I have a style for the lens in my RAW shots and have a style to get to a
starting point that I apply to both my RAW shots and JPGs shot from my
phone. DT works fine for both!
Chas G wrote:
> In a current thread, someone asked, "If you are more satisfied with the
> in-camera jpg, why are you
>
On 1/11/22 7:13 AM, Chas G wrote:
In a current thread, someone asked, "If you are more satisfied with
the in-camera jpg, why are you bothering with dt and why are you
shooting raw?"
I know that a raw file can offer more data, and that darktable is
thought of mainly as a raw converter. My
Terry Pinfold schrieb am 11.01.22 um 23:21:
It is really interesting when you have a class of twelve students and you end
up with twelve different interpretations of the same image file.
yes - that's also what I am experiencing over there:
I would just like to add to the comment about mobile phones. When I grew up
my grandparents had Box Brownie cameras, and many of my generation had
Kodak style instamatic cameras that took 110 or 126 film cartridges. These
cameras captured our lives growing up. 35 mm cameras were the realm of
Hi Patrick,
Thanks for this post. One of the recurring problems or questions
that appear here and elsewhere is that the RAW file processed by various
programs, including but not limited to DT, do not match the out of camera
JPG. The camera's JPG is the manufacturer's attempt at
* Chas G [01-11-22 11:59]:
> "I made that comment and on further consideration, it was un-called for. dt
> is excellent in processing images, raw and otherwise. I perhaps was
> becomeing somewhat frustrated trying to explain that the jpg images out of
> camera were processed in-camera whereas
"I made that comment and on further consideration, it was un-called for. dt
is excellent in processing images, raw and otherwise. I perhaps was
becomeing somewhat frustrated trying to explain that the jpg images out of
camera were processed in-camera whereas the raw was not and felt the OP
* Chas G [01-11-22 10:16]:
> In a current thread, someone asked, "If you are more satisfied with the
> in-camera jpg, why are you bothering with dt and why are you shooting raw?"
>
> I know that a raw file can offer more data, and that darktable is thought
> of mainly as a raw converter. My take
In a current thread, someone asked, "If you are more satisfied with the
in-camera jpg, why are you bothering with dt and why are you shooting raw?"
I know that a raw file can offer more data, and that darktable is thought
of mainly as a raw converter. My take is that darktable can - and should -
