Improvement Suggestions

[martinus]

I have been trying to move from Capture One to DarkTable. And while I love many of the features. (LUTs are wonderful, denoise (profiled) and many others). I am struggling a lot with some of the approaches DarkTable took.

I have watched a lot of videos on DarkTable, many of them really good and informative once. But I want to share a couple of things that can be improved. I have two major feedback points. (PS. I have also posted this on redit (see https://www.reddit.com/r/DarkTable/comments/1j52wcl/moving_to_darktable/) And got the suggestion to post it here as well)

1. There are so many ways to do the same thing.

There are many tools to sharpen an image, or denies, or adjust color. I don’t mind a learning curve, But it feels like often just like a bunch of modules thrown together. I do understand that people would like control. But in the module department it could use a bit more thoughtful ui.

More is not always better… More is often also more confusing. The number of video’s I came across see ‘3 ways to do X in DarkTable’ shows that it maybe a bit time to do some consolidation of the modules.

And maybe… just take a look again to some of the sliders… sometimes sliders can go from so far (say between 1 and 100) that it rediculius (1 - 10 is more then enough)

2. Mask.

Yes, masking is powerful in DarkTable! And I really like that almost all the tools can work with a mask. That is powerful. And parametric masking is genius.

The Brush mask on the other hand is a disaster. Where are tools like ‘Magic Wand’? (I would assume that a vector based brush is easier from a developer perspective is much easier. But for a user… well it very very cumbersome)

And also the workflow is a cumbersome. IMHO it would make mush more sense to just create a layer (mask) (and hide all the underlying brush strokes in the UI) like in Photoshop, Capture One etc, and apply tools on each mask. It makes the UI much easier to comprehend.

In the type of photography it do, (wild life) often you want to select the background on the image and use a different noise reduction or blur method then on the foreground. But often - the colors are not that different so a parametric masking is not working…

I do understand that AI masking (like subject detection) as you see nowadays in many commercial tools is hard to build. But it would really be a much easier…

[Mike_Bing]

@martinus

There are many tools to sharpen an image, or denies, or adjust color.

I can only assume different people like different tools. My solution was to move the tools I know best and use most of the time to my quick access panel so I have all of my custom configuration tools together whereas I still retain access to the stuff I seldom use. I feel good to have more ways to resolve an issue and being able to “graduate” form a simpler module to a more complex can be reqrding.

[europlatus]

Hi @Martinus, welcome to the community.

@martinus

1. There are so many ways to do the same thing.

Yes there are, but try to think of Darktable more as a toolbox than software with a set workflow. The idea is to provide you with tools and options, and you then create your own workflow. There are lots of ways to do the same thing, but you can ignore the ways that don’t suit your way of working. I don’t think there is any appetite from the devs to take away options that work.

@martinus

The Brush mask on the other hand is a disaster.

This is just your opinion. In fact, the brush tool works very well. I think what you are saying is that you want Darktable’s tools to more closely match what you are used to. But please remember that this is different for everybody. There are many users of Darktable that are very happy with the current tools. Improvements can be made of course, but you need to create a proper feature request with constructive suggestions.

@martinus

In the type of photography it do, (wild life) often you want to select the background on the image and use a different noise reduction or blur method then on the foreground. But often - the colors are not that different so a parametric masking is not working…

You can mask based on tonal differences, hue differences, saturation differences, frequency separation, details, drawn masks, color channels… and the great thing is you can combine them all to further refine your mask. Maybe you just need to learn how to do these things?

[martinus]

@europlatus

Yes there are, but try to think of Darktable more as a toolbox than software with a set workflow.

Yes I know, but that comes with an incredible steep learning curse (which is ok). And I do like that these options are there. But sometimes a toolbox grows and grows and grows…

@europlatus

This is just your opinion. In fact, the brush tool works very well. I think what you are saying is that you want Darktable’s tools to more closely match what you are used to. But please remember that this is different for everybody. There are many users of Darktable that are very happy with the current tools. Improvements can be made of course, but you need to create a proper feature request with constructive suggestions.

I agree, it is an opinion. And yes I have a certain user bias because I come from a different program. But that many DarkTable users are happy - is also user bias. Maybe the tools from other tools are easier and more effective than in DarkTable but the current don’t know that because they have not used them.

@europlatus

You can mask based on tonal differences, hue differences, saturation differences, frequency separation, details, drawn masks, color channels… and the great thing is you can combine them all to further refine your mask. Maybe you just need to learn how to do these things?

Exactly… It is possible… but what you describe is rather cumbersome and overwhelming. And yes I need to learn. And I am willing. I am not attacking… It are suggestions. But that it can be done, doesn’t mean that an other approach could be easier and just as effective…

[Pascal_Obry]

@martinus

Yes I know, but that comes with an incredible steep learning curse (which is ok).

No, just use the default tools presented in the default panels. Most of them are hidden.

[martinus]

I’m sorry… I simply don’t agree. The default panels include masking…

Compared with a simple (but effective) magic wand / lasso / subject select tool (whatever you want to call it), which takes me 5 or less minutes to figure out how to use it. And maybe it is me… but I can’t figure out masking in DarkTable in 5 minutes… And I can’t image I am the only one…

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t say that DarkTable is bad or so, actually it is a great tool! But the time to get things done is also important. So hence my suggestion.

[Pascal_Obry]

I was responding to a comment from your first point (too many modules).

[martinus]

A oke, I understand. Yes, I think I actually started with the beginner workspace…

[priort (Todd Prior)]

Welcome to the group …you keep coming back to layers and brushes…in FOSS that is the domain of GIMP maybe Krita or Inkscape depending on what you want…you can use multiple instances and masking in DT a bit like layers but its not a raster editor is one thing to keep in mind it is first and foremost a raw image developer… it can be integrated with GIMP or Affinity photo and other software that does do that sort of selection and masking but that is not the basis of the design of DT…

[europlatus]

@martinus

Exactly… It is possible… but what you describe is rather cumbersome and overwhelming. And yes I need to learn. And I am willing. I am not attacking… It are suggestions. But that it can be done, doesn’t mean that an other approach could be easier and just as effective…

It can feel overwhelming for sure, but after time it can become like second nature. You might also be pleased to know that someone is working on an AI-based tool for masking. I think it’s still fairly far off from being integrated, but we might get to see it in the future.

[EspE1]

@martinus

I think I actually started with the beginner workspace…

Hi, martinus, and welcome to the forum.

What you say here, if I understand you correctly, I also think this is a point that needs discussion. I have just thought about raising this as an issue, but do a follow-up here:

I understand you to mean that you have selected the modules section preset of “workflow: beginner”.

For some reason I cannot understand, (other than that the existence of this option has been overlooked in later revisions?), this option which naturally may seem enticing to beginners, leads towards the use of some legacy display-referred processing modules (rgb levels and rgb curve) - which are not in line with what we otherwise give advice on for modern dt usage.

So if new users start out from there, and so have to relearn to rather use a fully scene-referred set of tools, it is no wonder we get the kind of complains voiced in OP. (There are e.g. lesser alternatives under the color tab in workflow: display-referred, than under the beginner version …)

In my opinion the normal division of modules under the tabs in workflow: display-referred is not overwhelming and within a fairly reasonably understood framework. I don’t see what’s gained from omitting the correction tab, and e.g moving the graduated density module from the effects tab (that still exist in the beginner version) and rather to the color tab.

Conclusion: Let’s just drop the “workflow: beginner”

[Donatzsky (Nis Donatzsky)]

Excuse us if the tone is a bit harsh, but you’re not the first confused beginner to think they know better…

@martinus

I am struggling a lot with some of the approaches DarkTable took.

The best advice I can give you here is to forget everything you know and embrace the darktable way. It’s clear that the issue here isn’t actually that darktable’s UI is inefficient (it mostly isn’t), but that you don’t understand it yet.

@martinus

I have watched a lot of videos on DarkTable, many of them really good and informative once.

Don’t know which you have watched, but there are a lot of not very good ones as well as outright outdated. With only a few exceptions, any video that’s based on a version before 3.2 or so should be ignored. And if it teaches curves or levels it’s probably also not something you should learn from at first, since they are effectively legacy tools with much more powerful alternatives.

The only channels I will not hesitate to recommend are the following:

• Boris Hajdukovic
  https://www.youtube.com/@s7habo
  No one knows darktable better than him.
• Bruce Williams
  https://youtube.com/@audio2u
  Has done a very good job of “annotating” the manual. He has a full series on masking that you should watch.
• Aurélien Pierre
  https://www.youtube.com/c/AurélienPIERREPhoto
  Former developer. Typically very technical videos.
• Darktable Landscapes
  https://www.youtube.com/@DarktableLandscapes
  His Lightroom background shows in places, but solid technique for the most part.

There are others, but they can be hit or miss, so start with those above.

This tutorial covers the editing fundamentals you must know (there are some important differences from Capture One) and shows you how to only see the “modern” modules:

[EN] basic photo processing for beginners in darktable 3.6

This old article could also help you to understand some of what is going on:

Darktable 3:RGB or Lab? Which Modules? Help!

@martinus

There are many tools to sharpen an image, or denies, or adjust color. I don’t mind a learning curve, But it feels like often just like a bunch of modules thrown together. I do understand that people would like control. But in the module department it could use a bit more thoughtful ui.

There’s a lot of “history”, certainly, but I assure you there’s sense to the madness.

@martinus

And maybe… just take a look again to some of the sliders… sometimes sliders can go from so far (say between 1 and 100) that it rediculius (1 - 10 is more then enough)

That depends on what the slider is for. So that doesn’t make any sense.

@martinus

Where are tools like ‘Magic Wand’?

You don’t need it. A common mistake among new users is to think that you need very precise masking. You don’t. Just roughly select the shape from inside and use feathering to fill it out.

@martinus

And also the workflow is a cumbersome. IMHO it would make mush more sense to just create a layer (mask) (and hide all the underlying brush strokes in the UI) like in Photoshop, Capture One etc, and apply tools on each mask.

Each module is already its own layer and they get applied to the image in the order they are shown (just like layers in Photoshop). What you describe would only complicate things, and, it seems to me, not even fit with how the darktable processing pipeline works. And once you have created a mask, you can easily reuse it in later modules.

@EspE1

Conclusion: Let’s just drop the “workflow: beginner”

Fully agree on that one. It only causes confusion.

[europlatus]

@EspE1

leads towards the use of some legacy display-referred processing modules (rgb levels and rgb curve) - which are not in line with what we otherwise give advice on for modern dt usage.

So if new users start out from there, and so have to relearn to rather use a fully scene-referred set of tools, it is no wonder we get the kind of complains voiced in OP.

Isn’t it because the modules included in the Beginner workflow are the most familiar to people coming from other commercial software? The more recommended modules in the scene-referred workflow are more daunting to beginners.

Everyone who has ever done any raw editing will be familiar with RGB Level and RGB Curves, but Tone EQ and Sigmoid not so much.

I’m not saying that the presets are all the best they can be, but I do think there’s some reasoning behind the current decisions.

[EspE1]

@europlatus

Everyone who has ever done any raw editing will be familiar with RGB Level and RGB Curves, but Tone EQ and Sigmoid not so much.

Well, sigmoid is included in the beginner preset …

And what you say may have something for it, but then call the preset “converts” rather than “beginners”, because there are some of us that start with darktable from scratch …

What I also wonder about is whether it could be a point to have a preset for people who come for editing jpegs and other pre-processed files, where both tone mappers are removed and the display-referred modules ought to be given prominence.

[raublekick (Andrew Raub)]

Darktable is definitely overwhelming at first, and the amount of tools can be overwhelming. However, you really only need a handful of them and many of them can be multipurpose. You can even customize the UI to organize and only show the modules you care about.

I don’t think anything should be removed necessarily, but some modules should certainly be de-emphasized. For example both the velvia and the vignetting modules’ documentation discourages using those modules in favor of other modules. But within the app itself, this isn’t evident.

I think what makes darktable overwhelming at first is that it really is a toolbox full of tools. A hammer can drive a nail, pry a nail, knock things together or apart, it’s not just for a specific singular use. Other RAW developer applications tend to abstract these tools away into a more outcome-focused set of tools. The contrast sliders in Lightroom are a good example (Contrast, Texture, Clarity, Dehaze). Those are designed for specific outcomes, but behind the scenes they are probably employing similar tools as the diffuse & sharpen module in darktable. Just like darktable is very opinionated in some ways, those types of tools are also very opinionated in the opposite direction. You don’t need to understand what it’s doing and you have no control over it other than applying more or less.

[paperdigits (Mica)]

@europlatus

I don’t think there is any appetite from the devs to take away options that work.

There isn’t the appetite from the users to take away any modules. They can be hidden or removed from the panel, and that is about the best that can be done. Every time a module is deprecated (not even removed, just depreciated) the people who use that module come out of the woodwork. Just the other day on mastodon, someone was wincing about the levels modules… So breaking peoples edits is generally thought of as bad, so module removal doesn’t really happen.

@EspE1

What I also wonder about is whether it could be a point to have a preset for people who come for editing jpegs and other pre-processed files, where both tone mappers are removed and the display-referred modules ought to be given prominence.

This has been discussed many times, “who do we cater to?” and we never reach a good answer. I think darktable is the result of people making a tool for themselves and others who participate. If it were my decision, I’d have the displayed referred tools and a few other necessary modules, and hide everything else. Present something opinionated and promote the latest features we have. I think that is our strength.

[EspE1]

@paperdigits

If it were my decision, I’d have the displayed referred tools and a few other necessary modules, and hide everything else. Present something opinionated and promote the latest features we have. I think that is our strength.

I guess you really mean “scene referred”, – and I totally agree. We should now go for the core in what’s visible for new users.

But many of us may wobble our way towards good working methods, and one of the issues we may grapple with is how do we process jpgs, that many have a number of besides any raws. It may take some time to fully realize the differences in what these files are, and the consequences for how to approach their processing. And in that period a particular Jpeg “dashboard” might be a help.

[europlatus]

@raublekick

The contrast sliders in Lightroom are a good example (Contrast, Texture, Clarity, Dehaze). Those are designed for specific outcomes, but behind the scenes they are probably employing similar tools as the diffuse & sharpen module in darktable. Just like darktable is very opinionated in some ways, those types of tools are also very opinionated in the opposite direction. You don’t need to understand what it’s doing and you have no control over it other than applying more or less.

I would very much be in favour of labelling that makes it clear what the outcome/effect is, rather than the technical name for what the slider is doing. To me, it’s much more user-friendly to have a “dehaze” slider than it is to have “1st order speed” and “central radius” sliders. But I also recognize that a module like Diffuse or Sharpen can’t really have a “dehaze” slider (in its current form) because of the way it works. You need to twiddle about 5 sliders to get the dehaze effect. But I think this module is a bit of an outlier; it’s just so much more complicated than anything else, and I would actually favour a complete interface overhaul for it so that most of the sliders were hidden.

I would also agree that Darktable could benefit from being a bit more “opinionated” and promote the recommended/essential modules. As long as the other modules can still be used by those who want to use them. The trouble is getting consensus on recommended and essential. The aforementioned Diffuse or Sharpen is a good example of a module I would hesitate to recommend because it’s so complex.

[paperdigits (Mica)]

@EspE1

I guess you really mean “scene referred”,

whoops, you are correct.

@EspE1

and one of the issues we may grapple with is how do we process jpgs

The modules to process jpges don’t have to change from processing raws, sans having a tone mapper active. Maybe they do for you and others, but when you’re editing in dt, you’re editing in linear space, no matter if its a jpeg or not.

@europlatus

The trouble is getting consensus on recommended and essential.

I’d not get consensus, we’ve never had it and we’ll bikeshed forever. Just do it. As long as you can customize the tabs, then people will find their way to what they need.

[EspE1]

@europlatus

The aforementioned Diffuse or Sharpen is a good example of a module I would hesitate to recommend because it’s so complex.

That’s just so far as users haven’t been taught that the simplest way to get results from many of the dt modules, is just to select from presets.