* Bertwim <b...@xs4all.nl> [08-15-15 16:59]:
> With thanks to all respondents, I think my initial mail was apparently
> not clearly stating the issue.
> The issue is that if one has among the original images (raw+jpg) a
> couple that you don't want to touch,
> the way Darktable works is that it is virtually impossible to do nothing
> for those images, i.e. also not creating the XMP file.
>
> I am aware that by taking special care like not loading the pristine
> images, exporting to separate folders etc.one can reduce istakes being
> made, but this means a rather cumbersome workflow. I am also aware that
> DT will not directly overwrite files ( by default). What I have
> experienced is that I have made mistakes because of this, myself to
> blame indeed, but "invited" by the fact DT also creates xmp files for
> images that are supposed to be untouched, or more precise, applies the
> autopreset to these images (which is de facto equivalent with changing
> the picture after export.
>
> A solution would be, I think, to have an option ("pristine'0 for an
> image that prevents it from being exported, so that one will not even
> generate new variations of the pristine image, thus preventing that it
> will be incidentially overwritten. This would make DT much more suitable
> for those this use case.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Bertwim
>
>
>
>
>
> On 15/08/15 20:40, Bertwim wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Darktable is giving me headaches with the following problem
> >
> > My camera produces an image in both raw and jpg format. Obviously, when
> > I am satisfied with this camera jpg-image, there is no need to further
> > edit it and I don't want Darktable to touch it. However, this is in
> > practice almost impossible,
> >
> > The reason is that when one loads a set of (raw) images in Darktable
> > (not loading the jpg), one invariably will also view the images in
> > darkroom mode, also the ones that are already ok. But in darkroom mode
> > the auto presets are applied, and on export unintended overwriting of
> > the camera picture is luring around the corner.
> >
> > One can of course select the pristine images in lightroom mode and then
> > discard the history stack, but this is cumbersome, error prone and very
> > unpractical especially for larger sets of pictures.
> > Would it be possible, e.g. to "lock" an image, (and emptying its history
> > stack), thus preventing it to be processed by DT?
> > Perhaps there are other solutions.
> >
> > Your views are much appreciated.
> >
> > Kind regards,
> > Bertwim
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > Darktable-users mailing list
> > Darktable-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Darktable-users mailing list
> Darktable-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
So set the darkroom/lighttable view mode to "unstarred only" and mark the
images you wish the "remain undisturbed" with "r" or any number of stars
and the "undisturbed" images will not appear in your darkroom/lightable
view. When you subsequently export, they will not be exported.
note: I also shoot only raw and do not have such a problem.
--
(paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri
http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri
http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Darktable-users mailing list
Darktable-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
