHUE
a REAL and VERY SMART photugrafur like me draws his subject masks by hand with a wacon tablet >:( darktable is fine!!!! you're just too stoopid to use it and im smarter than someone for onse!!!!

t. only shoots manual, only shoots raw, uses linux

>>4447806
Are they different enough that learning a second is worth it? Darktable is already enough to drink in.

>>4447813
Doesn't sound like a skill issue, sounds like they could still figure out darktable, and they just prefer something else

>>4447805
I bet you feather and blur that mask too you filthy casual. No one ever needed a perfect isolated selection of the subject to edit a photo. Thats scrap booking

>the workflow in darktable sucks so bad I tried it once and uninstalled it after 3 min
Translation: there is no button I can click to open the best mans eyes in a shot where he blinked

>>4447900
freetards still coping

What is a "freetard"? Is it some american term Im too civilized to understand?

>>4447909
A freetard is someone who only uses crappy software made by people who weren't good enough to work for a software company. They tend to pretend they're smarter but they're actually notoriously stupid and rely on google and wikis to do basic shit like get audio and wifi working.

>>4447916
>audio
>wifi
Do you know where you are? Is there someone youd like me to call who can pick you up?

>>4447917
>what is video
>what is tethering
This guy dont have no job

>>4447917
The probably have no idea, sounds like another one of the retards got lose
>when i type audio, i really mean video
>when i type wifi, i really mean tethering
>you're the unemployed one!

Pirate everything. Especially Adobe products.

>>4447916
>Tell me you're a Leica owner without saying you own a Leica

>>4447953
Audio is the most important part of video, And wifi IS important for tethering, but I digress, it is mostly unrelated to /p/, but it's very related to free software being shit. Darktable is just one turd in a very large sewer.

>>4447916
Sounds like freetards are a cut above the average faggot who asks chatGPT to spoon feed them

>>4448064
I would've guessed video is the most important part of video, but I'm not a retard so

So this guy tried to install linux once back in the 00s when drivers was still a manual thing (and he failed lol, too proud to "google and wiki"). Now he woke up from a coma 20 years later and since only freetards use google he cant find another forum to complain on?

>>4445698
default sigmoid settings ALSO suck unless they changed them
>bro just clip anything even close to white so the brightest thing in the image is newspaper grey
"no"

File: file.png (59 KB, 246x246)

59 KB PNG

I hope you're not too poor, and can use ergonomic software instead of autismal spergfiesta

>>4448167
Ill have you know that I have both an iphone and a (sub)lease, so literal upper crust. Of course I can afford apps

File: file.png (405 KB, 643x402)

405 KB PNG

>>4448169
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/nitro-photo/id1591292532

>>4447804
to be an artist truly requires an immodest degree of sensuality

>>4448167
>>4448177
Buy an ad raj

>>4445649
There are a lot of modules in Darktable. The docs recommend using the scene-referred workflow. I'll reread the the definition and their reasoning why to use it, but I haven't exactly internalized it. There are some modules I like to use from the display-referred workflow, but in the back of my mind, I feel like I'm breaking some best practices by doing so. Yet I can't grok the docs well enough to understand exactly why.

For the most part, I don't give a shit and just use whatever produces what I think looks cool. That said, does anybody with more knowledge of photography and darktable have a take on this? Does it matter? Should I not be using modules which may deprecate in the future?

I guess I can ask here instead of /sqt/ where I posted same question already. I was using Darktable 2.6 for quite long time but last time some people on /p/ told me to use newest version or switch to something else, claiming that (old) Darktable mess up colors and noise removal. But I'm honestly afraid of new one, which remove many old modules like even classic "brightness - contrast - saturation". Should I switch to new DT or use something else after all? Since I have Nikon camera, I tried their NX studio (from before they forced NikonID account) but both work much slower and don't really like it (except quite nicely working d-lighting setting). At the other hand, my old DT installation have own problems like it fails to detect my new lens, despite it being present on list and selecting lens each time manually, for every single photo, is little annoying.

I heard about using two versions at same PC but my Avast antivirus gets mad when I try to even install Darktable now because of one of libraries, claiming that it's a virus (VirusTotal have different opinion, both on installation file and .dll itself).

>>4451837
Not trolling or trying to be rude here, I think you should try a simpler software. Try something foolproof like lightroom and once you learn a bit more about photo development and computers come back to darktable. Darktable is the best photo development software out there but its not for tech beginners

>>4448281
I'm not rich enough for ad just trying to feed my village

is embedded metadata lens correction sufficient/accurate if the lens doesn't have a (complete) lensfun profile?

>>4453259
yes it is.

You can also build lens correction into your presets. Just correct pincusion-/ barrel distortion and vignetting and that's it

I personally don't correct lenses at all. It ALWAYS comes with a loss in quality. Pixels have to be interpolated when moving them in curves. That's bad. And good lenses don't have much pincusion-/ barrel distortion anyway. And a little soft vignetting is nice anyway.

>>4445649
Why does this thread still exist? Darktable is utter trash and nobody cares.

Adobe suite > payed Mac apps > Foss

and inside of FOSS: Rawtherapee > Gimp > Darktable

Darktable is quite literally the worst of the worst

>>4435105

>>4453274
Adobe is so garbage ETTR doesnt even work with it. Capture one is vastly superior. Adobe is so bad it's the source of sony colors memes. In capture one, sony colors are just dull and ugly, not green like shrek.

>>4453302
adobe rendering is just bad with its more faded colors and oversharpened grain

if it werent for adobe paying off educators to use their suite, no one would touch it. the pro photo industry is 80% capture one and phocus. lightroom's so shit newspapers use stuff like affinity photo.

>>4453270
>Pixels have to be interpolated
That's an interesting point. I hadn't thought of that. Regardless, some horizon or building lines have an obvious bend without correction. I've been doing it by default but I will think twice next time.
>>4453274
I started using Darktable because Rawtherapee failed to open the raws I had. What makes it better and Darktable the worst of the worst?
>>4453302
>ETTR doesnt even work with it
I don't understand this. Isn't ETTR a technique for preferring more exposure in camera to take advantage of the dynamic range of a scene? Why would a software deal with that poorly?

>>4453593
cANON linked the article. You'd have to ask him.

It showed some examples where exposing one over and dropping exposure in capture one improved everything, but in lightroom, it fucked up the colors. The article then provided a bunch of cope excuses for why adobe processes raws wrong.

>>4453274
this is a really stupid take, DT is a great editor if you take the couple of hours it takes to learn how to use it

File: DSC_5572.jpg (1.89 MB, 5620x3952)

1.89 MB JPG

>>4453628

Made in like 30 seconds from a super over exposed raw, blow me losers who can't learn to use a simple raw processor


>nooooooooo you HAVE to pay 6 gorrilion for the INDUSTRY STANDARD or you're NOT A REAL PRO LIKE ME


stfu losers

>>4453630
Looks like shit

>>4453632
post a better one faggot

File: DSC_5600.jpg (1.66 MB, 5620x3952)

1.66 MB JPG

flawlessly edited DT windo snapshits. Captureonefags are ALL nophoto losers

>>4453639
Looks super shit

>>4453646
Post pic or prove the rule

>>4453593
>how could software ever do something wrong to my raw files?

>>4453639
Based f2f, happy to see you around

File: 2025-07-06 08.48.35P7060077.jpg (4.09 MB, 3888x5184)

4.09 MB JPG

I used it but got bullied here and swapped to capture one. Truthfully I can't tell the difference but I don't have great vision or edit on calibrated monitors, and I shoot mft. I may go back because people say I am shit regardless, but to be honest I might just quit photography, haven't really been enjoying much of anything other than hiking these days. I am looking forward to passing away. I suspect many DT and mft users are on the same path as me.

>>4446814
GenP for LrC or maybe MonkRus for lightroom? but Monkrus has been kinda sus iirc

>>4453738
What's there to look forward to in dying?

File: m43.jpg (3.53 MB, 4102x1080)

3.53 MB JPG

>>4453738
I tried using a micro four thirds camera for a bit and yeah that's how it feels

Why even go for the good light it's just a m43 snapshit

File: phone.jpg (2.8 MB, 2940x1080)

2.8 MB JPG

>>4453890
Phone photo for quality reference

File: 25-07-21-DSCF1027.jpg (3.36 MB, 4023x3017)

3.36 MB JPG

>>4453639
It does do ok bug pics

Maybe it could even do ok bird pics

Otherwise why m43?

This is all capture one btw

File: 25-07-04-DSCF0774_Panorama-4k.jpg (2.97 MB, 4096x1078)

2.97 MB JPG

>>4453890
Oh wait that's not the meme edit, that's what it actually looked like

THIS is the meme edit

>>4453897
>>4453892
>>4453891
Micro four thirds looks EXACTLY like a phone

File: 2025-05-24 10.28.16P5240104 1.jpg (4.17 MB, 2388x3582)

4.17 MB JPG

>>4453887
I'm not sure. But maybe the moment before death when you let go entirely is the only point of life that will make any sense, and if it doesn't then it won't matter anyway.

>>4453890
>>4453897
Looks like a burn area. Not the worst composition but could use better light as you said.

>>4445651
>by not using it
Just like your camera.

>>4453648
post the raw and I'll edit in capture one so we can really compare

>>4453984
yeah you can really post RAWs on here, can't you

File: Screenshot from 2025-07-2(...).png (34 KB, 1010x248)

34 KB PNG

>>4453736
sorry but I'm not that tripfag, tripfag

>>4453738
>ALL that purple fringing

Is this the power of CAPTURE ONE?

>>4454013
It's the power of micro four thirds. Such fat aberrations the defringe tool is useless.

>>4454012
He's just desperately trying to associate with people who take photos in the hopes it makes it seem like he also takes photos

File: DSC_0660.jpg (2.08 MB, 3785x5657)

2.08 MB JPG

I'm being serious. I straight up challenge any non FOSS paidware shill faggot to post a better snapshit than this humble image, done on DT in about 3 minutes.


Or, for that matter, to simply post ANY picture they've taken. Suicidal bug guy gets a pass, congrats

>>4454018
No, I was desperately hoping those ironic shitposts with borders would be f2f. I guess he truly got sick of the paid marketers (pajeet shills) polluting the board and left for good.

>>4454025
pathetic

>>4454024
Jesus, darktable just flat out ruins anything it touches if it's a more challenging scene than grass and trees doesn't it
Turn your $5000 camera into a $500 camera with this one weird trick

>>4454037
>still no pictures


also taken on a nikon z30 KEK got it for like 200, flattered that you thought my edit looked like 5 k tho ;)

>>4454041
Oh you were kind of a jerk and didn't have any money left for software so I just assumed you bought too much camera lol!

>>4454049
>your image looks too nice
>must be because you're a jerk
>uhhhhh actually it's because you're too poor for lightroom heh!

>>4454067
No your photo is blurry dogshit so I assumed you were a total retard who bought an a7cr or something, shot with motion blur at a pointlessly high ISO (auto mode), and then ran it through darktable and mindlessly clicked export not really knowing what any of the sliders do.

The last part I can't fault you for because you have to read darktable's source code to figure out which module combinations won't crash it but that's legit below jen dockwell tier and looks pretty typical for people who buy cameras like the a7cr and rx1r

>>4454091
>darktable
>clicking export
That's not exactly the perl script you have to write to export a photo

>>4454091
Anon, it’s probably bloom or orton effect used for an artistic purpose . This board seriously is full of bug bugmen reality scanners, huh

File: 1637870372941.gif (689 KB, 500x375)

689 KB GIF

>>4454091

>>4454193
does that photo look even 1% artistic to you

>>4454218
Better question has any artist ever gone anywhere near a "FOSS"? Furry porn ones maybe

It is inherently bugman software. None of the good tutorials cover the current version. But its great for nerds that read manuals and source code.

>>4454218
Idk? Yes? Looks like most instagram tier street photography

>>4454244
There isn't a shred of art to be found brudda!

It could be interpreted as a scouting shot taken on a phone or PNS for places to come back and photograph properly later but as it is, it's just random garbage and really bad processing
Whenever you think huskyfag, corgifag, and shepfag are mediocre there's always a /p/ tier street snapper there to remind you it could be worse (and that good street photography is staged by charismatic chads)

>>4454275
Ok well at the risk of sounding like the poster above lol, do you have anything of your own that you’d care to share to show us some proper art?

>>4454280
Why is this the default response to "ur photo shit"? No one will ever bite it because it always ends in "no UR photo shit!"

Just take the L. You took a bad photo. It needs zoomed in on to tell whats in it. And then your bad processing and poor gear skills show. For what? A FUPA karen on a phone. L. So many cool architecture shots and potential setups in that place but you didn’t shoot anything.

File: IMG_7711.jpg (933 KB, 1179x1467)

933 KB JPG

>>4454282
Not that anon but thanks for the spergout I guess

>>4454024
At least the punchy colors are nice I guess

File: 100S9589.jpg (3.21 MB, 3000x2000)

3.21 MB JPG

i'm just getting started with scanning and i'm using darktable to convert the negative scans. it seems to be workable
also i tried shooting tethered into darktable but it didn't work out how i wanted. for one, it was a bit buggy to sync up. but more importantly, i couldn't figure out how to shoot from the camera instead of the computer. does anyone know if there's a way to do the type of tethered shooting where you can walk around with the camera and shoot normally except the files go directly to your computer?

I am sad to announce that not even AfterShot Pro 3 works well for us Linux users. The software itself works and every function works, the problem is that the results are uncomparable to LR. Every photo I tested has become a smearfest, details washed out while the same RAW file imported into LR gives nice details. How is this possible even? It's not overcooking with the sliders, no sliders applied already gives a bad fuzzy image, same as in Rawtherapee and Darktable. RAW file imported into LR, no settings, no denoise etc... applied, not even lens profiles and the image is fine, no noisy fuzz, no smears.

I already tried applying the camera profile manually and redownloading that specific profile and installing/reapplying, Aftershot Pro 3 just behaves the same as Darktable. Complete garbage.

>>4454480
Skill issue. Review the source code to figure out the best settings. Paidware shills can’t figure out how to do this because they’re cringe artists instead of based autists.

>>4454500
this but unironically

>>4454500
this

wouldnt give up my autism allowing me to save $200 on software for all the creativity and soul in the world. no one cares about your photos but you so saving money is more important than meeting standards you’re not held to.

>>4454480
>>4454500
I dont mean to state the obvious but samefag

>>4454480
does seriously anyone have any evidence of this alleged shitty fuz smear etc that darktable automatically generates onto raws?

Redpill me on denoising in Darktable.

>>4454540
https://docs.darktable.org/usermanual/4.6/en/module-reference/processing-modules/denoise-profiled/
The manual unironically has lots of good info

>>4454543
ya but where is the button that does the magic?

>>4454544
it's literally called "denoise (profiled)"


If you can't find it on the sidebar you can do a global search for it

>>4454540
It doesn't work very well. Not even with denoise profiled. I've never actually seen a darktable user post an image with acceptable noise reduction, sharpening, or tone curving. I have seen them post a lot of cope tho.

>>4454535
I can't post the exact photo, it is a portrait. I'm looking for a snapshit with a similar noise and tonality, just hold on to your hoses, buddy.

Also the screenshots are on two different computers, Macbook with LR and my desktop with Linux

>>4454581
What would a screwnshot from you prove? Anyone can open a raw in dt and see that you are wrong and confused. Smearing? Lmao

>>4454581
>trust me, this thing that no one else in the universe has ever observed is endemic. NO I won't post evidence!!!!

I installed darktable once and since I'm an artist I have better things to do than learn some FOSS autists speshul snowflake way of doing things

And then it crashed so I didn't have to worry about continuing to waste my time "learning" to use bad software. Learning to use plan 9 is probably a better way to waste time.

>>4454590
I've never seen darktable crash. Proof? Or is this like an "and then everyone clapped" story

>>4454584
It would prove what I described. Isn't that what you wanted? It is extra effort but since you behave in such a shitty attitude I think I'll just pass. I guess I'll just use LR in the browser at my desktop and use the proper software on my Mac.

>>4454604
lol the absolute state of 4chan

>you asked for an example? WHAT AN ASSHOLE. You know what, I'm NEVER posting an example now!

you must be a woman kek show tits or gtfo

>>4454540
denoising is overrated, as bad as cranking the clarity slider in lr

>>4454609
This. Embrace noise.

>>4454590
Bot post. Its the 10th time ive seen you type out the same nonsense

>>4454609
chroma noise looks like shit and benefits from adjustment but luma noise should not be fucked with unless you want your photo to turn into a smeary blob.

>>4454709
>no way darktable is not bad it does not crash this is bots my sirs darktable hires the best programmers in mumbai for $0 an hour
even programmers think it sucks
https://ansel.photos/en/news/darktable-dans-le-mur-au-ralenti/

>>4454713
>this is what darktable users believe
darktable is often worse than shooting jpeg
except for fuji, somehow, but fuji doesnt make good cameras and darktable isnt good software so maybe when two shitty things collide they emit a small amount of "ok"

>>4454715
I don’t use Darktable

>>4454714
>advertising your shitty ai generated blog on 4chan
Whew lad

>>4454714
The first 20 screens didnt mention crashing or smearing. Writing was too crap to continue after that. This is the kind of writing you get when you pay your writers from Mumbai 0€/hour lmao

All right, confess, which one of you bastards did this?

https://www.ebay.com/itm/388768522834

>>4454777
>https://www.ebay.com/itm/388768522834
the only fool's the one buying

>>4454777
Fucking lmao

https://www.ebay.com/itm/286104951435

File: F3964799-9D42-4F9C-B536-7(...).jpg (131 KB, 1104x1600)

131 KB JPG

Dark table 5.2 is the first RAW editor I ever used (not counting iOS photos and windows 11 photos). Been playing with it for about two hours now. Have a photo.

File: D8147E3F-5D10-4AF4-8E0C-6(...).jpg (166 KB, 1119x1600)

166 KB JPG

>>4454824
And another one. I really enjoy the frames!

File: FD31D7E8-5928-4219-962C-4(...).jpg (210 KB, 1600x1119)

210 KB JPG

>>4454825
Lat one for now. Darktable is alright, although I still do not quite understand its lightable section and a lot of history / module management.

File: problem.jpg (873 KB, 1875x1250)

873 KB JPG

Okay, maybe you guys could help me. I had this problem before while working on older version (2.6), now use this newest 5.2 and it still persist - when I have photos with very strong blue/violet light, I have this odd effect at highlights resembling posterisation. I tried adjusting settings in either base curve, filmic or sigmoid but couldn't get rid of it. Only situation where it does not appear is when I set color profile from "standard/enchanced matrix" to adobe and use "unbreak color profile" module but it cause saturation to drop significantly. This problem does not appear when I open file in NX Studio (I work with D750) so it must be caused by one of DT modules. Could you help me figure out what could be the source of the problem?

>>4454824
>>4454825
>>4454826
Aaaand you've single handedly proven every bad thing anyone has said about darktable

Pirate lightroom classic or learn to shoot jpeg

>>4454828
Darktable is a mess of incomprehensible pajeet spaghetti code. What you've found is a bug that may never be fixed. Simply pirate lightroom.

>>4454834
People use DT with success so this is a problem taht surely can be fixed. No, I won't pirate software, any software.

File: 100S9704_01.jpg (3.33 MB, 3000x4000)

3.33 MB JPG

>>4454299
i'm getting a slightly better handle on the negadoctor tool. this seems much better than anything gimp has for converting film negatives
>>4454825
that's cool i didn't know there was a frame tool

>>4454713
i think it's easy to make photos look like plastic, i'd rather get more light. i don't like to shoot high iso, i'd rather flash or slower shutter and grip tight

>>4454834
Darktable requires learning and reading docs. Nobody can just download it and grok it.
>>4454857
How has the experience of working with negadoctor been?

File: 08C8D0AF-A533-4A75-98E0-E(...).jpg (156 KB, 2150x3072)

156 KB JPG

>>4454857
Frames are cool

>>4454882
>bad programmers fail to adhere to common design standards
>autists think putting up with incompetence and reading a manual to use a raw editor makes them smrt
Darktable sucks
Use ansel

File: 100S9706.jpg (3.35 MB, 3000x4000)

3.35 MB JPG

>>4454882
it's been ok. just by fiddling around with it i've been able to get stuff to look decent, which is all i need since it's expired film with weird color shifts anyways. if i need to get everyhting consistent, i'll probably read the instructions
>>4454828
i don't know much but i'd have guessed it's the filmic rgb module

>>4454882
>Darktable requires learning and reading docs. Nobody can just download it and grok it.
I had to use it in a pinch years ago and i was able to get my photos done and out, if I can do it other people can

>>4454828
are you using sigmoid? i figured it out, if you're using sigmoid, you can attenuate the clipped blues and get a much nicer transition

https://discuss.pixls.us/t/purple-fringing-turning-saturated-blue-and-clipped/41690/4

>>4455052
I like RTFMing desu

File: DSC_9308_01.jpg (1.05 MB, 1875x2500)

1.05 MB JPG

>>4455070
Thanks for link, I checked it out briefly but found out two solutions - one that you mentioned (albeit it desaturate blue but get rid of this effect) and another by tweaking chromatic aberration module for bigger radius and strength. I admit that I never changing it before, always leaving it at default. Cheers.

Darktable is a half finished pos that requires learning things that are only relevant to the developers of raw editing programs. Its like driving a car that requires manual input to get the gas to the engine and make the spark plugs fire in the right order.

Bangalore tier engineering. Capture one is $200. You consoomers would rather spend $200 on a new lens that you think will make you take better photos tho.

>>4455079
i stopped reading docs on projects like this because devs change behaviors too often. look at old versions of blender for example when all the mouse stuff was reversed

>>4455108
I don't follow. Devs changing behavior should constitute more RTFMing

>>4455178
Not him but you don't even have manual for 5.0, not to mention 5.2 yet and 4.8 one existing is outdated already.

>>4455178
what ends up happening is you read a tldr worth of docs and still end up behind the current version or the next version has significant changes to invalidate what you learned

>it changes too often
>it doesnt change fast enough
>I dont like reading docs
>the docs arent good enough
>(trust me on this one ok?) Le foss smearing of my beautiful raws
>its free, which is somehow bad
Yawn, I feel like troll could do better

>>4455359
it is bad software, half baked upon launch, and demands the photographer learn a load of bullshit that is unrelated to photography and only related to finishing developer work that is already done even in manufacturers FREE raw editors

it's ganoo/linux shitware, plain and simple. something so garbage, only literally communist ideologues would waste their time using it, because it is literally communist software (the source code and therefore means of production is forced to be legally open, in a legally cancerous fashion that can infect derivative projects, by a license designed by richard m. (((stallman))), who personally confirmed he was friends with epstein and an outspoken proponent of eliminated age of consent laws and anti-bestiality laws)

>>4455366
sneed

>>4455366
Working for Adobe marketing?

>>4455376
Just use the free raw editor for your camera brand and pirate photoshop instead of paying for software

>>4455376
Pirating Capture One/Lightroom/Photolab? Free
Wasting your life on eternally half baked open sores software? Priceless

>>4455366
>nooooo you can't stop me from being a jew leech profiting from code generously donated by other people, that's COMMUNISM!
pathetic

File: 1683046853316743m.jpg (68 KB, 957x1024)

68 KB JPG

>>4455366
>using the most powerful software available for editing raws (which happens to be free) makes you a literal pedo
Impressive shit take, kudos

>>4455430
Preventing people from owning the means of production is literally communism ya dog rapist

>>4455494
You mean like proprietary software does you monkey abuser? You buy a piece of software and what you're buying is merely the right to use it, you own nothing. Then it goes and does all sorts of shady shit on your computer all covered by the EULA.

henlo i am a beginner in lightroom and photography but i know photoshop and used to have a crack version in windows. now i am using mac, i hate CC so much, should i invest my time in darktable? would also want to know if photomator is worth paying the lifetime which is like $120

>>4455359
sounds like you hate the user, you must be a contributor

>>4455528
Darktable & gimp are the goats. Everything just works, its free and there is a large community if you have questions. If you do part time wedding photography then maybe lightroom is ok but for anything more ambitious use proper software like darktable & gimp

>>4455528
I use RawTherapee and it does everything I need it to, which is not much lol
>noise reduction
>colour correction
>gamma correction

>>4455742
Not him but I used both and while Darktable surely is useful software, trying to modify photography using Gimp is literal sadomasochism.

Probably stupid question but - why every single time I use filmic module instead of sigmoid, it always results in noticably less saturated images? Which setting actually cause saturation to drop in filmic?

>>4456361
Are you sure you're matching the appearance correcty when comparing? Sigmoid makes it a little easier to adjust the contrast, which can make saturation look higher.

>>4456365
By default, sigmoid have 1.5 contrast setting but even when I increase contrast inside filmic, it still makes colors "washed out". I simply want to find out which settings actually govern this.

>>4455754
>trying to modify photography using Gimp is literal sadomasochism.
yeah you need to use rawtherapee integration with gimp to smooth things out. you should be able to daisychain darktable or rt as your rawprocessors and gimp should auto import the results if you have it set up properly. remember you can script and batch process, so there are ways you can make the system benefit you

Why do you even need raw processors? It's not 2005 anymore

>>4454828
https://youtu.be/yuEds-0z2AI
I watched this a while back and I think he fixed what you're talking about but it was a while ago

>>4462210
>Chudlet asserts you don't sneed it
Fuck off homo.

>>4462210
1: Because jpeg is an afterthought in every camera. Even with fuji, the jpegs are blurry as fuck.
2: Jpeg is an abomination. Cameras used to only have 5 controls: shutter button, shutter speed, aperture, ISO, focus. Jpeg needs you to also control white balance, DRO/DR400/HDR etc, film sim/creative style/etc, and all sorts of other things with no standard names or functionalities. Raw is like photography has always been, a platonic ideal. Take photo now, make photo later instead of wasting your time playing with your camera like a faggy gameboy.

>>4462275
How is that a problem. Just set all that shit to auto

>>4462334
Because then people brandfag over which model has the beat jpeg nr and most accurate auto mode. With raw, the shittiest oldest camera performs like the newest canon.

File: 1732500580726102.jpg (112 KB, 696x664)

112 KB JPG

i'm still using 4.6.1 what's new with 5.2?

>>4446694
i don't mind it. I mostly just use it fixing colors

>>4453628
>a couple hours
more like a few minutes

>>4445659
Wait is this shit actually difficult for some people to learn?

>>4446694
Try RawTherapee or start using tone curves instead of sliders. RawTherapee’s duap tone curve setup is handy, as well as the “ctrl + right click to add curve point” feature. Want this part of the photo darker? ctrl + right click and drag. You want that part lighter? ctrl + right click and drag. Want to make minor adjustments to contrast or clarity in the midtones somewhere? Adjust the second curve. There’s a few options for color grading too, including a HSV equaliser, a film sim module, split toning, color correction regions, etc.

>>4455366
>it is literally communist software
Holy retard alert.

>>4462399
>rawpee

Would DT + DXO Pureraw + affinity photo be a good all encompassing processing kit?

>>4462451

if loaded with moneys why not photolab plus nik collection

>>4462403
Even worse, you can't write rawtherapee without the rape.

File: file.png (2 KB, 111x42)

2 KB PNG

>>4462501

>>4455366
>, because it is literally communist software
Goes well with developing my photos taken with a FED 2 :^)

I would pay a reasonable amount of money for something like Darktable or Rawtherapee, aka autistically designed global adjustment sliders (for example, I really like the "highlight compression" slider in RT), just with normal usability.

But apparently it's either $0 for opensource jank or $200 plus tip for C1, which is nothing phenomenal. Or DxO, but I don't quite dig the acidpiss look that it tends to give the photos.

>>4462564

adobe cs2 maybe does not support all your cams

>>4462501
>rawrape

File: aec83b59-7c64-4345-b1a1-d(...).png (4.85 MB, 2599x1949)

4.85 MB PNG

How do i get this effect in DT? Pic related

>>4462917
>crushing and lifting in 2025

>>4462917
Create a curves layer.
Open it.
Lift the left edge of the line upwards a bit.
Lower the right edge of the line a bit.

>>4462930
Oh sorry, you said Darktable. Well, I'm sure you can do something similar in that programme, instead of photoshop, providing you can force your enfeebled, soft, woman-like hands to work the mouse until your wifes boyfriend buys you photoshop in return for intensive testicular flattening.

Uncalled for.
>darktable thread
>posts PS shit