Rawtherapee tutorials

Rawtherapee tutorials

Please note that the recent game-changer tutorials are only available on the rawpedia.pixls.us link and not on the rawpedia.rawtherapee.com link.
The rawpedia.pixls.us entry not only contains the tutorials which have already been posted on this forum but also a summary of the guiding principles for the new workflow, which can be broken down into four main steps:

  1. Raw data optimization ;
  2. Equalization and pre-tone mapping ;
  3. Tonal contrast adjustments and output tone mapping ;
  4. Color adjustments taking into account scene and viewing lighting conditions.

@Lawrence37 : Can you take this information into account for the 5.13 update?
@patdavid : Can we hope for clarification from the websites?
Thank you both.

Complicated or complex: a few additional comments
What is complicated refers to what is difficult to understand unless you are an expert in the field. A complicated project can be accomplished by breaking it down into clearly defined tasks and functions. There is a clear cause-and-effect relationship. In a complicated world, there is a standard, a plan, a reference point - something that serves as proof and allows us to distinguish between truth and falsehood. For example, in Rawtherapee, the graphical user interface (GUI) tools can seem complicated because they are often scattered throughout the interface, numerous, and use names unfamiliar to users (e.g., Wavelets, Retinex, etc.).

Complexity refers to a system whose behavior is more or less unpredictable because the nature of the multiple interactions between the system’s elements lacks stable cause-and-effect relationships. In RawTherapee and other software, this means attempting to solve a problem where the number of unknowns is greater than the number of equations: there are almost infinitely many solutions, which depend on numerous, more or less interdependent factors. These include the nature of the image (landscape, portrait, etc.), shooting conditions, the type of photographic equipment, the photographer’s skills, the developer’s skills, and so on. Faced with this diversity, the tools react differently, and the expected results are not always achieved.

The thread ā€˜It’s not complicated…’ provides an overview of the concept of ā€˜complicated’. Other free software has reduced the ā€˜complicated’ aspect, but has it reduced complexity?
It’s not complicated

I will try in a few lines to present in a little more detail the foundations of ā€˜Game changer’ and the choices I made. In other words, how to reduce complexity in Rawtherapee (these choices for dealing with complexity stem from systems thinking - systemic).

The tools of photographic systems.

Rawtherapee’s ā€˜Competitors’ Software:

In Rawtherapee’s ā€˜competitors’ software, the concepts of ā€˜linear’, ā€˜Scene Referred’, and ā€˜Display Referred’ are used; ā€˜Lab’ is rarely used. Associated tools are often ā€˜Filmic’, ā€˜Sigmoid’, and ā€˜AgX’, typically located towards the end of the process and frequently utilizing primaries.
This introduction is not intended to be ā€˜good’ or ā€˜bad’ but rather to establish a vocabulary and some principles familiar to users.

The RawTherapee System:
RawTherapee uses slightly different principles:

Rather than using ā€˜Scene Referred’, RT uses the concept of ā€˜Sensor Referred’, and instead of ā€˜Display Referred’, the term ā€˜Viewing Conditions’ (associated with ā€˜Scene Conditions’) is preferred.

ā€˜Sensor Referred’ encompasses the entire Raw process and virtually all the parts of the process (whose order is fixed in the pipeline) that take place in the ā€˜Working Profile’. In ā€˜Sensor Referred’, RGB, XYZ, and Lab data can coexist. It is in this area that ā€˜White Point’ and ā€˜Black Point’ are calculated, just before being used, and the data range is limited to the dimensions of the ā€˜Working Profile’. It is also in ā€˜Sensor Referred’ that the color gamut is compressed to make it compatible with the output profile. The general principle is to perform ā€˜White Balance’ and ā€˜Pre-tone Mapping’ as early as possible in the pipeline to ensure long-term data accuracy. These actions and principles are possible because all calculations are performed with real numbers in single or double precision.

Only then, at the end of the ā€˜Sensor Reffrered’ process, are the contrasts, local contrast, and colors fine-tuned to achieve a visually appealing image. It is at the very end – ā€˜CIECAM’ is recommended for this task – that the colorimetry is fine-tuned to adapt it to the ā€˜viewing’ and ā€˜scene’ conditions. Indicators for gamut overshoot and/or saturation allow the user to make any necessary adjustments to the initial settings. This step is the final one before converting the profiles to the output (screen, printer, TIF/JPG files).

Jacques

10 Likes

Could you elaborate on what you want me to do for 5.13?

@Lawrence37

I think update 5.13 should also take into account the evolution of the documentation.

Currently, it references the old Wiki-based documentation, which is no longer being updated.

Two possible options for the Rawtherapee website (my proposals are only a framework for reflection; of course, the syntax, titles, etc., can be changed.)

  1. Leave the documentation link and lead to a selection :
  • New documentation using Hugo, which can be updated with Pull Request by experienced users. This documentation is currently almost complete in English and includes tutorials.

  • Build Hugo RawPedia

  • RawPedia Hugo

  • Old RawPedia (Wiki) documentation maintained for compatibility reasons, as not all translations for Hugo have been completed or validated yet.

  • RawPedia Wiki

  1. Put two links on the Rawtherapee website page, instead of just one.

Other opinions.

I think we would like to take down mediawiki as soon as you all feel that the Hugo site is ready.

2 Likes

Is the plan to make rawpedia.rawtherapee.com point to the new documentation? If so, I think it would be better to just leave the links in 5.13 to avoid adding a new link that may or may not exist after the new documentation takes over.

@Lawrence37

I don’t know…That’s why I’m providing this dual link.

Currently, Rawpedia-Hugo is working correctly and is ā€˜complete’, except for the translations.

@patdavid
@paperdigits

Yes. That is the plan.

If I might make a suggestion, the Game Changer page might be more approachable to newcomers if it is broken up into several smaller pages, and reordered somewhat.

Gamechanger is announced under the ā€œTutorialā€ heading on the main page. We might expect it to be one of the first places a new user would visit. What they will see first is many screens of detailed discussions of recommended tools. These discussions often assume the reader will already be familiar with the old tools, and sometimes also the new tools. Someone looking for a tutorial is perhaps not likely to have that knowledge already.

The actual tutorials are on the same page, but aren’t even announced until the reader has scrolled through a lot of technical discussion.

Could the Gamechanger section start with a listing of the tutorials (each presented on a different page), with the extended discussion offered as something to be considered afterwards? Inverting the order might increase the chance that the reader understands the details being presented well enough to follow along.

Just a suggestion from RawTherapee fan!

6 Likes

@plantarum

First of all, thank you.

I appreciate these kinds of suggestions, which show your interest in the tutorials I’ve created, which represents a very large amount of personal work

I’ll see what I can do to place the tutorials’ ā€œmenuā€ at the beginning. The comments will appear afterward.

However, unless Hugo has features I’m unaware of, it will be difficult to put the tutorials on separate pages. I’m not saying it’s impossible, but it seems difficult to me (at least with my current knowledge).

Hugo’s principle is to create pages linked by hyperlinks from a main section. Here, it’s ā€˜Tutorials > Game changer’. The ā€˜rank’ of each title determines its position in the ā€˜Table of Contents’. Everything is grouped in a single ā€˜index.md’ file (of course, the images are separate). These ā€˜index.md’ files serve as the basis for the translations. Therefore, significantly altering the ā€˜index.md’ file or splitting it into multiple parts will create portability issues and complicate the translation process.

Your observation also applies to all tools and tabs with numerous fields, for example, ā€˜Selective Editing > Local Adjustments,’ which is a monster that is difficult to maintain and read.

Your remark - which is more than relevant - also highlights the limitations of documentation tools. For example, if we don’t know that a section exists, we can’t perform a query to find it.

Thank you again.

Jacques

Hello

I just push a change

Game changer - Tutorials

Jacques

1 Like

Hi Jacques,

RawTherapee does indeed support dividing content into sections like this!

I’ve have done a little experimenting on the repository, with the following results:

Editing index.html I replace the tutorial section with one link:

This goes to a page listing the various pages in the section:

And then each ā€˜section’ of the original long page can have its own address:

Doing this properly will require a bit more work, but it’s certainly possible.

The code for this is here:

I’d be happy to help with this kind of reformatting, but I will be quite busy for the next few weeks and may not have more time until later in June or July.

  • tyler

I’d hate for the RawPedia wiki site to be abandoned. I don’t necessarily need tutorials, sometimes I just need a simple explanation of what a tool does. This is something that the wiki does really well. That said, I haven’t regularly referenced it in quite some time because I’ve been able to somewhat master the tools that I use all the time. The tutorials are also a welcome addition, and I can imagine a new user a new user being able to gain a lot of information that way. Is there a reason why the wiki site isn’t being updated regularly, even to document changes to each new version? Are volunteers needed for this purpose? If so, I would be more than happy to contribute this way. I’ve been using RT for about eight years now and I believe I have a sufficient grasp of it.

1 Like

We’ve migrated all the content out of the mediawiki into a hugo static site. This is much easier to host and admin. I hope the github workflow will encourage more participation.

Nothing is being lost, just the backend tooling is changing.

@plantarum

I see you’re using GitHub, so there shouldn’t be any problem with you creating pull requests. What I see in the code is a ā€˜rewrite of the principles’ I was given (only use index.md). I have no idea how relevant it is, because whether it’s C++ or Hugo code, I’m (almost) hopeless… My expertise lies in science and algorithms. What’s certain is that this will cause a problem for the actors who have (perhaps?) started the translation.

@paperdigits @patdavid , what do you think?

@Rick
I think, but others may disagree, that we should keep both (Wiki and Hugo) until the translations are done. This implies that Hugo needs to have its links and image (for each language) references reviewed (a very important task, since I did it for all the ā€˜new’ features). However, I don’t think it’s a good idea to update the Wiki.

What is highly desirable is that every potential user of Rawtherapee and its documentation knows that both versions exist - with their references. Otherwise, as things stand, users will only see the Wiki version. I have no idea how long it will take to translate Hugo, but what I’m seeing is that there’s no rush. @Lawrence37 if we don’t put anything on the Rawtherapee website, we risk this lack of awareness for an indefinite period (6 months, a year, more…). What alternative is there other than word of mouth?

One very important point: relying solely on me for updates (currently, I’ve made 95% of the changes) is very risky and problematic. I’m old (nearing 80) and in poor health. It would be wise to allow others to approve pull requests.

Thank you all for your suggestions

Jacques

The pages that were translated in mediawiki are also in Hugo, I don’t think we have lost anything. Translations are just not turned on in Hugo as far as I know.

1 Like

Hi, I don’t have expertise in anything technical (only started with RT and photography recently; my last winter self dev project), but I have a career worth of university education/pedagogy (recently retired) that I would be willing to use… Is this the sort of participation the tutorials/GitHub workflows need?

Also, @plantarum makes good points regarding learning for newbies and tutorials… Personally I like the technical stuff; there of course is no one size fits all… For every student I taught there was a different way to present the topic.

I’ve also learnt a great deal about using RT from other RT users, not least @Rick and others by diffusion of ideas & their posts and pp3 files. Again, that’s not the only way to learn…but it’s valuable.

And finally the work, so often behind the scenes, of @jdc and @Lawrence37 is phenomenal… If I could give back in anyway for the help I’ve received, I’d be pleased to.

1 Like

@plantarum

I tested your version of Rawpedia.

Indeed, it works… We do have 3 separate tutorials.

However:

  • The other tutorial (Rawtherapee Process Challenge) has disappeared…
  • The images are no longer referenced, but it’s ā€˜easy’ to recreate them.
  • Many links and sections have disappeared (principles, recommendations, etc.) or are dead ends… In principle, it seems to work, but a significant amount of work remains.

Thank you for this forward-thinking work, which is a step forward.
:grinning:

Jacques

@paperdigits

Of course, everything has been imported, that’s undeniable. And you did an excellent job, a big thank you to you and Pat, otherwise we wouldn’t be here. :grinning:

However, the images are rarely displayed (due in some cases to capitalization issues with RawPedia Wiki, or because they are in a inappropriate folder…), and the links are erratic. And obviously, there’s no table of contents.
No insurmountable difficulties, but still a significant amount of work.

Then there’s the matter of the new sections added since the end of RawPedia Wiki (for example, Game Changer, but there are others). In this case, apart from the translation, it shouldn’t pose any problems… except for doing it. :wink:

Thanks again

Jacques

Yes of course! I had a few minutes to do some experimenting, I only wanted to see if it was possible to structure the files how I suggested. It will take a bit more time to clean it up and complete the switch. If that seems acceptable I can continue. I will be very busy over the next month, so I won’t promise to finish until July.

@plantarum

In principle, I agree… but I’m not the only one who gets to decide ( I am not ā€˜the boss’ :wink:)

If someone has already started a translation, this will disrupt their work. Furthermore, I have no information about who is doing what with the translations.

The deadline is another issue.

Thank you.