> > libraw being GPLv3, it is not gonna go well with GEGL that is LGPLv3. It > will turn it to a GPLv3 package at runtime. I'd be careful of the > headache this would cause. >
Regarding the licensing I think we should look at this from a larger perspective. I picked libraw from the todo list because it was there. I don't think using libraw gives us any additional functionality over what could be done with dcraw. operations/common/raw-load.c and operations/workshop/rawbayer-load.c already attempt to use dcraw and I don't think it caries the licensing problems. What's the longer-term strategy for supporting raw files? The Darktable project is _really_ good at developing raw images (non-destructively). It would be great if you could have that same functionality but also include the additional image processing capabilities that GIMP provides (blur, heal/clone, layers, etc). In order to have more control over the raw processing we should be working directly from the sensor data. Most sensors use a bayer pattern that needs to be demosaiced (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demosaicing). IMHO that algorithm should be just another operation inputing RGBG and putting out RGB. How would this work with the use of babl? The demosaic algorithm would perform the pixel format converstion, but that's what babl is supposed to do for us. Even if you added an RGBG pixel format to babl how would it know how to find a gegl converter to get it to RGB. I haven't looked at the babl code so maybe my limited understanding is off. Paul
_______________________________________________ Gegl-developer mailing list Gegl-developer@lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
