Free and Open Versus Subscription Part 3: Should You Dare Switching Over?

Free and Open Versus Subscription Part 3: Should You Dare Switching Over?

During the last weeks I took a look at the free and open Software “Darktable”. In this round-up I’ll explain why Darktable is a true and legit alternative – but not suitable for everyone.

If you haven't followed the discussion, you might want to go back and read the review of Darktable's "Lighttable" or the review about editing in Darktable's "Darkroom".

Can Free Software Even Compete Against a Media Empire?

From the very beginning of my comparison, I was sure that “Darktable versus Lightroom” will be like a fight between David against Goliath. Adobe is a company with a volume of sales of more than 10 billion dollars and more than 20,000 employees. Darktable, on the other hand, is an open project run by a small group of genius people who cooperate with voluntary coders, translators, and testers.

Working with Darktable for a month, although not full-time, was an interesting experience. During my first attempts of editing, I thought: “Well, of course, it doesn’t run as smoothly as Lightroom does,” or “of course, they don’t offer the same quality and the results can’t compete against my Lightroom edits.” All because I believed in the power of money.

But I forgot the power of collaboration. It starts with small things like a comprehensive manual, which has been translated into several languages by a network of volunteers. And it ends with supportive comments and emails from readers on Fstoppers, who explained some details about certain modules and even offered me to try to edit my raw files.

Pretty soon, I found that Darktable isn’t necessarily worse than Lightroom, it might even be superior in one way or the other. But it’s also different to handle, difficult to understand, and more complex than one would expect.

The Main Difference Between Darktable And Lightroom

Many people who want to develop their digital photographs on a Linux based computer will choose Darktable, because of a lack of alternatives. I think you can feel the influence of a certain group of users and developers when you use Darktable. My impression is that Windows and MacOs are made for users who are ignorant about the processes of their computer and only want to use their devices in a comfortable way. They are made for users like me.

Linux on the other hand has quite a nerdy reputation. Every Linux user I know is also a coder. It’s people who want to know what is going on behind the screen, love to understand how their system operates, and develop and share solutions for their I.T. problems. Sorry, if that doesn’t apply to all Linux users, but it’s a general impression I have.

Working with Darktable goes in the same direction. You don’t simply pull sliders until your photograph looks good. You need to understand what every slider does, how it affects which pixels, and how to counterbalance unwanted artifacts or looks.

Of course, Lightroom users also know that the “Shadows” slider brightens up some areas of the photograph, but do you really know which pixels will be affected in which way? In Darktable, it feels like you always need to know what you do. Instead of moving one slider, you often have to make a bunch of adjustments to reach the same results.

To me, Lightroom is a service center, while Darktable is a toolbox.          


Reasons for Giving Darktable a Try

Ironically, one would assume that software that comes for free is the beginner’s best choice. Let’s face the truth: Only really ambitious hobbyists and professionals will be willing to pay hundreds of dollars for the services of Adobe. Yet, the topic is more complex, because Darktable is far from being a downgraded version of Lightroom.

I have been working with photographs for a while now and I’ve developed thousands of images in Lightroom. I understand how contrast and even "micro-contrast" works, and what’s the difference between curves and basic adjustments. I even have a good idea about advanced editing in Photoshop using frequency separation, high pass filters, and (rarely) luminosity masks. Still, I struggle with understanding Darktable.

Does that mean Darktable is not recommendable for beginners? It depends. I guess, once you mastered Darktable, you will have a good laugh about the simplicity of Lightroom. Yet, mastering Darktable will take some time and if you are not willing to go through a full manual, several tutorials, and ask questions to the community, you might get disappointed.

Developing your basic workflow in Darktable, leaves you with almost endless possibilities, even though there are some recommended basics. More than 50 different modules go far beyond the few sliders which Lightroom has to offer. When you start learning the functions of Darktable from scratch on, you will really get to know how a digital photograph works. And that’s a good thing, I suppose.

Once you went through the whole Darktable rabbit hole, you might even start learning coding and engage with the wonderful community which brings the world a solid editing software for free.

Reasons Why I Can’t Make the Switch… Yet

What counts to me, though, is the result. Call me lazy or even call me a “millennial” (which happened to me in the comment section of one of my first articles here on Fstoppers), but I feel I don’t need to understand the complexity of Darktable to develop my photographs. I want to reach a certain look by shifting a few sliders and I want it to happen quickly.

Playing around and being able to develop new looks without thinking too much keeps me curious and creative. I’d rather like the artist in me playing around than I’d like my inner coder to engage in pixel peeping. Time is valuable and I rather spend it outside shooting than reading manuals.

Yet, I feel challenged. I also like the idea of free and open software and would love to see how long it takes until I feel as comfortable using the “filmic RGB” module in Darktable as I do feel with the “basic” panel in Lightroom.

Besides all the curiosity, the most important advantage of Adobe is its product line. Even if I started with Darktable and properly learned how to use it, I’d probably have switched to Adobe by now. I use my subscription not only for Lightroom, but I am currently working with Photoshop, Premiere, After Effects, and InDesign on a regular basis. Being able to work with a combination of different programs where I can easily shift data from one to the other is the biggest advantage of an Adobe subscription.

The price is high, though. If you only edit a few pictures per month, it might not be worth it.

A Recommendation for Everyone

No matter if you are a Lightroom user or an absolute beginner, I can still recommend you one thing: Try it yourself. Just as Lightroom, Darktable works non-destructive. You won’t lose your files, you won’t lose money, you will only lose some time.

But maybe you’ll also find a new challenge like me. While I will continue working with Lightroom for reasons of time, I guess I will let a few images run through Darktable every now and then. As you could see in the images of this article, a new workflow also has the power to change the concept of a photograph every now and then.

Log in or register to post comments
El Dooderino's picture

I've really enjoyed this series! As an "amateur enthusiast", I don't think I'll be doing enough post-processing to justify the cost of LR/PS. As I am basically starting from scratch learning how to post-process, I think it will be worth the time and effort to learn more about how darktable works.

N.B. darktable 3.4 is now out. It would be great if you were able to review it and the changes they made!

Sam Sims's picture
Mark Suggs's picture

I have to catch up on the first two parts of this series, but I will say as a shoe string budget hobbyist, I find the subscription model very off-putting. I would like to pay only once for a good piece of software or sweet. I don't like the idea of "never truly owning" the thing that I am paying for. Currently I'm using Affinity Photo, as well as their publisher and designer, all of which I've gotten on sale at one point or another, paying less than $100 for the whole group. I'd be more willing to try a shockingly complex free software like Darktable than be hooked into paying a subscription fee for software that I'll never actually own.

Sam Sims's picture

The Adobe way of doing things now means, not only you don't own a copy of the software but it's on a constant upgrade cycle with only a couple of previous versions still supported. Unless you are able to upgrade your computer every four years or so (educated guess), you may find there's no longer a version that'll run on it. A one off purchase is yours forever.

Chris Rogers's picture

Forgetting one other thing. If you don't pay you lose access to your work. Sure you'll have the Jpegs but the progress files for your raws will be locked.

Nils Heininger's picture

Isn't there also a way to save the XLM from Lightroom? And your RAWs will always stay with you, anyway.

Nils Heininger's picture

sorry, it's called XMP. Below, there is a comment from a reader, who tried importing them to Darktable. It's a long read, but worth it!

Chris Rogers's picture

Woooooaaaaahh thanks! I didn't know this! Yeah I'll give it a good study. This is good info!

John Willemsen's picture

Thank you for so much well-presented and useful information. You sparked my interest in darktable (they don't like caps) and so far I am enjoying it - and very favorably surprised.

Alejandro Ravera's picture

Why is everybody using Darktable? Rawterapee is easier and the filmic simulations are awesome.
Try the antifog slider for example, you can see what is affected by the filter(ticking the option), and just at level one is wonderful.

Malcolm Wright's picture

I think you've missed the h out of Rawtherapee. I also agree with you Rawtherapee is excellent.

Tim van der Leeuw's picture

I agree that RawTherapee is much more usable and easier to understand than darktable. I also really dislike the UI controls of darktable: they change with my mouse wheel, but I want to use that for scrolling and not for editing, thank you very much!

Darktable however has masks to do local edits and RawTherapee doesn't do there's quite a few things one cannot yet do with RawTherapee.

I didn't yet figure out how to use masks in Darktable, it looked rather confusing to me and other UI issues put me off trying to figure it out already, but if that's what you need then it's either darktable, or going into Gimp.

Sam Sims's picture

Try looking up Rico Richardson on YouTube. He has many superb and easy to follow videos detailing the features and editing tools of Darktable, including masks I believe.

Nils Heininger's picture

Yes... scrolling is really one of the more horrible things in Darktable. But masks in Darktable are quite easy. They just work different then Lightroom. In Lightroom you take a mask and make many adjustments. In Darktable you make adjustments and put masks on them.

Deleted Account's picture

You can change the scrolling behavior in the settings and gone is the horror of it.

mike s's picture

I don't get it. I use the mouse wheel to scrolling in DT all the time... it is the default behavior. Is there a screen in DT where it doesn't do this?

Tim van der Leeuw's picture

Sure the mouse wheel also scrolls, but when it happens to hover over a control then instead it changes that control value.

This was happening to me all the time in the side panels with the adjustments, when trying to scroll that sidebar to see different adjustment panels that instead the slider that happened to be underneath the mouse cursor would change value. (Usually the last slider that I changed).

mike s's picture

ahh... this behavior is an option, in latest v3.4 at least. I can understand why some folks wouldn't like the default.

"mouse wheel scrolls modules side panel by default

When enabled, mouse wheel scroll modules side panel, and Ctrl+Alt+mouse wheel scroll data entry. When disabled, this behavior is reversed (default off). "

Tim van der Leeuw's picture


I'll look out for that configuration option next time I do something in darktable. :)

Karim Hosein's picture

I used to use RawTherapee, and agree that is it simpler, and very good at what it does. It may be the “right tool” for the beginner, instead of Dt, but Dt can do far more than RawTherapee, (in most cases), and may be better for the pro/enthusiast.

RawTherapee deserves its props, though. E.g., it handles PixelShift better than anyone, including Pentax.

mike s's picture

Meh. RT is... different and has (mostly) a subset of features (though, a few extra features too). Depends on your needs.

TBH when I first tried both 3-4yrs ago, I found darktable GUI (and workflow) "simpler" to understand and still find RT interface a bit confusing. darktable version 3.4, that came out just AFTER these series of articles is _even simpler_ and better organized.

Malcolm Wright's picture

Hi Nils,

I have to let you know that you have been bitten by the Free and Opensource software bug..
Your occasional dabble into darktable will grow over time.
You may also discover that there are many more free and opensouce options to Adobe some of which may be helpful in a photographer's work flow. As an example I find fotoxx, a very simple to use application, to be all I need to crop and resize photographs for a UK National hobbyist (Florist) website. Then there is GIMP which is probably more inscrutable than darktable. The list goes on and on..
For everyone of the Adobe products you currently rely on there are one or several open source projects offering free to use (but also feel free to contribute) alternatives. All will take time to learn.
You have started on your pathway to freedom from Adobe.
Please don't dismiss your many, many years in learning how to use Lightroom/Photoshop too lightly, after all there is a whole industry selling LR/PS tutorials (including fstoppers who often value such bundles at many thousands). As you have discovered there are tutorials and support for darktable available as well (this applies to other opensource alternatives).
For a beginner LR/PS is as difficult to get your head around as any of the Free and Opensource alternatives, if that wasn't true no one would be selling tutorials in how to use LR/PS.
Being opensource also means that exchange of files produced between programs is actually easier as the file formats used are also free and open, unlike the proprietary formats used by the likes of Adobe which seek to exclude the competition. You also end up locked in to Adobe..
So for a beginner Adobe isn't recommended, that means Adobe is relying on a locked in earlier generation of photographers who have heavily invested their time and money into a system that they can't easily get out of. The Adobe type of business model's time is passing.. opensource is just one route out.
To give an example of the possible future the Mobile phone world is now almost exclusively Unix (Apple) or Linux (Android) based, with earlier proprietary systems having almost completely gone, and recent attempts to enter that field with a more proprietary system have failed..
Linux is originally an opensource Unix based project.
Perhaps we all need a dedicated photo editing device rather than that jack of all trades computer with what is becoming a myriad choice of good software applications.

Volkanov X.'s picture

Very good series and I liked to read its all parts.
I think this sentence nails many things down: "But it’s [Darktable] also different to handle, difficult to understand, and more complex than one would expect." This is always what I say to people who ask me that what DT is.
I just would like to say that Darktable has more than enough modules and parameters for editing. This may be confusing for a newcomer. This is also the power of DT. There are more than one way to achieve the same result in DT, and there are also many other ways to give them some try to have some different results.

Anton Rosenfeld's picture

A well though out review, and refreshing to see somebody who doesn't instantly dismiss some software because it is different from Adobe.
If people are looking for free raw developing software that is easy to get good results quickly, I would recommend ART. It is very logically laid out, and has the advantage that the starting point looks very similar to your camera's jpg which is what a beginner would expect. It is also very powerful once you get to learn it with a good system of local edits and masks.
Further details are here:
(Unfortunately the website does not behave well on a mobile browser but don't let that put you off)

Joe Heborg's picture

I second this. To summarize ART(abbrev. of another Rawtherapee):
it's rawtherapee with a more logical userinterface and the local adjustments of darktable. Opensource is just awesome. Pick the best of two worlds, et viola ART was born

Károly Zieber's picture

Loved the articles, they came out at the same time, as I started playing around with RawTherapee and Darktable to process Fujifilm raws. I am a long time Lightroom user, but wanted to know if the change is worth it for me. I was totally amazed by the denoise (profiled) function (though it didn't yield any advantage for me in real life pictures), but the lack of easy X-Rite calibration was a disappointment. It turned out, Lightroom with the "Enhance Details" deconvolution function beat C1E, RawTherapee and Darktable in quality, I didn't mind the file size. So in the end, Lightroom's convenience, speed and Adobe's new features worth it for me, but I would use RT or DT if open source was a must for me.

Paul Haenze's picture

Thanks for your three-part, one-month review of Darktable. It is the first that I've read based on more than a cursory use. I have been using Darktable for the last couple of years I'd like to interact with a couples of things.
First, you mentioned that DT is not beginner friendly. But, you did not make reference to trying the "Basic Adjustments" module to see how far you could go. Nor did you make reference to using module presets. These are made by the developers and provide settings for different use cases. Because of their "point and click" nature, presets are a great way to experiment and even learn to create your own presets. DT has just released version 3.4 ("Merry Christmas") which includes a Beginner workflow using the most basic modules. I'd love to see an addendum article using the new workflow with the included presets as a trial for a "Lightroom switcher".
Second, your series does not address the elephant in the room - the question of vendor lock-in with proprietary software. Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) advocacy is much more than just Linux and includes an array of software for Linux/WinOS/MacOS/Android. FOSS advocates talk more about the freedom to use the software as you see fit (which is why DT has so many different methodologies) as well the ability take your data elsewhere (which is why DT uses sidecar XML files). The focus on cost of most articles handling FOSS is more on the transactional cost of a subscription or program, and not on the added cost associated with being locked into a platform that may become buggy, become abandoned, or become unwieldy. My daughter's senior project in video arts was voted best in show, best in program (amongst her fellow students), best in school (amongst all media program projects) and chosen by the Royal Television Society as the best student project for her region. After her student discount lapsed, she was not longer able to edit her award winning video unless she paid the monthly subscription fee. As a FOSS advocate, that doesn't seem like freedom.

Nils Heininger's picture

Sure, that might hurt and I also agree with you that it's really bad not being able to work on your existing projects after the ending of your subscription. It's clearly a disadvantage - in theory. But practically speaking: Once I'm done with a video project, I will rarely go back to it. Too many times I even think about deleting the original footage. Because Why on earth would I reuse it (eventually, I decide against it, "just in case")?When editing potographs a second or third time, I will completely start from scratch on, anyway.

Deleted Account's picture

Nils, thank you for the article. To me it seems there should be a 4th part after you got even more experience with darktable. I am sure you'll find it intuitive after a while. For years I used the 'base curve' module along with a calibrated input color profile of the camera(s). Now I redo some of my photos with 'filmic rgb' and the redone 'noise reduction profiled' while using prophoto rgb as input color profile. As far as I can say at the moment: It is impressive!

PS: Title says: "Should You Dare Switching Over?" Is that proper English? Shouldn't it read: Should You Dare to Switch? But never mind, I just got insecure.

(edit: spelling of title)

Ken James's picture

Oh gosh no, proper English! Ok then, check your spelling of Title (Titel?)


Nils Heininger's picture

No problem, I've got thick skin and I think it was meant as constructive criticism.

Ken James's picture

No problems, I just thought it was funny. 😂

kgoulet's picture

After years of the basic sliders on the editor provided by the camera manufacturer, I started looking at advanced software. I am trying dark table and I think you nailed the issues. I'll stick with darktable mainly because it's a hobby and time isn't so much an issue. Good article.

Sam Sims's picture

Since I commented on the previous Darktable article, noting my struggle to undrstand it, I've been looking up YouTube videos and making a concerted effort to get to grips with it. There's a guy, Rico Richardson, who's YT channel offers really excellent tutorial videos that are easy to follow and get straight to the point.

I am now getting to grips with the modules in the darkroom edit view (still plenty I don't understand yet) and find they produce superb results in a way that it certainly feels like its a program built by photographers for photographers as their website says. It's still a earning curve getting used to the workflow though but quite surprised how this could end up replacing the main comercial software for me as my primary RAW editor.

Farhaan Tariq's picture

i am a developer on microsoft, apple, google and linux platforms............your impression "Sorry, if that doesn’t apply to all Linux users, but it’s a general impression I have." totally wrong and illogical. linux users are not nerds and windows/mac/google users are not dumb.

Henry Richardson's picture

Nils, I read all 3 of your darktable articles. Well done and thank you! For you and others I will write about my experience playing around with the darktable import function that imports Lightroom XMP files along with images and tries to translate some of the data for use by darktable. First, take a look at the following 2 links and then below you will see things I learned that are undocumented and I have never seen written about anywhere despite having searched, watching a couple of videos, etc.

Here is a 2013 article written by the developer Pascal Obry about importing Lightroom XMP files along with image files into darktable:

You can also read the 3.4 manual info about importing Lightroom XMP files here:

There are 2 different types of data to import:

1. metadata (keywords (tags), star ratings, color labels, etc.)
2. editing instructions

I experimented with it this year by importing a few of my files along with their Lightroom XMP sidecar files to see what darktable would do. I was using darktable 3.2.1 which was the release before the new 3.4.0 released a few days ago.

I have 112k photos in my Lightroom catalog: 110k out-of-camera originals + 2k scanned film files. They all have keywords (tags), most have star ratings, many have color labels, many are in collections, etc. About 50k have been edited. I often go back to earlier edited photos and tweak them a bit. On rare occasions I undo all the edits and start over, but mostly just a few changes to an already edited photo. Some people suggest saving all the edited files to 16-bit TIFF files with the Lightroom editing baked in (sRGB or Adobe RGB or some other color space) which turns my 16.5mb Olympus PEN-F 20mp raw file into an 86mb compressed 16-bit TIFF file. And it turns my 3.85mb Olympus E-M10II 16mp JPEG file into an 83.5mb compressed 16-bit TIFF file. Now multiply that by all my files. And besides the explosion of storage space you are still stuck with baked in editing, baked in color space, etc. And you have thrown away all the advantages of non-destructive editing. So, for some people this is a reasonable solution, but it is not for me. On1, C1, ACDSee, and probably others also try to import the editing data from Lightroom, but none are even close to perfect. This is a very difficult thing to do and I no longer have any expectation that it is worthwhile to even do it to my photos.

My feeling these days is if I switch away from Lightroom then I most care about getting my keywords (tags), star ratings, color labels, collections, etc. since the editing translation to a different program is so far from perfect. With darktable you can get keywords (tags), star ratings, and color labels, but not collections. On1, C1, and ACDSee use the Lightroom catalog for the migration which has the collection data too whereas darktable uses the optional XMP files for each individual image file which is generated by Lightroom (you can get them by selecting your images and then hitting Ctrl-S to get them written). It is understandable why the free darktable uses the XMP files rather than the catalog. Adobe pretty regularly (every 2-3 years) changes the format of the catalog so if someone decodes it they have to keep decoding the new formats and updating the source code for the importer. The XMP files are text files and (presumably) are much easier to work with and they don't change.

Here are some important undocumented things I discovered:

1. When you create the XMP files in Lightroom it only writes XMP files for raw files. If you have edited TIFFs and JPEGs also then there will be no XMP file for them so the editing info is lost and cannot be imported by darktable. Turns out this is very good thing for the reason I will mention below. The keywords (tags), star ratings, color labels, etc. are written in the XMP file for raw files and are written directly into the TIFF and JPEG files.
2. When you import with darktable it picks up the keywords (tags), star ratings, color labels, etc. from the XMP file and also from the embedded data in TIFFs and JPEGs.
3. You will see from the links above that darktable can only translate a small subset of the Lightroom editing instructions so right off the bat you can see this is not all that useful.
4. The XMP importer documentation says nothing about base curve (display-preferred), filmic (scene-preferred), or none. The darktable default is to use base curve (display-preferred), but it can be changed in preferences to either filmic (scene-preferred) or none. I spent a lot of time trying to figure out the correct method with regards to importing Lightroom XMP files. After some research I found that probably the importer should not use either base curve or filmic when importing these, but it does. But no one really seems to know so it is still unknown what the correct answer is. Presumbably, you have to set your preferences to none and then import. Even now I am not 100% sure about this because even after asking people in the know there was disagreement about it. Some said it probably expected the base curve and others said it probably expected none.
5. The darktable translation of even the subset of editing instructions is rather poor. I imported a few test photos with Lightroom XMP and the results were not good. Better off to not even do it since you have to undo it all and then manually turn on the base curve or filmic (depending on whether you want to use the old display-referred editing or the new scene-referred editing) before starting your editing. If you had any dust spot removal in Lightroom then darktable tries to duplicate it, but in my test it often did it in the wrong location so worse than not doing anything.
6. Unfortunately darktable gives you absolutely no control over how or even if it imports stuff from a Lightroom XMP file. Very bizarre because the darktable developers are constantly making everything even more complex with a huge number of often almost redundant modules, many knobs, levers, and pulleys to control every cryptic aspect of the module. But in this case if there is an XMP file darktable automatically imports the data and does imperfect, incorrect edits on the subset of Lightroom instructions that it recognizes. You can't turn that off and you have zero control.
7. One might think that you can use the darktable discard history command to get rid of the incorrect steps that the import function put in there. Wrong. This is not documented and almost certainly a bug, but discard history will not discard the steps that got added. It will only discard steps you did yourself. If it worked properly then you could select all your imported photos and discard the history to get rid of the mess the importer created. To get rid of the mess you will have to open each one up individually and manually remove the bad stuff from the history stack. Over and over for tens of thousands of photos. :-(
8. The thumbnails in the lighttable view are generated from the raw file after the editing steps have been applied. That means all the poor images created by the importer will have poor thumbnails too.

As it is now it is worse than useless, IMO. I most definitely want the metadata (keywords (tags), star ratings, color labels, etc.), but the editing stuff also gets automatically imported, translated incorrectly, and applied with no control over it. I would like to be able to tell it to import only the metadata, only the editing instructions, or both. Or a version of darktable that only imports the metadata since it seems to do that part correctly. It would probably only be about one line of code to disable the import of the editing stuff too or just use a conditional compilation instruction in the source code (#ifdef, etc. in C) when darktable is built. Even a properly functioning discard history command that could at least delete all the bad editing instructions from all selected photos would be adequate.

Deleted Account's picture

I wonder what happened if you'd try the same the other way round: Import thousands of darktable sidecar files into Lightroom? Is that possible at all? To take over the edits and history when importing will not work in most of the times regardless of the software being used.
Lightroom uses 16bit integer while darktable uses 32bit fp. The modules, functions work quite differently, even the internally used colour space is probably different. What sense would it make if your imported photos would be altered, even if it's very close?

Henry Richardson's picture

Jan, please read again because you totally missed the point.

Malcolm Wright's picture

This should not be a surprise.
After all Adobe uses its own closed proprietary file formats. These are also protected by Patents and Intellectual Property Legislation. Therefore it follows, that if coders were to ceate full seamless transfers, they would be immediately hit with a multi-billion dollar law suit.
That is why the recommendation for beginner photographers is to avoid the bear trap that is Adobe.
It also explains the absence of any full instruction set as to how to go about doing it, as publishing such an instruction set would render both the Author and the publication media open to lawsuits from Adobe and even possible extradition/rendition to the U.S. of A. to face a criminal court trial.

Henry Richardson's picture

Malcolm, please read again because you totally missed the point.

Malcolm Wright's picture

Hi Henry,
I think it is you that missed the point when you bought into Adobe, and now you're stuck with it.
Clearly you don't like being stuck with it, but please don't take that out on anyone else.
You've clearly gone to a lot of trouble and investigation to confim that you are still stuck with your decision to go with Adobe.
That is why members of my Camera club do not recommend Adobe LR/PS to new members.
As for becoming unstuck, no one will wave a magic coding wand and breach all those Intellectual Property Rights that belong to Adobe, not you as a user of their products, for fear of legal repercussions.

Sam Sims's picture

Malcolm, the above post is clearly spam - see reply to Jan Holler also. I have reported it.

Henry Richardson's picture

Malcolm, I have provided great info about stuff that is undocumented and gotchas for anyone who wants to migrate from Lightroom to darktable. Why does it bother you that I have documented stuff that wasn't documented? Why are you annoyed that other people will know this? Are you also annoyed with Nils for documenting his experiences in 3 articles?

I suspect that most people don't want to lose all the metadata (keywording/tagging, star ratings, color labels, etc.). And darktable fortunately allows that to be retained. It also does a lot of incorrect editing translation that probably most people don't want though and is mandatory. Unfortunately you get that too whether you want it or not and the only way to get rid of it is to manually delete it individually from tens of thousands of files. This is great info for everyone who wants to migrate.

Even if it remains as it is there is no reason to try to keep it a secret. Let's be open about stuff and document it. I bet even you learned something from my post, right? Why do you have a chip on your shoulder?

mike s's picture

Henry Richardson It didn't seem that Malcom was bothered by your sharing, nor did he accuse you of anything you mentioned. I think most folks will think it's great to know about undocumented things.

However, a comment thread on this website, general topic photography, is not an effective place to share "undocumented info." If that's your goal, I'd suggest a forum specific to darktable (a search engine will have suggestions for "darktable forum")

What I think Malcolm is pointing out is proprietary software has a long strategy of whats called "vendor lock-in." Adobe has a long history with this. What you've described is a symptom.

In contrast, if darktable is open source. If it doesn't work the way YOU want, you have multiple options.

Finally, from your original comment, some of the "history" you describe that can't be reset in darktable, might be due to preferences of auto applied styles during an import. (you can disable this)

Henry Richardson's picture

As it currently stand it is totally perverse. You DO NOT WANT the automatic editing translations which are useless or even harmful, but you are FORCED to get them and then it is extremely difficult to get rid of them going through tens of thousands of files and manually undoing the mess because discard history is broken. :-( No one wants to throw away all their Lightroom keywording (tagging), star ratings, color labels, etc., but in order to import that metadata darktable forces also the importation of Lightroom editing that you DO NOT WANT.

Deleted Account's picture

Two reasons: darktable is first of all an image processing software. darktable is not made to replace lightroom. I did tell it elsewhere already: This two functions should be separated. One software for the catalogues, one for the image processing.
And you? You are lost at that moment, when either you stop to pay that monthly fee of when Adobe replaces LR with something else in, say, 10 to 20 years.

Henry Richardson's picture

Sigh, you still seem annoyed that I documented this stuff for the benefit of the internet community. And you make all kinds of ridiculous, unfounded assumptions about me and my motives.

Deleted Account's picture

That was not my intention. I made no assumptions about you or your motives. Sorry, if you feel offended.

Battery Chargers's picture

Nice post thanks for sharing!

You can Check Batteries and Chargers also to get best quality of batteries, chargers, flashlights and many other electronic devices..

click here to visit the site:

Chris Rogers's picture

Now all I need is affinity photo on linux and i can ditch microsoft and adobe forever.

More comments