Flatpack version discrepansy

Software ART
1

Hi there,
First of all I would like to say very big Thank you! to the team of ART project! Really, Despite I’m vivid user of RawTherapee I appreciate your efforts in bringing new ideas into this raw development approach!..

I use both manual git repository release download and flatpack versions of ART on Fedora Linux. Both work fine (I tend to prefer flatpack one because of automatic updates), except that flatpack package version misses (disabled) that Embedded in metadata profiled lens correction option!? Its kind of annoying cause I have few lenses which has no appropriate profile in the ART/RawTherappe but has some builtin one which camera understands and uses during shoot…

I’ve tried to allow full access pf ART flatpack to the system - it doesn’t help, seems it’s somethinkg missing in the flatpack package itself!?.

Regards

2

Hi,
Thanks for the report. I have no experience with flatpaks but maybe @hub can comment?

3

I’ve got ART installed via Flatpak on a Pop!_OS COSMIC 7 box, and ART run the “traditional” way on an Elementary OS v7.1 box.

Both have “embedded in metadata” grayed out for shots from my Fuji XT-s with XF10-24mm zoom

4

Yes, my Fujis behave the same…
Fuji seems does not put correction data into the metadata
BUT Sony does, and it works with “traditional” installation

1 Like
5

I just do not knowe how ART reads this information: by internal code or separate external utility (exiftool)? If latter - then maybe flatpack package just miss that utility?..

6

ART uses exiftool. In principle you can install it yourself and set the correct path in the preferences dialog. However, I don’t know if this will work with the flatpak sandboxing. As I wrote above, I have zero experience with flatpaks and so I can’t be of much help I’m afraid, sorry.

7

I see that in “traditional” installation package exiftool is present in the lib folder! I suspect that flatpack contains it too. So the problem probably in incorrect invoke of included exiftool in case of flatpack…

Wait I do not see anything similar to exiftool in flatpak app folder (but there a re some other common libs there) - so maybe it just absent in flatpack!
Unfortunately I’m not an expert in flatpaks…

image
image2096×967 364 KB

8

Depends on which camera.

9

Well,

Running the flatpak version was an exercise in futility on a Pop!_OS COSMIC ALPHA 7 laptop. It’s an old Dell XPS13 and was completely non-responsive in the flatpak version.

Running it via the traditional method, it was slow, which was expected, but definitely usable.

cheers

10

I sometimes use it on a 2013 Lenovo Yoga S1 (Debian Bookworm) and it is very usable (but far from fast) both as flatpak and as binary. It has 8 GB of ram, an SSD and an I7.
I see no difference between flatpak and binary.