Dear Camilo, dear list, On 2012.06.27 10:39, Camilo Polymeris wrote: > I am Shotwell and Rawstudio user and have submitted small patches to > both projects. This combo, plus sometimes a bit of the GIMP, does > everything I need. Only problem is the interaction between both > programs
> So, how could Rawstudio (or similar programs) be brought into this > workflow? I find both your stance and your experience interesting. Although I don't have a, immediate better answer to suggest for the question you bring up, I'd like to run an tangent idea by you (and other involved folk, of course), if you don't mind. I could not agree more when you state that > I have come to the conclusion that > it is better to keep that program simple but powerful. > That is, leave the [organizing] and sharing to Shotwell It's the classical Unix tool philosophy, which serves us so well. I've been experimenting with RAW image development for a little while, and what I'm beginning to imagine is that it would be useful to have the possibility of assigning more than one developed versions of a picture to a single raw master, in an explicit manner, inside Shotwell. Rationale : sometimes I can be equally satisfied with two different development results ; or would like to be able to quickly switch between candidates to a final result, inside Shotwell, where I already have an established pattern of skimming through multiple shots of a single subject with a single framing to select my favorite one, then reject and later delete all the others. (This desire actually also applies to simple JPEG files, where I sometimes have been wanting to keep and export, for example, two differently cropped versions of the same picture, or a color version side by side with a black and white version of a portrait) How pertinent would it be to expect a tool like Shotwell to adapt to this kind of use pattern ? Both... - on a "workflow / target use cases suitability" angle (maybe software that allow a user to compare two images side-to-side, à la Lightroom more suited to this and substantially different from Shotwell in any way, and I should be using them instead alongside a "photo manager" like Shotwell ? ), - and on the technical feasability side (how natural would it be to extend Shotwell to implement this ? (Would it be breaking important fundamental assumptions about data structures or GUI layout, because Shotwell was not designed for such a level of organization, sorting and selection ? Have the developers considered this in the past ? ) Any insight is appreciated. Thanks for reading ! _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
