In a current thread, someone asked, "If you are more satisfied with the in-camera jpg, why are you bothering with dt and why are you shooting raw?"
I know that a raw file can offer more data, and that darktable is thought of mainly as a raw converter. My take is that darktable can - and should - be thought of as an image editor that happens to be able to work with raw files. The large majority of images I use darktable on are jpgs from a cell phone. I do have a Nikon DSLR and and can shoot raw, but I frequently do not have the big camera with me. Top line cell phones produce shockingly good images nowadays - at least when the lack of a short lens or a long lens is not a problem. The old maxim that the best camera you have for a particular situation is the one you happen to have with you is still true. I have the cell phone with me more than I have a professional camera. If I never shot another raw again in my life, that would not change my view of darktable as the first choice in image editors. The speed, power, and fluidity of work via darktable appear unmatched. I'm not picking on the comment or the commenter. Far from it. It just happens to give me the chance to address a notion that deserves a wider audience, that darktable, as an editing tool, is bigger and more powerful than is generally advertised. Darktable is the best editor out there. Not just for raw files. ____________________________________________________________________________ darktable user mailing list to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-user+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
