CR3 metadata / EXIF

Software RawTherapee
1

I realize there have been several discussions on this topic in general and my sincere apologies if I’m asking what’s already been answered elsewhere (if so, please redirect me – I searched). But has the situation with exiv2 been resolved to the point it will be included in RT? Just curious when it’s reasonable (all things considered) to expect EXIF support for CR3 in RawTherapee. I’m running 5.8-2995-g166538d on Xubuntu and it’s not there AFAICT. It sure will be nice to get EXIF from my CR3s.

Thanks for all the hard work.

2

It’s a work in progress: Adopt Exiv2 for metadata handling by Beep6581 · Pull Request #5889 · Beep6581/RawTherapee · GitHub
And just give realistic expectations, things are moving very slowly in the development front, so I really cannot say when it will be included…

1 Like
3

Thanks for the update. I just wanted to confirm I wasn’t overlooking something obvious …usually the case! :slight_smile: I guess I could write a script to have exiv2 read a CR3 and plug desired values into its child image(s).

1 Like
4

I realize this last post was from a year ago, so pardon my dredging this topic up if it’s not meaningful to others, but I’ve been wondering…

I do greatly appreciate that FOSS is a blessing - a gift provided to the world by volunteers. And I recognize that Rawtherapee is an amazing software package. But after noticing how stable/official RT remains dormant (despite meaningful efforts that are still considered “beta”) and my quickly getting accustomed to using ART (which is constantly updated and tweaked), I’m left wondering why most RT users haven’t migrated over to ART?

Again, I’m not downplaying the fact that ART wouldn’t exist if it weren’t for RT. But it seems that so many features current RT users crave (local adjustments, saving snapshots, recognizing exif in CR3 files, etc.) are all available right now in a familiar UI borrowed from RT.

Note that I’m totally new around here - so please let me know if I’m posting a flame-worthy question for this community. But I’m seriously interested in better understanding why ART has not effectively become the daily workhorse fork of choice for most RT users? :thinking:

[And thanks again to all who make these awesome FOSS tools available.]

5

Perhaps most people have, we really just don’t know :slight_smile:
(this is also a beauty of FOSS tbh - I don’t really need to care about market share)

Still, the intention remains to support exiv2 after RawTherapee 5.9 is released.

1 Like
6

Thanks … it’s certainly encouraging to hear talk of RT releases post-5.9, suggesting active/ongoing development intent.

Having choices/forks of an otherwise mainline program is one of the reasons open source software can become such a powerful force.

It’s also the reason I’ve provided occasional financial contributions to support such development… despite the “F” in FOSS. :+1:

7

Development is active, see Commits · Beep6581/RawTherapee · GitHub

Its just a release that is missing.

1 Like
8

I moved to ART mainly because my camera’s (OM- systems OM-1) RAW files are not recognized by RawTherapee and after some time I started to like it. I especially like the masking options in ART and I am not sure I will come back to RT if these are not implemented in RT.
Jan

1 Like
9

Yes, understood. This tracks closely with my own journey through the wonderful world of RAW processing. But thank goodness for RawTherapee… as Mr. Griggio can stand on the shoulders of open source giants. :slight_smile:

10

If I had to (very wildly) guess based on the number of downloads, I’d say that ART has maybe 200 active users at most, likely even less.
Googling rawtherapee, I get about 318000 results. Just to give a bit of perspective… :slight_smile:
(For reference, the hits for darktable go in the millions)

11

Thanks for reminding me I’ve been procrastinating on working on that for waaaay too long.

It oculd be argued that simply moving to libraw is the solution here, but I think it merits attempting to fix this before 5.9 is formally released.

12

Don’t know what metadata is needed by RT/ART, but note that LibRaw is not a metadata extraction library - it parses from CR3 only the minimum needed for its own raw decoding purposes, not all the (known) metadata like exiv2.

13

Heh, we started getting a bit offtopic here - the OM-1 issue which I quoted isn’t metadata. You’re correct that CR3 is a different issue, and exiv2 is the solution there.

There’s an outdated pull request for exiv2 on RT’s github, the plan was to move it forward after 5.9 was released. I’m thinking of kanging @agriggio 's libraw work too after 5.9 is out - the next RT release is starting to look like it will be full of under-the-hood rearchitectures (exiv2, maybe libraw, maybe gettext)

1 Like