On 06/04/2011 12:12 AM, Adam Dingle wrote: > Shotwell users, [..]
> 1. What kind of camera do you have? Nikon D5000 > 2. When you shoot RAW, do you usually shoot RAW+JPEG, or RAW only? RAW > 3. What photo resolution do you shoot? If possible, can you tell us the > resolution of the JPEG images which your camera embeds in RAW photos? > (You can find out by running 'exiv2 -pp' on a photo, for example.) Preview 1: image/tif, 160x120 pixels, 57600 bytes Preview 2: image/jpeg, 570x375 pixels, 54139 bytes Preview 3: image/jpeg, 4288x2848 pixels, 554849 bytes > 4. Generally speaking, how does Shotwell's default rendering of your RAW > photographs compare today with the JPEG images/previews generated by > your camera? Please respond with one of the following: much better, > better, about the same, worse, much worse, unusably bad. If Shotwell's > rendering is poor, can you describe in a few words how it looks worse > (e.g. distortion? color shift? underexposed appearance?) Poor, the images are blurry and very poort resolution. > 5. Suppose that Shotwell offered one or more of the following modes. > Which would you use by default? > > a) Shotwell develops all RAW photos at import time. (This is how > Shotwell works today.) > b) Shotwell develops RAW photos only when you first open them. This > would speed importing and save disk space, but might add a delay of > several seconds before you could edit or zoom into a RAW photo after > first opening it. > c) Shotwell stores RAW+JPEG pairs as a single unit, and uses the JPEG > for rendering. > d) Shotwell renders a RAW photo using the JPEG embedded inside it. I'd go for c, since it is fast, full-res and it wouldn't clutter the library with 'duplicates'. > 6. With options (c) and (d) above, Shotwell could let you switch to a > RAW rendering for individual photos (and Shotwell would develop the RAW > photos only at that time.) Similarly, with options (a) and (b), Shotwell > could let you switch individual photos to render using an embedded or > paired JPEG. How often do you think you'd use this switching feature? I'm not sure if this would be useful to me personally. However if specific RAW enhancement features like white balance or exposure control is required directly in RAW file it would be good. > 7. Any other ideas or comments? Grouping JPG and RAW together as pair is a good idea to keep things together. Regards, Chris Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you! _______________________________________________ Shotwell mailing list [email protected] http://lists.yorba.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/shotwell
