That’s fine saying that, but for someone that’s trying to get to grips with how darktable works, I’m not even sure what you mean there. I for one don’t care how a module looks, I only care about how any of it works, and what it does.
Having so many modules duplicating functionality, but often with different names, or even a completely different interface. It’s not wonder that it’s confusing for newcomers.
I agree though, that when I read this article, it was only apparent to me that this was opposite to any information I’d read up to now.
For a user coming from other software, that is used to working a different way, none of this is as obvious as it is to those that are programming it.
The more I’m studying this forum, and other articles, the less clear it’s becomiong as to a sensible workflow.
I did get some reasonable results editing my newer Nikon images, but have so far completely failed to get anything usable from my older Olympus images.
I appreciate that darktable has some fantastic editing tools, and has the potential to produce some of the best images possible. But, there appears to be absolutely no consistancy in how I go about it.
For now I have abandoned darktable, and removed it from my system, but I still monitor progress, and this forum, for any revelations that might make it work for me.
It’s clear that a lot of work goes into darktable, but IMHO it fails miserably with regard to UI and workflow. I’m not one for pretty interfaces, but they do need to be reasonably well laid out so that a normal human being can understand what is going on, and how stuff should be used.
Sorry of that comes across as a bit of a rant, it probably is one, but I am finding some of the comments here are very much looking down on the poor peasants that never got an education.