Darktable in 2023

[DrM]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dear all,

Have anyone experience with Darktable as an alternative for Lightroom/photoshop? I’m not a fan of subscription models like LR/PS, and like to have local installed software. Darktable seems to do the trick wrt LR functionality, but I wonder if the image quality in terms of tonality, color, etc, and long term archiving experience  are similar. 
Best,

Marc

[dpitt]

I am using Darktable for a few months now. Coming from a pre-subscription version of LR, this was the best free option available IMO.
It covers most of the functionality in LR, I use and even adds some. What I like for example is that any control has a masking section, so you can layer and mask any control action with very powerful masking.

So, in some ways DT can be more powerful than LR. It feels more like a merged PS and LR for anything in “normal” photography. However the way controls work tends to be totally different compared to LR and C1. It is a world on its own to me, so prepare yourself for some hours learning how to use it best. A good point to start is this:
https://www.youtube.com/@audio2u

My conclusion so far is:

Pro:

• Long term archiving possibility is excellent. Everything is stored in individual files next to the RAW files.
  You could move part of the catalog and start on a different computer without losing anything. This is much better than LR because of its depencency on the central catalog file which can get corrupted.
• Once you get used to it, it can get the same results
• it combines editing with DA management and comes with powerful keywords and culling possibilities 
• Focus is on controls that change one aspect of the data without touching others

Con:

• Not really a con because there is not much better, but importing LR catalogs is only partly possible. Edits made on RAW files in LR are not compatible with the edits in DT so they have to be done over in DT. This is also the case when going from LR to C1 or vice versa.
  Ratings and keywords can be imported.
• Steep learning curve. Using it is no problem, but using it best is harder because there are even more options than in LR to do the same thing.
• Large catalogs DA management gets slow, slower than in LR. Solved by keeping the catalogs smaller, which is easier to do than with LR. You can basically take any subfolder and use it as a sub-catalog.
• DT can read the files of my Leica’s with no issues but only mainstream camera’s and lenses are supported with correction profiles and such.
   

All in all, I think it is easy to test for yourself sinds it is free and very unobtrusive to use. Just dump some RAW files in a dedicated folder and get going.
Try it for a while with new projects before you move all old stuff. (if ever)

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[reuter]

Con:

RAW/DNG-conversion is supportetd with a correct profile only for a few Leica-camera-types (M8, X1, Q2 ...). For other Leica-(and others)cameras a DT-standard-profile is used with doubtful results. So you have to develope your own camera-specific profile - possible, but a lot of trial and error....

LG Wolfram

[Datsch]

I'm with you on local installed software. I use RawTherapee now but I tried Darkroom. Opening up Darkroom just now it seems very competent and I may try it again, so thanks for reminding me about it!

 

[XOONS]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb reuter:

with doubtful results

The current version opens M10 and M11 DNG files without problems. In my opinion, the results are very good even without extensive editing. 

 

[reuter]

vor 19 Stunden schrieb XOONS:

The current version opens M10 and M11 DNG files without problems. In my opinion, the results are very good even without extensive editing. 

 

Opening DNG-Files is no problem, but converting the DNG-Data to correct colors is. That works acceptable with M8- and M10-Data (I have no M11), but in horrible results e.g. with M240-DNGs, compared with C1-conversions and even with the JPGs out of cam.

I use DT 4.2.0 (WIN 10) with different camerasystems. I think it is a fine system with a lot of potential, but tricky with some Leica-DNGs.

LG Wolfram

[XOONS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for the feedback. I would be interested in an example of the M240. Because just with the Leica DNG files and darktable (also version 4.2.0, but on the Mac) I have not achieved "horrible results". Maybe it is just a matter of taste. Can you post a suitable example or - even better - provide a DNG file from the M240? (I have not found anything online.)

 

[DrM]

Thanks all for the great feedback and insights. My current archive holds mainly M8,M240, and SL2 images. If it is possible to share some examples on the difficulties and work arounds that would be most welcome :).

Any experience on the monochrom camera support?

Best regards,

Marc

[dpitt]

Apart from Darktable, I am now using Digikam as a DAM system. It seems to be a good free ‘photo mechanic’ and that is the way I intend to use it.
At least it is way faster than Darktable with large directories.
It has full editing tools too, but these seem a bit clunky to me. Tags, culling, even faces work fine for me, and off line resources are supported too.

It also stores all this in the photo files (and a SQL Lite DB too for speed). So even if you want to take oout part of a catalog, none of the metadata has to be lost.
Once I want to do some editing, I now open the file in Darktable (can be set up in digikkam).

On 1/11/2023 at 12:45 PM, Datsch said:

I'm with you on local installed software. I use RawTherapee now but I tried Darkroom. Opening up Darkroom just now it seems very competent and I may try it again, so thanks for reminding me about it!

 

@Datsch Do you think Rawtherapee could be better than Darktable with all types of Leica hardware?
Please share your assessment compared to what you know about Darktable’s editing possibilities.

[reuter]

vor 19 Stunden schrieb XOONS:

... provide a DNG file from the M240? (I have not found anything online.)

 

@Dear XOONS, to load up a DNG-File is not feasible because of the filesize (about 24 MB).

But to give you a rough idea about what I mean with "terrible" (in comparison to LR and C1) I have done the following steps:

• I imported the original DNG from M 240 in DT, LR (newest version) and C1 (older version)
• then I exported the converted file from each of this applications without any changes/optimizations and reduced the file-size!

This is the result:

Darktable 4.2.0 (WIN10):

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Lightroom:

Capture One:

The reason in my opinion is, that DT has no M240-related profile to convert DNG-data in acceptable colors, epecially by interpreting WB. So they use a standard-profile, which doesn't match with M240-DNGs. (When using M8-DNGs, the result is nearly perfect).

I hope, now it is understandable, what my "terrible" problem is... 😉  

BTW:

Today I use C1 whenever skin-colors are important (LR + PS in other cases). Because C1 is going to switch to an abo-system, I will leave them, and I hope Darktable will be emproved for more Leica-cameras, so that DT could be my system in the future. It is very performant and a sympathic concept!

LG Wolfram

 

[XOONS]

@reuter Many thanks for the very informative presentation and the additional explanations! I had previously assumed that Darktable supported all cameras that produce DNG files, even if they are not listed. (At least that's what it says in the introductory text of the web page you reproduced. But probably there are differences after all.)

What I hardly dare to say: I find the Lightroom and C1 results a bit too colorful and and a wee bit too unnatural in direct comparison. The skin tones are currently best in the C1 result shown but somehow also a bit choppy. Of the three results, the Darktable image seems to me the most pristine (unbiased?) and would be for me the starting point for further processing (manual white balance, a little more contrast, a little more color etc.) ... already with your JPG it went quite well. With tools like "color zones" you could fine-tune the skin tones and with "color correction" you could give the image a warmer look.

 

[reuter]

@XOONS: you are right - at the end of the day it is a matter of personal taste. And I'm sure, with individual processing you can get very good results based on the DT-conversion. At least I hope so, because sooner or later I will work with Darktable with my Leica-DNGs 🙂

Perhaps the mentioned remark on the website, that all DNGs are supported, means that they can be opened. That doesn't go without saying as you can see with DxO: Some DNGs (e.g. M8) can not be opened.

Have good times and successful processing with DT!

LG Wolfram

[dpitt]

On 1/13/2023 at 8:34 AM, reuter said:

@Dear XOONS, to load up a DNG-File is not feasible because of the filesize (about 24 MB).

But to give you a rough idea about what I mean with "terrible" (in comparison to LR and C1) I have done the following steps:

• I imported the original DNG from M 240 in DT, LR (newest version) and C1 (older version)
• then I exported the converted file from each of this applications without any changes/optimizations and reduced the file-size!

This is the result:

Darktable 4.2.0 (WIN10):

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Lightroom:

Capture One:

The reason in my opinion is, that DT has no M240-related profile to convert DNG-data in acceptable colors, epecially by interpreting WB. So they use a standard-profile, which doesn't match with M240-DNGs. (When using M8-DNGs, the result is nearly perfect).

I hope, now it is understandable, what my "terrible" problem is... 😉  

BTW:

Today I use C1 whenever skin-colors are important (LR + PS in other cases). Because C1 is going to switch to an abo-system, I will leave them, and I hope Darktable will be emproved for more Leica-cameras, so that DT could be my system in the future. It is very performant and a sympathic concept!

LG Wolfram

 

Thanks for the sample files. You may be right for the M240. I do not have that model. For my M9 however there is no camera profile in the latest Adobe DNG converter. So LR will use the Adobe Standard profile anyway and can use the embedded profile (embedded in each DNG from the M9)
What can be clearly seen here in the samples is that LR applies some enhancements like basic sharpening and maybe other things to the RAW files where DT is designed to do the absolute minimum. The result of LR looks pleasing maybe, but you cannot see the original RAW data and if you would want it as a starting point.

I am aware that users like Thorsten Overgaard do not like the LR treatment of RAWs from their Leica’s and choose to use C1 which has camera profiles for all Leica models it seems. I do like the basic RAW from C1 a bit better than LR in the samples, but it also looks a bit sharpened and modified to me, even if you did not do any adjustments. 

By chance I came across this person who uses Rawtherapee (and is experimenting with the latest DT now) to avoid LR default RAW treatment. He shows that files sharpness is affected negatively by the basic RAW treatment in this video:

He also shows how to get camera profiles from the Aobe DNG converter and use them for Raw Therapee. I am now investigating how I could use these camera profiles in DT also.

 

 

 

Edited January 14, 2023 by dpitt

[Qwertynm]

Am 13.1.2023 um 08:34 schrieb reuter:

Because C1 is going to switch to an abo-system,

you can still buy an unlimited license  for C1 2023, just fyi

[zeitz]

On 1/14/2023 at 4:47 PM, dpitt said:

For my M9 however there is no camera profile in the latest Adobe DNG converter. So LR will use the Adobe Standard profile anyway and can use the embedded profile (embedded in each DNG from the M9)

I don't understand this statement.

Adobe DNG converts proprietary/camera-specific raw (such as Nikon .nef) to .dng raw.  M9 raw is already Adobe Raw .dng so the Adobe DNG converter is not applicable.  As Adobe says:

"The Adobe DNG Converter enables you to easily convert camera-specific raw files from supported cameras to a more universal DNG raw file." 

LRC version 12.1 (the latest version) uses Adobe Camera Raw version 15.1 for the Develop Module.  A number of profiles can be applied to a raw file in the Develop module.  There are 7 Adobe profiles.  There can be any number of custom Profiles; I have one that I made for my M9.  And there are two embedded profiles that the M9 places in the raw file, one for color and one for B&W.  You are right that Adobe Standard is the default profile used by LR.  So there is a complete set of profiles in Adobe Camera Raw.

I always use the profile that I created for my camera.  The Leica embedded profile was so bad with reds that I was ready to return the camera.  The profile I made use the X-rite Color Checker completely fixed the problem.

[reuter]

vor 19 Stunden schrieb Qwertynm:

you can still buy an unlimited license  for C1 2023, just fyi

Thanks - I know. But the the scope of services is severely reduced (no further improvements, just bug-fixes), and I'm afraid that it will be the last edition ...

LG Wolfram

[dpitt]

On 1/16/2023 at 3:18 PM, zeitz said:

I don't understand this statement.

...

I always use the profile that I created for my camera.  The Leica embedded profile was so bad with reds that I was ready to return the camera.  The profile I made use the X-rite Color Checker completely fixed the problem.

What I see in LR is only the choice between Adobe Standard and embedded. When I look in the profile files that came with the latesr DNG converter (used and shared by all Adobe apps), they come with lots of Nikon, Canon etc. profiles. M8 and M10 has a profile too, but not for the M9.

So basically you have to make your own profile like you did.

See the latest list of Camera profiles from Adobe:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[zeitz]

43 minutes ago, dpitt said:

What I see in LR is only the choice between Adobe Standard and embedded.

Attached in two parts are the profile options under Develop/Profiles for an M9 raw file.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!