Digikam raw files and darktable

[Juan José Casafranca]

On domingo, 15 de enero de 2017 11:31:34 (CET) Remco Viëtor wrote:
> On dimanche 15 janvier 2017 10:19:29 CET Juan Jose Casafranca wrote:
> > I don't understand your point about thumbnails. Thumbnails in DK are
> > stored
> > in the database, the only thing needed is to change the way the thumbnail
> > is generated in the first place and that will be the image that is saved
> > in
> > the database.
> 
> And that is exactly what I don't like about your idea...
> 
> > When the associated xmp file is changed for a raw image, the thumbnail
> > will
> > be updated.
> 
> Meaning, if I understood your previous posts correctly, that you _replace_
> the thumbnail in the digikam database by a new one. Which means that you
> won't see the original thumbnail anymore (as it has been overwritten)...
> 
> Now, imagine a new Digikam user, who uses the build-in editor for a while
> and is used to seeing his edits and the original (RAW or jpeg/tiff/dng/...)
> file side by side. That user hears about Darktable and decides to give it a
> try. He edits a few files with it, and goes back to Digikam, _where his
> original images seem to have disappeared_ (as DK replaced the thumbnails).
> 

And if you don't replace the thubnail, you simply view the embedded jpg in the 
raw file. I prefer to see the actual image that a version the camera generated 
based in who knows which development. 

> > About how to associated a single raw file with several xmp, I still have
> > to
> > understand that part of the code. Simon proposed to use a virtual file. I
> > believe this means adding several entries to the file database for a
> > single
> > file, but as I said, I have to think about this part and how can be
> > implemented.
> 
> And if you go that way, there is no reason anymore to replace the original
> thumbnail, you just add an extra virtual file.

You can always generate a new duplicate which you left untouched. But I buy 
this. For a raw file, generate one extra virtual file which is the embedded jpg. 

> 
> Also, it seems that UFRaw and RawTherapee require you to save the edited
> images to jpg (or whatever you like), and in that case, Digikam sees the new
> files appear and takes care of the new thumbnails automatically. So the
> 'virtual file' solution is only needed for Darktable (afaik). So, if
> possible, a plugin that automatically saves a jpeg from within Darktable
> might be an easier solution (the 'virtual file' solution might cause a lot
> of other head- aches when you use DT and another editor like te GIMP: as no
> real file exists for the DT edit, it's going to be complicated to avoid
> file naming conflicts).
> 
> I'd love to see a solution where the DT edits are visible from within DK,
> but replacing thumbnails isn't acceptable for me.

I don't want to export the jpgs. If you still think that, you have completely 
misunderstood this whole point. I want the raw thumbnail to show how the image 
is currently based in the development you have done in the raw processor.