One thing I found challenging in the beginning was the scene-referred (filmic) workflow and identifying the modules for processing the images. The above videos helped me a lot to get going on this topic.
Some background: I have been taking photos now for over 40 years and using Lightroom since version 2 among other (DxO, Luminar, Nik etc) programs. My experience so far is that darktable gives me more fine controls and options how I want to process the images.
My special thanks to the developers and the community.
In DT the user can use either filmic or sigmoid module for tone mapping. I do feel that sigmoid is easier for a person new to DT because it more often than not gives a good look straight out of the box with colors that are more colorful compared to filmicâs result. I am not knocking filmic, but I see it as a tool to master when a user is more familiar with how DT works.
I would not recommend reading the whole docs, especially for the processing modules. A beginner can just
apply some modules automatically with a preset or a style (highlight reconstruction, raw CA, lens correction, profiled denoise), with no actual adjustment initially,
get started with a few basic modules (sigmoid, exposure, color calibration, tone equalizer, crop, rotation),
build on that (diffuse & sharpen, rgb primaries, contrast equalizer, color equalizer, insert your favorites here).
The problem with Darktable is the overwhelming amount of modules. Even among those not deprecated, there are some which are niche use or have better alternatives, but this is not explicitly mentioned.
The whole documentation is a bit too much for a first read (most of it is written as a reference, after all).
I would recommend reading the first three sections (Overview, Lighttable, Darkroom), as those explain the overall structure of the program, and something about the âphilosophyâ behind it. The section on Preferences and Settings is also worth a good look.
Then read as needed/wanted (e.g. read the entry for a module you use, whih requires manual adjustment).
As you get more experience, reading up on other modules gets more useful.
Something to keep in mind when switching from another program to darktable: transferring edits is virtually impossible (some exceptions do apply), and transferring metadata like keywords and captions can be delicate (there are just too many ways to store those items in the various metadata sections).
One of the reasons that I have been sticking to dt is that the documentation is largely very practical and it does not [too often] expect me to be into and understand the maths or colour science. Iâm a maths dumbo.
Having been using dt for a little while (in years rather than weeks) now, Iâve gained a clue about scene/display -referred and why a range of numbers might be involved. But Iâve also come to the conclusion that it doesnât matter that much. I practical terms, stick to the scene-referred modules when there is an alternative â but dt will look after what gets done in what order anyway, and changing module-processing order is not something for the beginner.
I understand that filmic has more control options, but the almost-ready-from-the-off starting point of sigmoid is one reason for my sticking with dt. It seems to do what I always thought the âlike the camera jpegâ button in rt should do. So much so that I am even using it for simple-tweak stuff that I would previously have done in GIMP.
Iâm learning is a similar way to how I became I Unix systems manager 25 years ago. Reading the manual, through and through. Each time noticing something that I cold now understand, or spotting some command that could be useful to me. What one can grasp is more important than what one canât grasp. And what one canât grasp today might be obvious next week.
(Even when I had become an actual systems manager, ie it was the job I went for, rather than the one I slid sideways into, and making extensive use of tools like grep, sed, awk, I still could not actual define âregular expression.â I guess itâs one of those maths things. Couldnât define it for you, but I still did some magic things with them!)
So recently I tried some commercial software and I too found that overwhelming because the environment (GUI and expected processing steps) were so foreign to me. Now I am less critical of the steep learning curve with DT. Any program takes time to learn and with DT that time is a worthy investment.
I created this post for people new to darktable but not new to photo development. I agree with @Tamas_Papp that there are modules in darktable which are not needed by everyone all the time. This I think will be true for experienced darktable users as well.
For someone new to darktable, I see it as helpful to âseparate the wheat from the chaffâ in reading through what it has to offer and separate the modules into groups like:
modules which are achieving what I am used to in Lightroom for example
helpful modules which are easy to understand (crop)
might be interesting to try out when I have the right photo/time
not for right now or near future or hard to get my head around
A new user with experience in digital photography faces two major challenges approaching darktable
can I achieve results which are at least equal to what I can achieve so far. I have answered this question for myself with a clear yes.
how do I achieve the results
For all the points mentioned above I think it is important to have some idea about the possibilities of darktable.
Thatâs a tricky one: modules like âdiffuse or sharpenâ and âcontrast equaliserâ are very useful, but not all that easy to understand. The provided presets do make them easy to use (within the limits of those presets, of course).
âTone equaliserâ is another very useful module, but itâs also somewhat more complicated to understand than âcropâ.
Another important feature is not mentioned at all: the masking, very powerful but not always easy to grasp.
Drawn masks are not difficult*, and something very similar will have been used by those coming from other packages. The logic of mask combination still escapes me, but that is just my blind spot and Iâll get there one day.
Do packages such as Lightroom have the equivalent of dtâs parametric masks? Totally wonderful. And yes, I do âgetâ restricting a parametric mask with a drawn mask to isolate a specific matching area. I never want to use a package without this functionality!
*Of course, such reflections are very personal. One manâs easy is another manâs incomprehensible
The basic uses of masks are easy enough (simple drawn masks, even simple parametric masks)
With the ânot always easy to graspâ part I was thinking of all the other options you have, especially the combination of drawn and parametric masks. Getting those the way you want isnât always that easy.
