Digikam raw files and darktable

[cerp]

Dear Juan Jose,

I think it is an interesting concept particularly if the plugin  
allowed to chose every time from a series of possible RAW editors.

Best,



Quoting Juan Jose Casafranca <jjcasmar at gmail.com>:

> And that is my intentionm not replacing the raw editoe but calling the
> external one to receive the edited image
>
> El 13 ene. 2017 5:01 PM, "cerp" <cerp at eeos.biz> escribió:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> Then we would need to have a fork for RawTherapee, one for LightZone
>> (which I both prefer to Darktable for RAF file editing) and so on ....
>> would it not be better to have a mechanism to use the preferred editor?
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Quoting Andrey Goreev <aegoreev at gmail.com>:
>>
>> I agree 100% but digikam devs have their own point of view on how the
>>> program should look like and we need to respect it.
>>> This is how fork projects appear. If it is not too complicated to replace
>>> libraw with darktable a fork could be not a bad idea.
>>> Someone will have to maintain it though, new versions of both digikam and
>>> darktable come out pretty frequently.
>>>
>>> Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
>>> -------- Original message --------From: Juan Jose Casafranca <
>>> jjcasmar at gmail.com> Date: 2017-01-13  8:29 AM  (GMT-07:00) To: digiKam -
>>> Home Manage your photographs as a professional with the power of open
>>> source <digikam-users at kde.org> Cc: gimp-user-list at gnome.org,
>>> darktable-user <darktable-user at lists.darktable.org> Subject: Re: Digikam
>>> raw files and darktable
>>> Thanks Albrecht, that's exactly my opinion and the reason I want to
>>> develop this module :-)
>>> 2017-01-12 15:15 GMT+01:00 J Albrecht <heviiguy at gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> On 07 Jan 2017, at 09:41, Juan Jose Casafranca <jjcasmar at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> They need a way to organize
>>> their library, which DK is good at, and a way to process raw files, which
>>> DT is
>>> good at (DK is not a good raw processor and DT is not good for library
>>> management).
>>> For the Developer’s benefit, I’d like to reiterate the above statement:
>>> digiKam is a brilliant program but please, let’s maintain the focus on
>>> where it is brilliant rather than trying to craft it into an
>>> all-singing-all-dancing piece of bloatware comprising relatively mediocre
>>> modules just for the sake of doing so. In the FOSS realm, digikam is an
>>> excellent Digital Asset Management program, darktable is, IMHO, the best
>>> Raw editor and GIMP is unparalleled for post-processing. It’s folly and
>>> perhaps a bit arrogant to assume that Users would willingly be hobbled by
>>> using only one program simply because they are “loyal” to that program.
>>> Wouldn’t it be nice if we could just all get along….
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>