@Qor : Don’t get me wrong I’m not against a new Web site talking about Darktable.
I’m French and maybe not the same way to read the sentence I quoted. But I’m just reporting to you that saying that feel very negative to me. And this is the first title (bold) on the first page. Not good way to promote Dartktable to me.
Maybe not intended, but that the way I get it. I fear that I won’t be the only one.
Is that a way to justify some more text conveying the same feeling?
Sorry but I do quite a lot already for Darktable and I have no time to spend on this.
Chris, I am sorry but I find myself repeating this thing over and over.
When someone tells you that “something is perceived as X”, you keep answering “It’s not our intention”.
But “I read X as Y” is not a comment on your intention. It’s a comment on the effect that “X” has on the readers. “It’s not my intention” is not a valid answer. Either you change “X”, or it means that you are fine with people perceiving it as “Y”, which means that “Y” is the message that you want to send.
And again, just to avoid being misunderstood, let me reiterate that I have nothing against darktable.info per se, I think it’s good to have a website focusing on resources for beginners and I am sure that your intentions are good.
That goes of course both ways. If several people have said that they feel not welcome on this forum or in this community that, that’s how it perceived, although not the way it was intend. Even when it is hard to put the finger on the exact words. And yet I have been ‘attacked’ that my experiences are incorrect.
When I shared my post on feeling not very welcome here at the beginning I have had several personal reactions of people that feel the same.
Now about the understandable… I can see people find that harse. Let me share something from the official website :
Yes and no. Darktable is an alternative to Lightroom the same way any other raw editor is, since it edits raw files, but it would be a mistake to think it’s a direct replacement. Other than both being raw editors with photo library management, and looking somewhat similar, they have very little in common. While Lightroom aims at making raw processing accessible to anyone, regardless of technical skills, darktable is a powerful and flexible raw processing toolbox that leaves the user in charge of their workflow and provides a level of control that few others can match, often by exposing the full power of the underlying algorithms to the user. This also means that the initial learning curve can be steep, since very little workflow and tool knowledge can be transferred from other programs.
If you have prior knowledge and experience in other programs (and almost everyone has, even if you come from a iPhone with their funny ‘raw’ edior), it doesn’t easily translate to dt. I think this is the gap that the .info people want to bridge. Darktable has a steep learning curve. As a side note, yesterday on the biggest Dutch tech website someone mentioned that he wished that there is a darktable lite version (https://tweakers.net/downloads/75376/rapidraw-148.html). He likes darktable, but he was comparing it to RapidRaw and darktable is so complex… (his words from the context)
So, yes the .info website is a bit opinionated. In how they think the workflow should be and in some of the wording they have. But it does reflect what a group of users of darktable is feeling.
But here is the thing: do you really think that the .info people would invest their time, energy and some money to build that website and promote darktable if they wouldn’t want people to use dt??
I have been thinking a bit… it seems that many users on this forum have a very deep understanding of the technical aspects of photography. Some reactions on posts can feel very overwhelming and sometimes off putting because of the technical aspects. Is it really that bad that there is a separate place that there is a place to discuss the maybe easier questions?
From what I read, almost all people here love darktable. And I think that most also love to see darktable trive. So give please let’s give each other a bit of space. The internet is big enough
Looking for a professional, subscription-free alternative to Lightroom or Capture One?
Darktable delivers exactly that – and much more.
To help you keep track of the numerous features, we provide the guidance you need.
For Beginners.
On darktable.info, we cut through the noise of the past. Our tutorials focus 100% on the modern, scene-referred workflow that makes darktable the most powerful and versatile RAW developer on the market.
What’s the issue with it? If he’s satisfied with the results of RapidRaw, why should he think about darktable and its steeper learning curve. If he comes to limits with the simpler tool, then he might see the more important differences …
There are plenty of free and non free raw editing tools around that might fit the requirements of different users better than darktable does. darktable was designed to match requirements other tools weren’t able to.
I don’t get the attitude that a tool must fit for everybody - everybody’s buddy is everybody’s fool
At this point, I have to completely disagree with you regarding darktable. That would be quite unfair to DT.
I am sure anyone can learn darktable with the right help.
I find it rather a bit harsh you say this. You don’t know what is going on in the mind of the people that gave up. You don’t know why they gave up or if it impatience or frustration with the available learning materials, other things that happened in their life.
I have given up on darktable in the past. Before I switched to Capture One from Lightroom I have given darktable a try. But at that point in life I was struggling with a depression and simple did not have the mental capacity to learn a tool that that is so different to my formerly used tool. Capture One was much closer. But photography and editing picture was one of the few sources of joy in life.
(I left Lightroom because of the subscription model - I find an unethical way of selling software)
I have not learned the bulk of what I am capable in darktable through any of official documentation. I have watched hours of YouTube video’s about darktable. Just to hear people talk how they do stuff. In learn through mostly through listening, that is my preferred style. If it wasn’t for @s7habo and @Bruce_Williams I would not have learned to use darktable. So I am deeply thankful for their work.
This doesn’t mean that the manual on darktable.org is bad, it just means that it is not a suitable way of learning for my personality.
If darktable.info is successful, we will see in the long run. darktable.info has more pictures (screenshots) to explain things, and for some people that is really helpful. Not everybody learns but just reading. And there is a place for articles / topics that are very helpful but wouldn’t fit the official more technical document (e.g. Your monitor is lying (probably) - Mastering DT 5.4: Workflow, Shortcuts, Themes & AgX) - something like could be a blog post?
Sure! See partly my remark above. But I think I have missed what you exactly mean by the first three sections of the manual?.
I hope that is not the case here. I want a good outcome out of these posts.
I see myself in agreement with both camps. I believe both sides care for DT and want to improve it.
I think we’re speaking in generalities, and a bunch of us have heard this a lot in various places: darktable is hard, its not like other editors, and people don’t want to bother to learn it. I’ve heard it a lot myself, and I don’t find this statement to be untrue.
This is not a slight at you personally and I don’t see it as intended that way.
I am sorry to hear about your struggles with mental health and hope that you’re in a better place now.
I am sure that is true for many people and that’s why they’re highlight recommended by many people here and elsewhere.
If you don’t learn well by reading, how does darktable.info help?
True, good point. Maybe that is the reason.
To clarify, we expect that a user has darktable open while reading through the manual. We don’t consider the manual to be casual reading material.
Sure, but people need to write blog posts, and outside of the one that was just posted, it just doesn’t really happen that often. We’ve never turned down a blog post (not saying that we won’t in the future, but I am saying we’re very willing to publish things as blog posts).
There are several tools the forum has to have this post not come up for you, please use them. This is the third time you’ve interjected with something that only detracts from what people are discussing.
I try to do that as best I can, which is why I asked.
I didn’t understand the “we” and I think that, especially when making a comparison, the term “successful” should be defined. How do you determine whether one thing is more successful than another?
Okay, I understand the question a little bit better now. I think a direct comparison is difficult because the way in which information is provided varies.
The main difference is that we take a very direct approach and provide appropriate signposts. This is to avoid unnecessary searching.
It starts on the home page with the choice between Quick Start and Workflow.
Quick Start is designed to contain only the most essential information needed to explain the basic functions. This ranges from importing photos to masks.
Otherwise, most of our pages are structured as follows: the maximum amount of information needed to get started with as little text as possible.
One of our most visited pages, for example, is:
Here, information is compiled in a very compact form. The content is optional for editing RAW images, but it makes some things easier.
We also try to explain as much as possible with images alongside the text. Images help you find the section of a text paragraph much more quickly or even provide the context you need to understand something in the first place. The same applies to the spatial relationship between images and text. If I only have text and then have to find what is described in Darktable, this requires extra effort, i.e. it costs time and concentration.
A decision that was not so easy for us to make: all screenshots in English for the time being. But the decision was important because it would have meant so much extra work, especially with changes at the beginning of the project. Currently, the translation of the FR site is being worked on, and the FR team has decided that they want FR screenshots. That’s an even better solution.
As already mentioned, we try to keep the content as concise as possible (for starters) in order to use the limited resource of concentration as effectively as possible. In other areas, we will then go into more detail.
Is this better or worse? I think that varies from person to person. How can you quantify that?
The site is structured the way “we” would have wanted it to be when we were new to DT, which is also one of the reasons for the site. It also gives us the freedom not to have to meet certain expectations (that one might have of an official DT documentation).
I am sure there are good reasons why the information provided by darktable.org is the way it is. I/we do not want to judge that, nor are we in a position to do so.
While I certainly appreciate the desire and drive for bringing more information and workflows to DT users new and old, I can’t help but wonder why you wouldn’t put that effort towards the official documentation and website?
It sounds like you have the motivation to work - in the spirit of Free/Libre software why not direct that energy towards the official documentation or blog/website/here?
You can gain the benefit of direct access to the most trusted source for darktable information (it’s own website or here) and can avoid having to build an entirely new presence from scratch?*
The darktable website already can support this and the forum here certainly can as well.
You are certainly free to do as you wish, but all of PIXLS.US was created to explicitly avoid fragmentation of sharing knowledge and learning together.