On 12/02/2013 01:27 PM, David Vincent-Jones wrote: > Not writing sidecar files would probably negate much of darktables > capability since there would be no history of processing. Darktable > would then be another 'dumb' processor in the same manner as Digikam. > Oil and water simply do not mix well.
I've done quite a bit of testing of the various floss raw processors and settled on darktable for the quality of its output, not because it does asset management. I use digiKam strictly for DAM (not raw processing). I don't let digiKam write to my originals, whether raw or jpeg, so I want the digiKam-generated xmp files left strictly alone. By default darktable writes over the top of them. The information that darktable stores in its xmp file does look very useful. If there were an option to tell darktable to put all its XMP files in one directory, completely separated from my archive folder where my originals are stored, that would be great! Have I overlooked such an option? Elle ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list Darktable-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
