On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 01:01:40 +0200, stesind <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes that is right. But for the first preview the embedded JPEG could be > used. For me at least Shotwell is not an image manipulation program but > a maintenance program. Yes, but still you are able to do simple color correction, rotations and crops. And if these look different on the embedded JPEG and the RAW file you have a problem. That having said, I would tend to agree that using the embedded JPEGs for first views and replace that with the properly rendered RAW version as soon as that is finished should be sufficient. It would mainly hurt performance if I want to e.g. export a large number of .RAW files but people wanting to export lots of .raw files to jpgs should be prepared to take a performance hit :-) (or use LOTS of disk space) > So my suggestion is, just keep it simple. Shotwell is a picture viewer > and not an editor. So performance and not accuracy is the main > objective. I find that shotwell in general takes the simplest approach that works, which is what they had done here as well (I am not involved in shotwell development). Any other solution that would save disk space would be more complex. Sebastian _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
