Rawtherapee Documentation V2.3 links aren't working


I tried downloading the Rawtherapee Documentation V2.3 User Manual for my personal use but the links don’t work. All they say is,

"The requested module could not be found!

Please feel free to contact us on the link in the footer."

Is this a bug or isn’t the document uploaded yet? Someone, please help me out.

Also, I find the rawpedia really complex to understand and a little high for my understanding. I also assume it would be the same for many others. Is there any chance I can get a User manual with simple and understandable language? The lack of a good User manual for rawtherapee is making so many people think that the software is very complex.

Thank you.

Thanks for reporting, please paste a link to the page which links to the 2.3 documentation.


Here it is. The link is automatically redirected to this page.

No, I asked where did you find the link to RAWTherapeeManual_2.3.pdf, in other words paste the link to the page which links to RAWTherapeeManual_2.3.pdf.


Thank you.

Obsolete documents can be found in:

Thank you. Is anyone working on a User Manual with simple and understandable language though? It is tough for me to understand rawpedia.

If you can post here an entry which is not clear to you, you will surely receive some help.
This seems to me to be a more viable option than a complete re-write of the entire document.

1 Like

I’m finding it tough to understand this thread :rofl: (joking)

Seriously, @Tarun are you using RT version 2.3? Oldest version of RT for download seems to be 2.4.1 ( https://rawtherapee.com/blog/list/3) and only made available by demand of users?
Yet you refer to RawPedia where the pages can be viewed or downloaded as a PDF and which is dated 9 June 2019 so bang up to date so probably doesn’t cover old versions like 2.3? certainly covers up to 5.5 and pretty sure much if not all of 5.6.

I agree the latest manual could cater more for non technical users but you can just skip the technical parts, I certainly do. Ideally, an enthusiastic non-technical RT user could write a plain language manual but that’s a tough (unpaid) assignment and I doubt many people have that much time on their hands :woozy_face:

As often said on here, you learn by doing, by experimenting, using the software. That’s what I try to do with occasional incursions into the “manual” where (and here on the forums) I never fully understand but usually get the drift or something rubs off and you get that eureka moment or a homer “doh!” moment :grinning:

1 Like

Haha @mannikon, I am using the latest version of RT. And I wanted to download the older user manual just to understand things a bit better. I believe that "Old is gold :stuck_out_tongue: ". Anyways I thought it would be easy to understand if I read the older manuals because they would have some simpler language maybe? :joy:. I downloaded rawpedia and will be reading it extensively once I am free. I am experimenting with the software though. One day I edited an image for a whole 5 hours to get the desired results. The thing that is complicated for me is the number of options I have. I don’t know what wavelets do. I know it is related to sharpness but don’t exactly know how it affects the picture. I looked into rawpedia but the description went above my head. It was full of maths. And guess who failed in maths? :rofl:

1 Like

Just keep asking questions!

Wavelets are not unique to RT. They’re in a lot of applications. It let’s you work on an image in layers of sharpness, more or less. So for wavelet contrast, you can add more local contrast to a specific sharpness (the 1-7 scales). For textures, this is amazing.

1 Like

Love to know if those editor comments (?) on Wavelets page are meant to be public?

((this whole paragraph needs rewriting, I can’t make interesting/useful sense of it))
((what does this mean really, of what use to the user is this?))
((can’t make sense of this))
and much more in the same vein :joy::joy:

Where is that?


Thanks! ping @Morgan_Hardwood

Documentation is always a work in progress!

Well, the wavelet tool is a really complex tool in it’s innards, so no wonder it creates quite a few doubts to anybody trying to explain it to plain users.

That page is really, really old. It was written in 2014 and the tool itself has been heavily rewritten in the meantime, if I’m right.

I’m currently writing a new, updated version, but as it’s been said it’s a tough work, so don’t expect it to be finished in a near future (currently it’s about 80% finished).

Oh! And don’t forget it’s an advanced tool, so it’s nowhere near a simple slider tool.

On the other hand, if anybody feels he/she can write a better version of some part of the documentation, I bet @Morgan_Hardwood would be more than pleased that you send him the improved text.

@XavAL - would not disagree with anything you wrote, just struck me as humorous because I read the comments on that page in an Arnold Scwarzenegger voice as per Morgan’s avatar. I did send a revised text to Morgan but he hasn’t responded. Like most non-coder/compiler users of RT and other FOSS I have huge admiration for the work that goes in and happy to support in any way I can. including (if allowed to) correcting simple wiki text errors which might ease the workload of others.

1 Like