(which I both prefer to Darktable for RAF file editing) and so on. Then we would need to have a fork for RawTherapee, one for LightZone Wouldn’t it be nice if we could just all get along…. It’s folly and perhaps a bit arrogant to assume that Users would willingly be hobbled by using only one program simply because they are “loyal” to that program. In the FOSS realm, digikam is an excellent Digital Asset Management program, darktable is, IMHO, the best Raw editor and GIMP is unparalleled for post-processing. Good at (DK is not a good raw processor and DT is not good for libraryįor the Developer’s benefit, I’d like to reiterate the above statement: digiKam is a brilliant program but please, let’s maintain the focus on where it is brilliant rather than trying to craft it into an all-singing-all-dancing piece of bloatware comprising relatively mediocre modules just for the sake of doing so. Their library, which DK is good at, and a way to process raw files, which DT is On, at 09:41, Juan Jose Casafranca wrote: Thanks Albrecht, that's exactly my opinion and the reason I want to develop this module :-) Original message -From: Juan Jose Casafranca Date: 8:29 AM (GMT-07:00) To: digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with the power of open source Cc: darktable-user Subject: Re: Digikam raw files and darktable Someone will have to maintain it though, new versions of both digikam and darktable come out pretty frequently. If it is not too complicated to replace libraw with darktable a fork could be not a bad idea. I agree 100% but digikam devs have their own point of view on how the program should look like and we need to respect it.
0 kommentar(er)
