3.0 How to get good results automatically?

The modules are ordered according to their sequence in the pixel pipe (bottom first). For more sophisticated edits it might make sense to edit in this sequence. e.g. when using parametric masks these can be reused as pixel masks in subsequent modules …

1 Like

He already answered most of it in the article which was mentioned above.
https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=fr&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fdarktable.fr%2F2020%2F01%2Fdarktable-3-rgb-ou-lab-quels-modules-au-secours%2F

Hi guys,

I’ve been reading this thread (as well as others) with some interest, as some of the topics covered here are some that I can relate to.

I’m a long time Lightroom user (and before that iPhoto, Aperture and Photos). Over my lifetime I have spent time in a real darkroom, used various types of camera from 110 cartridge to 1980’s SLRs, to small digital compacts and over the last 14 years, a variety of DSLR and Bridge cameras (and a few Phones too). Although I’m no pro, I’m no novice either.

Over the last couple of years I have been looking for a replacement for Lightroom, for a number of reasons - mainly that I want to get away from the lifetime subscription trap, but also because they seem to be dragging their heels with regards to development of basic functions.

Now, I really like darktable, but coming from Lightroom I am finding it difficult to come up with a workflow I’m happy with. I’ve watched many videos by Bruce Williams, and some of Rico’s too, all are excellent.

But, whatever I try, I cannot get to a workflow that gives me decent results in anything like the time it takes in Lightroom using a handful of very quickly accessed slider adjustments.

I sympathise with the OP here, as someone trying to make a transition after many years of doing something ‘another way’, I would welcome some kind of pointers towards a decent image with minimal input as a starting point. So far I can work away at an image, usually for some time, and after swapping about a few modules, and get to a result I’m quite happy with.

However, when I get back off holiday (for example), and want to show off some images to friends and family, I don’t want to be spending too long processing hundreds of images.

FWIW, I both agree, and disagree, with the statement above that ‘no-one can expect photography to be easy’. Yeah, I get it, we should perhaps be learning to the best of our abilities the best ways to get the best possible photos. But, it doesn’t have to be that way, and it’s a very blinkered view of the world. Why should it have to be difficult? Just because it’s always been that way? Yeah, I’ve heard that before. But, overall, why shouldn’t photography be easy? It should be enjoyed by anyone that wants to take photos. What’s wrong with wanting to be able to quickly process a bunch of photos to show off to family? It’s up the the end user how much effort they want to put into the development of their photos.

Of course opinions and advice from more knowledgeable people is always appreciated, but they shouldn’t get snobby about it either. I want to use, and fully support software such as darktable, but it’s still got to work for me.

I don’t want a Lightroom clone (if anything I’d prefer an Aperture clone ;-)). But some way to ease the transition would definitely be useful.

Apologies for the ranty part, but I feel that the flavour of the comments is trying to close off software like darktable to a wider user base, otherwise I very much appreciate that it does exist, and is so feature rich at such a nice price point.

Best regards

3 Likes

RT has a matched curve feature that is able to quickly make it look “good” for those of us who want it. It is kind of a lifesaver for those with little time to spare. Not sure whether dt has or could have anything of the sort.

1 Like

there‘re plenty of raw converters available that have a bunch of automatic corrections - so why should darktable try to be just an additional noob tool?
If fast automagic results are sufficient, why not just use the in camera jpeg‘s - these aren‘t that bad nowadays.
I prefer darktable beeing a tool that prioritize providing tools to get the best out of the raws, even if it needs some steps to achieve it …

2 Likes

In the vein of going as-fast-as-possible, I’ve set Exposure to Automatic, then enable Filmic RBG and clicked the four auto droppers from top to bottom. Looks pretty good and I’m not sure the effort can be any more minimal.

I’m pretty sure there’s nothing to be gained from that.

Yes, this is a pun, with context from another thread… :smile:

2 Likes

Hi, I’ve read your post with interest.
Short Answer to the question of this thread : if I want to get good results automatically, I make use of the JPEG’s. I tend to use Nikon’s own software for that case.

Through the years I’ve went from Adobe’s ACR over RT to Darktable for my rawconversions. Each has it strenghts and weaknesses.
Reading RT’s and darktables manuals and recently watching Aurélien Pierres video’s and following different threads of this wonderfull community, I’ve learned a lot about rawprocessing.

I’ve learned that RT and Darktable gave me way better results then any commercial software I used before.
Darktable is since a few years the only rawsoftware I use.

I’m conviced that the new approach in dt 3.0 is far better then in the previous version, but has a new learningcurve for me again.
After I’ve spent some time with it, I’m now at the point where I could get nice, quick results in only a few minutes.
I presume that the new basics module could do the job even faster, but I don’t use it.

My new fast workflow looks like
exposure, lens correction and white balance if needed
Cropping if needed
Filmic rgb
Color balance for saturation and contrast
Noise reduction if needed

For further editing there is a plethora of modules in dt that I can use to do what I want to do : not being happy with automatical results but being creative.

I’m sure if you spent Some further time with dt you soon Will be able to get Some decent results within a few clicks. Succes and have fun with your quest :smile:

1 Like

Well I do not think that one should call Lightroom or C1 a noob tool. You also have a huge amount of possibilities to control the result but you do not have such a high bar in the beginning (do you say so in English?).

Thanks @all for telling your workflow. That really helps a lot

That’s simple: They may not be existent. Darktable is not only a great raw developer, but also a digital asset management for photographs. If I need special tools that are beyond the capabilities of the raw converter part of darktable, that’s cumbersome but acceptable (e.g. panoramas). But everything within darktables capabilities/scope should not require external software. If I manage my photographs in darktable, then also some for which a fast track solution would be sufficient. Going to the camera manufacturer’s raw converter for these images is not an option, especially as this software is not available on linux, and it would break my standard workflow.

However, for me, base curve and other default modules were sufficient for this purpose so far, but if there is something better, why not. At least I think there are reasons to request some automagic approach, if it ever will be implemented is on another page. And partially it is already there, e.g. with base curve and auto exposure.

2 Likes

I had the same issue when I started darktable - so many modules and I knew nothing on colour space or Lab vs RGB or linear mumbo jumbo. Over time, and watching some of the videos and reading some of the papers its starting to make sense. I feel fortunate going from Lightroom’s “just move the sliders” approach to some really fun editing in darktable that also made me appreciate the theory behind it. The people on this forum have been really helpful. This is my list of go-to modules, and they do 99% of my editing.
Capture

4 Likes

LR also provides quite flat starting point.
C1 on the other hand uses quite agressive tone curve as default, which works nice e.g. for portraits in controlled environment, but makes strange things in less than ideal cases.

Nevertheless I would still use contrast brightness saturation for reducing saturation. If I used basic adjustments there would be 2 unnecessary color space conversions.

I totally agree with this statement and the rest of your post.

This is a precise description of my situation 1-2 years ago.

I agree with you guys and that was the reason I, in the first post in this thread, used the phrase “jungle” as a description of the collection of the many, many dt tools, which are partly overlapping and some excludes the appropriate use of others. I meant no offence……

Do we want dt to be a tool only for specialists who are willing to spend hours and hours studying theory and literature, or do we want to attract new users who, using dt, feel attracted to enter the photo world and over time study and explore all the wonderful things you can do with dt?

I remember when I first opened a photo in RawTherapee (dt was not available in windows) some years ago. Ahrggg! I very quickly gave up on editing the image into an attractive image.

If we want to attract new users, dt should out-of-the-box produce a good and attractive starting point for further editing. This is the case at present because dt will apply your cameras base curve as the default setting. But I also think that dt in some way should help you to find your way through the “jungle” maybe by presenting the user a “standard” base curve workflow or a “standard” filmic workflow depending on which way you choose.

2 Likes

Hi’ @anon41087856

I have just finished reading your article for the first time. Really amazing and wonderful, thank you very much!

It answers many of my questions. Everybody should read it before proceeding with filmic.

It would be a gigantic step forward if your good advice somehow could be built into dt itself so you are warned not to use outdated or questionable tools in your editing.

1 Like

It should also be emphasized that we users are also in demand here. Unlike the developers, who take their time for developing, we have the opportunity to try things out, test them, find the most effective ways and report on them.

I would like to ask all those who have difficulties with usability, despite all the frustration, to take part in the optimization process through active and intensive use!

9 Likes

Indeed so, and also I mean no offence, but, I still need to convey how I feel about it. We are after all different and prefer different ways of working, and maybe have different ideas of the end results.

I’m certainly not lookign for ‘noob’ tools to take over everything for me, FWIW I have little time for many of the new AI tools that seem to be appearing everywhere now. An assumption that all we want is a fully automated workflow is very wide of the mark indeed.

But, as said, it is useful to have a good starting point. And don’t assume I click all the Auto button in Lightroom either, I don’t, I do use my own handful of presets that apply certain adjustments tailored to individual cameras, and then I manually apply final adjustments myself. the Lightroom Auto settings end up pretty awful IMHO. Those presets I can apply very quickly to a whole bunch of images, and work through them in a few seconds applying three or four adjustments.

Now, again don’t assume that’s all I do. That’s just an initial quick adjustment to be able to view them for further evaluation, or just to quickly show family/friends (as an example). I will usually go through them again, and tweak a few to imporve them more, or even send some off to external editors if needed. I also usually create a full set of virtual copies to convert to monochrome, and then cull out the ones that don’t work.

Seems to me that many here have got a little ‘precious’ about dt, and maybe think the only way to edit photos is usuing the most complicated method possible.

There’s no denying that dt is a fantastic photo editor, but it is most certainly a rabbit warren of twists and turns that can suddenly turn an almost finished image to something awful within a few clicks. I’m not expecting to transpose my Lightroom workflow into dt, but I’m hoping to find something that gets near to the simplicity of those initial ‘starter’ settings.

All said, I’m certainly not trying to criticise dt or it’s developers, I’m merely offering some feedback that should be taken as ‘constructive’ critique if anything.

I’ll continue to keep working away at learning dt, as I generally find it is the best alternative solution to Lightroom I have tried so far, and as said, I do appreciate the work that has gone into it, but it is still very geeky to an average user.

There are a lot of people expressing what they want, but not many saying what they’ve tried… So it is difficult.to provide help beyond what has already been said.

1 Like

Well at least I for myself can say that I have received a good starting point here in the thread (Example Workflows and used tools of you and some others) and will give it a try at the weekend. I’m trying to give feedback as soon as I tried.

1 Like

Yes, definitely. But, you may want to consider warming to that starting point being ‘Neutral’. There’s a lot of discretion in the tone curves to consider, and learn from…

For a time, I searched for a tone curve to use as default for my proof images. Thing is, I shoot in such varied lighting and scene conditions that I could not settle on one, or figure out how to parameterize a selection. So now, my default processing delivers a linear RGB, “Neutral”, and I work from there.

If you really want to start from a good look, i think RawTherapee’s Auto-matched Tone Curve is probably your best bet. It takes the JPEG embedded in the raw file and computes a tone curve to approximate it.

1 Like