The situation seems better in the case of darktable, as recently some support for local editing was added. The conclusion was more or less always the same: one would need a code rewrite for that. This brings us to the second key question that was rised here: why not to improve an existing tool (like rawtherapee, or darktable, or photivo) instead of starting yet another project from scratch? Personally I'm more familiar with rawtherapee, and I've followed a certain number of discussions on their forum about adding support for layers and local editing. My answer will start with another question: why do you use gimp if you have ratherapee? Now suppose you have a tool that combines rawtherapee and gimp in one single application, providing you direct, non-destructive, local editing of RAW images, based on layers and layer masks. That's the key question, and I guarantee that I've kept asking myself the same for a long while before deciding to start the project. HOWNTO USE PHOTOFLOW SOFTWAREI'll start from the fundamental question raised by m0gg: "why would I use your software instead of let's say Rawtherapee?". As the leading (and for the moment only) developer of this new tool, let me try to answer at least to part of the questions and objections raised here. Hello, and thanks a lot for all the comments and interest about photoflow. I developed an algorithm central to my workflow that doesn't fit into existing editors' pipelines and essentially requires raw input (linear gamma), so I had to create a new editor around it. Of course, this is me speaking as someone currently writing a new photo processing application. That's why new projects pop up and supersede the old ones, dropping unnecessary and obsolete features on the way and having more polished UI's. It's often difficult to remove features from a FOSS program without a big rewrite. HOWNTO USE PHOTOFLOW PROAnd they have UI quirks that are irritating to big-time users like pro photographers: my pet peeve is when scrolling in to zoom never keeps the mouse over the same location in the image. In most editors' cases (not PhotoFlow, apparently), it's impossible for a casual user to know the order in which the tools are applied. The tool lists are enormous and don't provide much indication of what they do for photographs. The existing photo editors are enough for the average Joe, but they're far from streamlined.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |