You keep repeating this point. Could you elaborate which modules you encounter that feel like bloat and which you find cumbersome in terms of usability? This would strengthen your argument.
What do you mean by that? This seems somehow very paradoxical to me.
So I think Darktable is good the way it is!
Please don’t change it just because someone who doesn’t even use it criticizes it.
I find the new modules for the scene referred workflow (filmic, tone-equalizer, …) a bit difficult for beginners to understand. But you don’t have to use them because the old display referred ones still work fine. That way you can get used to it little by little. And finally, there are plenty of ways to organize the modules.
I think the GUI takes a little getting used to at first, but once you understand it, there is nothing better.
Imagine how different things would be today if MS, Apple, et al relied upon this method of updating instead of doing clean sheet redesigns from time to time! Yuck.
Is this statement true or not? Except for the usability part which you will undoubtedly disagree with since you know dt inside out.
It means what it says. It’s plain English using little words.
just to avoid further confusion. thanatomaniac is a rawherapee dev, not a dt dev/user.
I would just lock this thread. It is only going to spiral into the Backfire Effect.
https://effectiviology.com/backfire-effect-facts-dont-change-minds/
I read the article about the Backfire Effect - i don’t believe it.
There is a lua script that lets you open up to 9 external editors… I use it with Affinity Photo…
I would still like to see an answer to this question. You’ve dodged it over and over. Get specific.
You’re mistaken, I have been using dt from time to time for the last 3 years or so usually when I’m not satisfied with the results from other software on a given photo. It’s just not my go-to program because any of the raw developers I currently use (DxO, C1, RT, RT-ART) can produce just as nice a result as dt in less time and with less effort IF the light is good and IF the picture is properly exposed with no large areas of highlight burnout. That makes dt the program of last resort when my limited set of skills aren’t capable of getting what I want from any of the others.
dt has an incredible feature set that is very difficult to master (I haven’t), will everyone agree on that? dt developers have made a lot of efforts to make dt easier to navigate by grouping relevant modules together (like the scene-referred, display-referred, etc.) and that has helped a lot. I was just throwing out the suggestion to clean house in the interest of making dt’s interface less complex and the program faster to use and easier to maintain, usually a good thing to do.
It sounded like a win-win to me but obviously the downside of doing that wasn’t palatable to many of the people in this forum. I apologize, it wasn’t my intention to upset anyone.
Seems like as good a place as any to end this.
