Could be but there are tools to evaluate quality.
So something like a VMAF-scored noise reduction hierarchy? Hmm. How large is the parameter space that has to be sampled for one noise reduction algorithm? And after that a ‘best parameter’ competetion between algos? Interesting.
That is a conversation for another time and thread, and I am mostly definitely not the person to speak to on such matters. 
I don’t know if this is the right place, but to me neither sharpening nor noise reduction is necessary for Filmulator. If you add sharpening, you must add noise reduction because without NR sharpening is useless. But other programs can do this job in a wide variety, so why adding it?
Filmulator is small, fast and simple and mainly does what I would expect from a raw converter, particularly producing images that are perfect for working on.
Nevertheless, the developed images need a final retouch in Gimp or maybe another program. It would thus be great to have an option to open the final image directly in Gimp as Tiff. Perhaps you could borrow it from darktable or RawTherapee?
Futhermore, a colour picker for White Balance would be very helpful because adjusting WB by sliders is very inconvenient and error-prone.
And it would be great if the Exif informations would be handed over…
Hmm, an “open in external editor”, with a command set in the Settings tab?
color picker
I’ll have to think about how to implement this, but it should be doable.
That’s a deficiency in Filmulator’s TIFF handling at the moment. Before I was just copying over all the EXIF data, but it was bringing thumbnails and such along with it and GIMP would refuse to open them, so I omit the EXIF data.
Is only having basic exif data written okay with you? Camera make model, timestamp, exposure parameters, and focal length, basically?
Could you strip the previews and keep the rest?
If I knew how…
If anyone can help, I certainly would. I’d like to generate new thumbnails for the JPEG too.
Yes, open in external editor would be great. And it would be completely sufficient to have camera make model, timestamp, exposure parameters, and focal length in the Exif!
In rawproc I made a dialog window into which I load the output of exiftool. Recently, I added a “grep” filter that removes all lines not containing the filter text. Not too hard to do, and quite useful.
In wxwidgets I subclassed the list control; should be able to do something similar in Qt. Beauty of the scheme is the user can change it to use any exif command line program, e.g., exiv2…
I did some testing, and just restored copying all the data over for tiff. It works in GIMP (select the first page) and in RawTherapee.
I’ll try to upload a new build tomorrow.
Great! Will be happy to test.
Just a small thing (but perhaps not that small to code…):
I noticed that Filmulator resizes the app window always to the same size when restarted, regardless of what dimensions (e.g. fullscreen) I chose before. The same applies for the size of the queue. Is ist possible that it keeps these settings for the next start?
And, to expand the wishlist for the future: When opening filmulator with several images from explorer/digikam, for each image a new instance of filmulator is started. Is it possible to start only one instance and import all images in this one?
I think remembering the window size and state should be doable.
As for additional imports being enqueued in the existing editor… I need to do some research. It’s probably a good idea to do this but I need to figure out how.
Great! Concerning the size there is a work-around in the Windows system but perhaps not for other systems, it would thus be good to have it in the app.
Thank you in advance!
Because a workflow using different programs is not universally liked. Some people are fine with using a separate DAM, raw developer, stitcher, retoucher, print app and more besides for one photo. Others like to do as much as they can in just one program. It’s a personal preference and I guess it ultimately comes down to what the developer prefers.
@europlatus Well, it was a rhetorical question of course.
Nevertheless, there are so many varieties of all-in-one attempts on the market, FOSS and commercial, so that it seems to be wiser, not to start the next attempt but to concentrate on the developing process.
I know it’s not a popular opinion, but I agree with this.
With all the AI stuff, there are a lot of specialty programs popping up all over the place. You never will get the best denoising to sticking with one program, never the best sharpening with sticking to one program, etc…
For software developed in spare time, you’ll never be able to make every feature good enough to compete with those programs. I’d rather see workflow and support going into making sure input and output from and to those programs is as seamless as possible. DNG input, Linear tiff input, Linear tiff output, open from the command-line, export-and-run-program-with-output. Stuff like that can make the workflow much more fluid while still keeping the strengths of all the programs.
If you keep building features, you’ll eventually end up with something like Darktable or Rawtherapee… which is fine… but do you want to compete with those? Filmulator now has a unique exposure algorithm (that is getting competition from things like filmic in Darktable :)), that is it strength. Make it so that it plugs as seamless as possible in other programs will get a lot of people happy I think.
But it’s also CarVac’s own personal project, he can steer it whatever way he wants to go. Be it as hobby or as a tool he personally needs :).
1 Like
Seamless interoperation is fine by me as long as it doesn’t compromise the user interface that I use. I just need to figure things out and develop the features over time.
Developing rawproc with the unix “one tool to do one job well” philosophy has worked well for me. rawproc has no “dam” in the name; ‘damn’ is only an adjective to stick in front of the name when it crashes… 
When I’m working images on my Ubuntu desktop computer, I use geeqie on top of the filesystem to do DAM, then drag images I want to work to a rawproc desktop icon. When I’m working on my Windows tablet, I just use the Windows File Explorer in the same manner. I have a SMB share to my Ubuntu home directory, so I can even open images from there in the same manner.
Now, that takes a certain familiarity with file systems, networking, and such, which apparently they don’t teach in grade school… 
It’s not that I disagree, but I think it might be a barrier to adoption. Many users want a replacement for their current all-in-one software and/or will try out Filmulator and wonder why it doesn’t have some of the features that more well-known or commercial software has. Now, this might not be a bad thing, and @CarVac might not necessarily want to be attracting lots of users. But I thought it was worth pointing out. Users on this forum, as enthusiasts, are probably fine with more of the dedicated tool approach. But the more casual Windows/Mac crowd, maybe not so much.
depends what the tool does and if it performs…
you don’t see people asking Topaz for ‘lens correction’ or ‘vignette correction’ in Topaz AI Denoise or AI Sharpen… those are tools with a purpose and they do it (well, that’s another discussion) and people accept them for it.
Still, let CarVac see where it takes him :).