darktable or GIMP?

[Mark L]

For free PPing they both seem to offer something.
Using RAW, any thoughts?

[Claire M]

Hi Mark :),
Gimp is a good little photo/Draw/Art program, (mind you I've only used it for a little while some time ago) though I don't know how effective it is for editing RAW files.
However, another great FREE PP software worth experimenting with (which I use at times) is FastStone Image Viewer - that works with many different picture file formats incl editing RAW files, and other features including: Slide Show Creator, Image Browser, Converter, Compare images side-by-side (up to 4 at a time), Configurable batch processing, Create memorable artistic image montages, Screen captures, Printing Layout options, Supports touch interface (tap, swipe, pinch), and much more!........
Here's a link to tell you more about it: http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm



(http://www.faststone.org/FSViewerDetail.htm)

[Glenda]

I've never used either but have heard really good reports about FastStone. Isac recommended it to me when I was grumbling about trying to PP on my small laptop when travelling. (I really need to upgrade the lappy I think). Enseth also mentioned he uses it.

[ameerat42]

FastStone is not a raw converter AFAIHH/K/U, working on embedded jpegs only (else, how could it read the Σ raw files?)
It has basic and useful, mainly tonal and color editing functions. The description in the link by Claire M it is cited:

"It supports all major graphic formats (BMP, JPEG, JPEG 2000, animated GIF, PNG, PCX, PSD, EPS, TIFF, WMF, ICO and TGA)
and popular digital camera RAW formats (CRW, CR2, NEF, PEF, RAF, MRW, ORF, SRF, ARW, SR2, RW2 and DNG)."

The thing is, what is meant by "support" in this context?

Now I do not want to discount it. I use it as the default program to display and organise all files.
The program is quite useful, but IMO it is not a replacement for the likes of Photoshop.
There's a lot of comparison data on this wiki page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_image_viewers

A little time later...
I just confirmed that FastStone cannot "work" with 16-bit tiffs. It can open them, but it can't save them again as 16-bit files.

[tduell]

For free PPing they both seem to offer something.
Using RAW, any thoughts?

Hello Mark,
I use both, on Linux.
Gimp only occasionally. Never tried it for RAW. I would put GIMP in the image editor category, much like Photoshop, although not exactly the same of course.
I use Darktable all the time.It is described as RAW developer and probably best compared to Lightroom. Reads in JPEG also. It has quite extensive image library management tools.
I reckon Darktable is bloody marvellous, but still have a lot to learn about it. I like it so much I keep an up to date clone of the development source repository and build new binary packages whenever new code is committed to the repo, so I guess you could say I really do a lot of source testing as well.
Darktable has a neat 'profiled denoise' which uses data from your camera/sensor model to clean up noise. It does seem to give a much better result than the normal generic denoise tools. There are noise profiles for most cameras.
Darktable is worth a try, just to see how others approach the usual PP issues.

I guess you are using Linux? Darktable is only developed for Linux and OSX...none of that dark side stuff :D

Cheers,
Terry

[ameerat42]

Make yer "larf", some of these names:

Darkroom > Lightroom
(Peer here: https://www.google.com.au/search?q=light+table&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSpP6T2NLKAhVk56YKHaukDjcQ_AUIBygB&biw=1920&bih=916#tbm=isch&q=darkroom)

and

Light table > Darktable
(Vide: https://www.google.com.au/search?q=light+table&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSpP6T2NLKAhVk56YKHaukDjcQ_AUIBygB&biw=1920&bih=916)

[arthurking83]

FastStone does do raw conversions.

1. in the settings tab in the toolbar, go to settings(in the popup box).
In new popup window look for the RAW tab.
Once the RAW window opens look for the tick box where it says [View raw files in] and then the (default) selection should be embedded jpg preview file.
The other two options are: half size and full size. Those two options are to view the actual raw data image. The larger the selection the slower FSV becomes tho .. especially with large raw files.

2. From my experience FSV's raw file handling is below par. I've tried it so far on D70s, D300, and D800E raw files .. as well as many other raw files I've downloaded for testing purposes .. and the manufacturer's raw converter software is always better at rendering a raw file image. (but in saying that your taste may differ)

The real kicker here is that where FSV is fast to open most files(including large tiffs) .. with raw data, it's slow as hell.

[John King]

I am actually a registered user of FastStone Viewer. After using it for many years, I made a small donation to its creator as a token of appreciation for all his work. Nice guy.

It can indeed open an Olympus RAW file (.ORF), and can save this as an apparently uncompressed JPEG. The JPEG file has the same pixel dimensions as the .ORF, and is about 4 MB larger (~20% larger) file size.

AFAIK, this is the only program that can save a RAW file as an uncompressed, full size JPEG. All the others I have ever used, including Olympus Viewer, save the JPEG at 4:1 compression ratio.

[ameerat42]

I agree, John. The program is quite a useful one. But it does have its limitations, and that's all I was referring to.
Again, what part of the ORF file are you viewing? And though it can save in uncompressed jpeg (JPEG2000) and
uncompressed Tiff, it can't handle 16-bit files other than to open (I suspect some 8-bit) part of them. I can certainly
not save in 16 bits per channel like Photoshop (and who knows what else) can.

Also, to illustrate, it only has Unsharp Mask image sharpening, again unlike Pshop's various offerings.

[John King]

Gidday Am


I agree, John. The program is quite a useful one.

I find it very fast for quick and dirty image reviews, in particular. It is also the only program I know of that uses very high resolution images to create PDF proof sheets natively. Very hand for my wife's uses.


But it does have its limitations, and that's all I was referring to.
Again, what part of the ORF file are you viewing?

When one double clicks on a RAW file, by default it opens a reduced size image (3200x2400 pixels with my Olympus RAWs). If you then press the 'A' key, it will load the full size image.


And though it can save in uncompressed jpeg (JPEG2000) and
uncompressed Tiff, it can't handle 16-bit files other than to open (I suspect some 8-bit) part of them. I can certainly
not save in 16 bits per channel like Photoshop (and who knows what else) can.

True. It also cannot handle ProPhotoRGB colour space, which I use by default in Bridge/PS.
Olympus Viewer also only handles sRGB and aRGB, but it can create and manipulate 16 bit TIFF files. Photoshop Elements is restricted to 8 bit files and aRGB (IIRC ... ).


Also, to illustrate, it only has Unsharp Mask image sharpening, again unlike Pshop's various offerings.

FSV 5.3 can do USM or conventional sharpening. I almost never use conventional sharpening ...

One can also set up FSV to use (say) PS as the editor. Pressing 'E' with a file open will then load it into PS. One can have more than one external editor available.

My main problems with it are that it cannot handle standard keywords or wide gamut colour spaces. However, almost nothing but Bridge can IME ... :(.