Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-14-2022, 02:00 PM   #16
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
newmikey's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,103
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by MossyRocks Quote
Hugin's GUI now includes using enfuse and align image stack nicely in its GUI provided you want to to an exposure fused image.
Very similar to how Digikam does it then. I like the fact I can do the enfusing, then edit the outcome in the same software. I had only used Hugin for panos to be honest.

03-14-2022, 02:10 PM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MossyRocks's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Minnesota
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,618
QuoteOriginally posted by newmikey Quote
Very similar to how Digikam does it then. I like the fact I can do the enfusing, then edit the outcome in the same software. I had only used Hugin for panos to be honest.
Not being able to edit in Hugin and having to switch to another program is somewhat annoying but the tools behind the scene are very good at what they do. I don't shoot a lot of panos but Hugin really does a good job and if it struggles then I find that MS ICE will usually figure it out and that between the 2 of them there are few panos I haven't been able to stitch. The ability to combine images in other ways with the behind the scenes tools in Hugin is also nice. One recent shot I did was a 137 image focus stack of an old broken wrist watch movement.
03-16-2022, 01:22 PM - 1 Like   #18
Pentaxian
AfterPentax Mark II's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 852
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
I don't mean this in a negative or disrespectful way, but on my monitor the image does not look and feel like a real picture. It looks like a scene you'd see generated in a video game or a graphics art project.
I can understand your remark, but when you know this place you know it is quite how it looks in real life. You get a special kind of light due to the glass ceiling and the special colour of the walls. Add to that that you also get light from the entrances of the three arms of the building and the dome you see is right in the center of it all. I recognized the building immediately and not for a moment I thought "this is not right".
03-16-2022, 01:50 PM - 1 Like   #19
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 18,509
QuoteOriginally posted by MossyRocks Quote
Not being able to edit in Hugin and having to switch to another program is somewhat annoying but the tools behind the scene are very good at what they do. I don't shoot a lot of panos but Hugin really does a good job and if it struggles then I find that MS ICE will usually figure it out and that between the 2 of them there are few panos I haven't been able to stitch. The ability to combine images in other ways with the behind the scenes tools in Hugin is also nice. One recent shot I did was a 137 image focus stack of an old broken wrist watch movement.
Automated and integrated workflow is one of the areas where open-source solutions could be seen to lag behind commercial options in some areas. I'll admit though, I'm a big fan of "one tool for one job" products... both for photography and in other walks of life. I value independence and delineation of devices and software, especially as components within a chain... and I'll even put up with command-line work rather than fancy user interfaces if something does what I want or need.

Example - for some time now, I've been profiling my displays using Argyll CMS at the command line, rather than using the open-source DisplayCAL GUI wrapper application or the commercial bundled software for my colorimeter. As you suggest, this "behind the scene" tool is very good at what it does. Furthermore, it's cross-platform (Windows, linux, Mac) and once you understand what it's doing and why, working with it at the command line is actually quite enlightening, not to mention empowering...

03-16-2022, 02:38 PM   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
JensE's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Leipzig
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,455
Thanks for the write-up. I have not used LuminanceHDR in a while and always used Rawtherapee as the tool behind it in the workflow. Admittedly it always took me a while to get the results I wanted. But now that I do most of my post-processing in Darktable,I need to give it another try. Where do you actually demosaic, do you load raw files into LuminanceHDR or in-camera processed JPEGs?
03-16-2022, 11:32 PM   #21
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
newmikey's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,103
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JensE Quote
Thanks for the write-up. I have not used LuminanceHDR in a while and always used Rawtherapee as the tool behind it in the workflow. Admittedly it always took me a while to get the results I wanted. But now that I do most of my post-processing in Darktable,I need to give it another try. Where do you actually demosaic, do you load raw files into LuminanceHDR or in-camera processed JPEGs?
I load the pefs straight into LuminanceHDR (or Photomatix of course)
03-17-2022, 07:17 AM - 2 Likes   #22
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MossyRocks's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Minnesota
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,618
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Automated and integrated workflow is one of the areas where open-source solutions could be seen to lag behind commercial options in some areas.
There it may be the different mentalities of the developers and designers. In the Unix and Unix like world there is the general mentality of one small program that does one thing really well with lots of options and from there you string a number of them together to get what you want. In the windows and mac world the mentality tends towards more of a single monolithic program that does everything automatically. One isn't inherently better than the other but personally I like Unix methodology better as once one really starts to master and understand things it tends to become much more powerful. Then again I grew up with DOS and then around the time of Win95 started becoming a Linux users and since have worked with all sorts of Unix and Linux systems from Solaris, various BSD systems, True64, AIX, and many flavors of Linux and have found that I like an OS and tools that say here you go have fun and don't shoot your foot off.

03-18-2022, 02:56 AM - 1 Like   #23
Pentaxian
Dartmoor Dave's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dartmoor, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,051
QuoteOriginally posted by newmikey Quote
Well, if there were enough people who would like that, they'd get up and either join the existing developers team or branch the codebase and create what they need. I suppose there is one major difference there in that with commercial software a company develops software, listens (or not) to feedback and then goes on to develop new options/upgrades/updates/spin-offs. With open source, if you need something, you find lots of others who need it as well and just make it so. I think most of what you want is already there anyway so others have done exactly tht.

I think that would have been a valid position back in the early days of open source. When I first used Linux back around the turn of the century it was assumed that users would have a certain level of technical knowledge, and in fact it was pretty much impossible to use the OS without such knowledge. But those days are long gone. Most of the people who are switching to Linux nowadays haven't got either the desire or the skills to get involved as developers. They just want apps that do the job they are meant to do, with minimal fuss, and luckily there's lots of open source software around these days that does just that.

Photographers who want to switch to open source nowadays aren't doing it out of a geeky love of tinkering with software. They are doing it because it's free, it's better protected from malware than Windows, it gets them out from under Adobe's business model, and it ain't Microsoft. Sadly, the biggest barrier to widespread adoption of open source software in photography is the anti-user-friendliness attitude of the developers, as manifested in applications like Darktable and Rawtherapee. Yes, of course those apps can be used to do the simple day-to-day things that photographers need to do, but finding where the useful bits are hidden among the jumble of unnecessary complications can be a nightmare for users who just want to edit photos.

(By the way, I had my first go at image editing on a computer in the mid 1980s. My father designed graphics hardware for a living and his company was developing a competitor for the Quantel Paintbox that sadly never made it to market. I got the chance for a ten minute play around with a prototype in (I think) 1985, and I could see straight away that it was the future. But I didn't imagine for one moment that we'd end up with the sort of stuff we've got today.)
03-18-2022, 04:39 AM   #24
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
newmikey's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,103
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Dartmoor Dave Quote
Sadly, the biggest barrier to widespread adoption of open source software in photography is the anti-user-friendliness attitude of the developers, as manifested in applications like Darktable and Rawtherapee. Yes, of course those apps can be used to do the simple day-to-day things that photographers need to do, but finding where the useful bits are hidden among the jumble of unnecessary complications can be a nightmare for users who just want to edit photos.
That old shtick just confuses me as much as it did ten years ago. So the user-friendly bits are "day to day things" but the "useful" bits are hidden ... "for users who just want to edit photos"? Standard fare from people complaining about software which is not extremely powerful and configurable as well as dead-simple at the same time (as if that exists in the first place). Spoon-feeding is so 20th-century!

I have found many of those "useful bits" by watching Youtube stuff from knowledgeable users and then adding those bits to my own user panel so I do not have to navigate a "jumble of unnecessary complications". I may not use all of the modules all of the time or even know what they are for at times but I'm happy they are there and can just be added into my workflow once I understand what they are for and how I can use them.

Heck, I just learned about parametric masks a few months ago via a very good tutorial and have gotten to use those now and then. I'm perfectly OK with there being some bits and pieces which can stay hidden until I have a need for them.

But, by all means, don't use any open source software in photography because of the "anti-user-friendliness attitude of the developers" - stick with the user-friendliness of the closed-source marketeers and sales departments.

---------- Post added 03-18-22 at 12:54 PM ----------

Last remark and then I will leave this discussion for what it turned into. Just Google how easy Photoshop (yes, that user-friendly closed source program that can be used to do the simple day-to-day things that photographers need to do without any useful bits which are hidden among the jumble of unnecessary complications)

Somehow it seems that people maintain different standards wwhen it comes to open source and I've had quite enough of that, thank you very much.

Last edited by newmikey; 03-18-2022 at 04:55 AM.
03-18-2022, 09:17 AM   #25
Pentaxian
Dartmoor Dave's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Dartmoor, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,051
QuoteOriginally posted by newmikey Quote
Last remark and then I will leave this discussion for what it turned into.

I'm genuinely sorry about that. I didn't realise that I'd be hitting a raw nerve when I suggested that open source photography software could be made more user friendly, and I wouldn't have posted in the thread if I'd realised that it would cause offence.
03-18-2022, 10:56 AM   #26
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jersey's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: 3City agglomeration
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,166
Open source is very good as software, but UX is often either lacking or its design is so completely different then it is close to unusable when switching from paid Windows/Mac software. And sometimes I have strong suspicions that I was designed by geeks who assumed that everyone is like them and will get it from first look. And then they are surprised when it is not the case.

I do use open source, I do work (like earn my living) on Linux, but for reasons above my IDE for example is closed, paid software (even tough I use it on Linux) because open source equivalents were very ineffective.


I tried Rawtherapee few years ago and found the interface very cluttered, hard to use and hardly optimized. I could set it up as I like, but it should be the other way around (start from basic and add what you need). I wonder how it looks like now, GIMP turned from "get the... with this" into very good PS alternative. So maybe I try some open source RAW developer again. I would not mind one able to handle HDR and PixelShift, as ACDSee is not able to do this and I need to include PDCU in workflow
03-18-2022, 11:11 AM   #27
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
newmikey's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,103
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jersey Quote
Open source is very good as software, but UX is often either lacking or its design is so completely different then it is close to unusable when switching from paid Windows/Mac software.
I think you hit on a key thing here. I never used paid Windows/Mac software over the past 20 years or so which probably makes it easier on me. I get the opposite when I need to use a Windows PC for work, the UX sucks big time and I get super irritated and tired when shortcuts or menu options don't do what I want or when a dialog keeps popping up asking me whether I'm really, REALLY sure I want to do something. Also, the lack of a good package manager and central software repository bugs the hell out of me - can't understand for the life of me why people put up with that.

QuoteQuote:
And sometimes I have strong suspicions that I was designed by geeks who assumed that everyone is like them and will get it from first look. And then they are surprised when it is not the case.
That sounds a bit like how Photoshop was described to me to be honest. I'm no geek and my programming skills are stuck back in the eighties (mostly BASIC and TurboPascal I'm afraid) but I have been watching youtube tutorials and reading documentation whenever I want to learn a new trick. Nothing could be simpler and if can can learn how to do it, anyone can.

QuoteQuote:
I tried Rawtherapee few years ago and found the interface very cluttered, hard to use and hardly optimized. I could set it up as I like, but it should be the other way around (start from basic and add what you need). I wonder how it looks like now, GIMP turned from "get the... with this" into very good PS alternative.
I liked RT but eventually preferred DT for most of my work due to its interface. ART, a fork of RT is pretty good with its interface, maybe that's more up your alley. Gimp has grown in leaps and bounds over the years - ever since it made the jump from 8-bits only to 16/32 bits it has replaced Digikam for most of my editing needs.

QuoteQuote:
So maybe I try some open source RAW developer again. I would not mind one able to handle HDR and PixelShift, as ACDSee is not able to do this and I need to include PDCU in workflow
I keep RawTherapee (or ART) purely for pixelshift raws but even then I process the output TIFF with Darktable and Gimp (for spotting and cloning out little hairs and stuff). Here's an example:
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
adjustments, apps, bits, darktable, developers, edition, enfuse, gimp, hugin, image, images, modules, panel, people, photographers, photography, photoshop, rawtherapee, shots, software, source, source software, time, user, workflow
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Night Whirlpool galaxy (open source data edited by me but not taken by me) aitrus3 Post Your Photos! 5 08-07-2018 07:38 AM
Substitute for Lightroom - open source? fikkser Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 41 11-01-2015 03:30 PM
An open-source photography workflow rawr Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 9 10-30-2015 01:12 PM
SmartDeblur - open source blur removal software rawr Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 6 10-21-2012 05:13 PM
Should Pentax open-source the firmware for old DSLRs? yusuf Pentax DSLR Discussion 13 03-13-2012 11:55 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:19 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top