Hi Tony,
totally agree with your comments about LR and lack of support and
attempts by Adobe to force you into subscription. When I refer to
professional photographers I am referring to the fact that some
photographers such as studio and wedding photographers need a
streamlined workflow to manage, edit and print photographs. LR does this
incredibly well and I have found no free or opensource program that
replicates LR. Now if you were a professional landscape photographer LR may
be less suitable to your processing needs. You want to work just a few
images to create masterpieces suitable for framing and selling in
galleries. DT and other programs including PS and GIMP come into play here.
BTW, I use LR to organise and keyword my images. I have chosen to organise
my images into folders based on date. LR is so good at this. But date is
not much help when I want to find an image based on subject matter. This is
where keywords come in and LR is also good at that. I have multiple screens
for editing so I may have LR opened on one to locate an image and then have
DT opened on another and direct the DT import function to the folder I have
located in LR. Sounds convoluted but actually works really easy.
As for your challenges working with GIMP, feel free to directly reach
out to me by email as I really love GIMP over PhotoShop. I have both
because of my work and always go for GIMP over Photoshop. The programs are
very similar in how they work and are used, but sometimes PS users notice
the differences more than the similarities and get lost and frustrated in
the switching over to GIMP.
On Sun, 28 Jun 2020 at 09:35, tony Hamilton <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Hi Terry,
>
> Thanks for your observations. Please understand that the words
> 'professional' and 'photographer' are orthogonal to my current life skills:
> I stopped going to work 25 years ago; I have 61 times 1 year's worth of
> experience being a picture taker, as distinct to a photographer, but I do
> have some 10's of thousands of images (and sounds) in digital, chemical and
> printed form. DAM is damned important to me: I've got to get it all bundled
> up to hand over to the next generation, preferably at least a few
> milliseconds before they become the current generation.
>
> I also made the choice to move away from a big, heavy DSLR to a simpler,
> smaller, lighter mirror-less camera with good glass: Fuji X-series. I
> didn't realise at the time that Lr was going to be a): a con-job by
> freezing support for a licensed product I had paid for and b): really
> terrible at handling the Fuji X-Trans sensor.
>
> That encapsulates the challenge I face: find a replacement to Lr that
> removes Adobe's oppressive foot from my neck, is an effective raw processor
> and will protect my investment in photo assets (all of which are slowly
> being converted to digital). Having looked at (in varying levels of detail)
> the front runner raw processor replacements to Lr it became clear to me
> that none of them provided adequate DAM capability (and that's not even
> considering the audio assets I have).
>
> The clear front runner DAM is iMatch but it is almost overkill for my
> needs, is relatively expensive and is Windows only. It also doesn't do the
> 'ingesting' tasks all that well: I was hoping that one of the better
> raw-processor candidates - DT - would address that issue, so I spent a long
> time trying to understand the import features of DT and how it would
> integrate with iMatch. As you may have seen from my posts here, it was/is a
> painful experience.
>
> Many far more experienced and knowledgeable people than me comment how
> good a raw processor DT is, so I want to go with it but need a better
> import front end (import is most definitely not DAM - a part of it maybe,
> but only a minor part). The front runner for this role is Rapid Photo
> Downloader, but it is Linux only.
>
> So I might just stay with Lr 6 for the import/ingest/file rename functions
> and also for the wider DAM functions built around the catalog, such as
> keywords, flags, labels, ratings, collections, versioning, stacking,
> exporting, printing etc and hope to do the raw processing in DT plus
> Gimphoto, if I can get it to work with DT (I haven't been able to get to
> grips with Gimp because it looks and feels so different to PS; I'm hoping
> Gimphoto will address this).
>
> The fall back plan is to use PhotoMechanic or Fast Stone Image Viewer or
> XnView-MP for the front end functions, DigiKam for the main-stream DAM
> functions and DT + Gimphoto or PS for the raw processor functions, assuming
> I can cobble together a reasonable work flow out of this. It would be oh so
> nice if there were an effective DAM with DT as a preferred 'plug-in'.
>
> Time is the constraint - I can no longer put in 18 hour days on this task,
> so I'd better stop here and get back to not-work.
> On 27/06/2020 00:15, Terry Pinfold wrote:
>
> Hi Tony,
> I teach photography and imaging classes. I promote GIMP as a free
> alternative to Photoshop because it does 99% of what photoshop does, is
> free and in my opinion is nicer to work with. I do not promote DT as a LR
> alternative because in my opinion it is not. LR is a program designed by
> Adobe for professional photographers. Lr manages the
> digital assets (images) so well. I personally use keywords, but it also
> offers rating systems, collections and can search metadata. The second side
> to LR is fundamental editing of images including Raw images. The editing
> ability of LR is sufficient for the average studio or wedding photographer
> that needs to do some final tweaks before presenting the image to the
> customer. LR is a beautiful professional photographer's tool. Subscription
> cost should not be a barrier to a professional.
>
> However, LR's editing capabilities are relatively limited. I have so much
> more fun working images in DT. I love the various modules and the
> flexibility of the drawn and parametric masking systems that are so much
> more flexible than LR's. I love the ability to do multiple instances of the
> same module. I love the multiple options for sharpening and noise
> reduction. I love DT as a photographer and as an artist because of its
> ultimate level of editing control, which LR can not rival. However, if I
> was a professional photographer I would stick to LR. The reason is time is
> money. Firstly I would photograph in RAW and JPG and I would try to have my
> JPG tweaked by camera settings to be a finished quality not requiring any
> editing because that is a waste of a professional's time. However, if I did
> have to do editing I would want some quick and dirty fixes that could be
> applied to all the images in just minutes. That is what LR is great at. DT
> has styles which can also process images quickly but it is no rival in
> terms of speed to LR.
>
> I still use LR for HDR merge of raw files and sometimes for panorama
> stitching. Microsoft ICE is a really great free panorama stitcher for
> Windows and can handle challenging merges that PS and LR fails at. For
> restoring scanned images and film I use DT for sharpening and grain
> reduction (noise reduction) but then move onto GIMP for dust removal. DT
> could do dust removal but GIMP is easier and quicker. I also like to
> experiment with levels and curves in GIMP to tweak the final color and
> contrast.
>
> My suggestion is to pick the best from each program. I wish DT had the
> DAM capabilities of LR and then it would be an alternative to LR. Your post
> was very successful at starting or reigniting a conversation on the topic.
>
>
> On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 at 23:36, tony Hamilton <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Terry,
>>
>> I'm a bit ... well, I suppose the concept is 'humbled' ... by the
>> response to my posting on this topic. I am equally very impressed by the
>> consistency of the advice I have been given. I have obviously invested far
>> too much time and effort in this part of DT where other solutions - such as
>> you describe - are far more practical. So now I should focus on those
>> functions DT is good at: raw processing. Plenty of work to do there, I
>> sense.
>> On 25/06/2020 22:34, Terry Pinfold wrote:
>>
>> Hi Tony,
>> I replied to the long post. I feel just use DT for editing images
>> and another program such as LR or Adobe Bridge to catalog, sort and import
>> (copy) images from your SD card. DT is a great editor but is not an
>> all-in-one solution like LR tries to be.
>> Good luck.
>>
>> On Fri, 26 Jun 2020 at 03:44, tony Hamilton <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Terry,
>>>
>>> I had not considered this option (as you can see from my long posting
>>> just a few minutes ago), but what you say makes good sense to me - I see
>>> you share my concern about the security of images on the SD card. That
>>> factor really gave me the heebie-jeebies when I realised what DT was doing
>>> - shudder... I'll examine this in more detail.
>>>
>>> Tony
>>> On 24/06/2020 02:49, Terry Pinfold wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Tony,
>>> since you have LR use that program to import and organise your
>>> files. It is well designed and excellent at that task. It also does good
>>> editing of Raw files, but DT is more sophisticated in the edits you can do.
>>> I own LR and use it as a catalog, sometimes to do panorama stitching and
>>> sometimes HDR images. But I love DT editing far more than LR editing
>>> usually. Focus on what DT does great, which is editing not cataloging. BTW,
>>> the extra images may be JPG files associated (embedded) with Raw files but
>>> I am not sure. I also recommend never letting the computer delete images
>>> from your camera's SD card. I have seen this as a cause of problems with my
>>> photography students in the past. I recommend copying images from the Sd
>>> card. Ensuring you have a minimum of two copies of the original on separate
>>> drives. Then, and only then, format the card in the camera to clean up the
>>> card. I would format rather than delete all images. Hope that helps.
>>>
>>> On Tue, 23 Jun 2020 at 21:30, tony Hamilton <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In addition to the difficulties I am having with import (the subject of
>>>> an earlier posting) I now find that DT imports more images than there
>>>> are on my SD card. The camera tells me my card has 52 images; Windows
>>>> tells me my card has 52 images. Lightroom finds and imports 52 images.
>>>> iMatch tells me there are 52 images and adds them to its database as I
>>>> expect. DigiKam does likewise. DT, uniquely, finds 72 of these 52,
>>>> providing sometimes as many as 8 images with the same file name. What
>>>> causes this strange behaviour and how can I trust that DT is also not
>>>> 'losing' some images on import, in addition to 'creating' some?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ____________________________________________________________________________
>>>> darktable user mailing list
>>>> to unsubscribe send a mail to
>>>> [email protected]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dr Terry Pinfold
>>> Cytometry & Histology Lab Manager
>>> Lecturer in Flow Cytometry
>>> University of Tasmania
>>> 17 Liverpool St, Hobart, 7000
>>> Ph 6226 4846 or 0408 699053
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Dr Terry Pinfold
>> Cytometry & Histology Lab Manager
>> Lecturer in Flow Cytometry
>> University of Tasmania
>> 17 Liverpool St, Hobart, 7000
>> Ph 6226 4846 or 0408 699053
>>
>>
>
> --
> Dr Terry Pinfold
> Cytometry & Histology Lab Manager
> Lecturer in Flow Cytometry
> University of Tasmania
> 17 Liverpool St, Hobart, 7000
> Ph 6226 4846 or 0408 699053
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to
> [email protected]
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to
> [email protected]
>
--
Dr Terry Pinfold
Cytometry & Histology Lab Manager
Lecturer in Flow Cytometry
University of Tasmania
17 Liverpool St, Hobart, 7000
Ph 6226 4846 or 0408 699053
____________________________________________________________________________
darktable user mailing list
to unsubscribe send a mail to [email protected]
