Workflow with gimp

[Anders Lund]

Hi list,

 

I'm reaching a point where digikams internal editor is not enough for me to do the postprocessing I want to.

 

I will have to use gimp or other to do additional work once in a while.

 

So do you have tips on a good workflow for that?

 

I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global adjustments, but after that I will need an external application, so

 

- which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

- concerns about metadata?

 

Any help appreciated!

 

--

Anders

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Daniel Bauer-2]

Am 02.01.2014 17:27, schrieb Anders Lund:
>
> I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global
> adjustments, but after that I will need an external application, so
>
> - which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

I use png. Good compression (I use 5). All information remains.
tiff files are too large IMHO
jpeg is lossy, I only convert to jpg in the end for the web copies


> - concerns about metadata?

I don't care about metadata in the edited images. I always strip the
original metatdata (it remains in the raws which I never delete). But I
guess this is not typical for many users...

Happy new year!

Daniel
--
Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Barcelona
professional photography: http://www.daniel-bauer.com
google+: https://plus.google.com/109534388657020287386
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Anders Lund]

Hi Daniel,

 

Thanks for your input :)

 

On Torsdag den 2. januar 2014 17:51:01, Daniel Bauer wrote:

> Am 02.01.2014 17:27, schrieb Anders Lund:

> > I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global

> > adjustments, but after that I will need an external application, so

> >

> > - which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

>

> I use png. Good compression (I use 5). All information remains.

> tiff files are too large IMHO

> jpeg is lossy, I only convert to jpg in the end for the web copies

 

I'll try with that :)

 

> > - concerns about metadata?

>

> I don't care about metadata in the edited images. I always strip the

> original metatdata (it remains in the raws which I never delete). But I

> guess this is not typical for many users...

 

Well not me, at least, I like metadata in the images :) So fra, gimp behaved well, it maintained about all meta data from a jpeg I tested with.

 

> Happy new year!

 

:)

 

I guess gimp will take some time to learn, but boy, I wish I could do adjustment layers/masked layers, healing brush and so in a KDE app :)

(Krita does some of that, but not all)

 

--

Anders

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Jean-François Rabasse-2]

Hi Anders,

On Thu, 2 Jan 2014, Anders Lund wrote:

> I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global
> adjustments, but after that I will need an external application, so

I use Gimp, I've been using it for the last ten years and I've kept my
habits when starting using Digikam (three years ago only).
(Humans are lazy and reluctant to changes :-)

> - which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

If you work with Gimp, probably the best working format is Gimp .xcf
That way you will keep all your work, selections, layers, masks, etc.
and just export to a web compatible format, .png or .jpeg, when
creating the final image.

To feed Gimp from your original photos, it will depend on how you
want to process your raw files.
If you do that inside Digikam, you'd probably be better to produce
.png, as Daniel Bauer said, and edit it with Gimp (saving results in
.xcf, and final result in .png or .jpeg).
But Gimp provides a UFraw plugin, so if you work with UFraw (just
another software based on Dave Coffin library, dcraw) you can open
your raw files with Gimp, without intermediate format.

A matter of taste...

> - concerns about metadata?

Current Gimp versions, 2.x, have a broken metadata support.
It will change soon, with Gimp 3.0, but as for today don't expect
Gimp to protect your metadata.
The best way, inside Digikam, is to edit and produce sidecar files
for your images. This will keep your metadata safe and off the way
of XMP metadata killers programs.

Regards,
Jean-François
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Jean-François Rabasse-2]

On Thu, 2 Jan 2014, Anders Lund wrote:

> Well not me, at least, I like metadata in the images :) So fra, gimp
> behaved well, it maintained about all meta data from a jpeg I tested with.

Take care, as it depends on Gimp versions :

Gimp 2.x, up to version 2.8.4, preserve Exif metadata but destroys
XMP metadata if any in the original file.

Gimp 2.8.6 kills also Exif metadata.

So, tests are required, and safe solutions (sidecar files) are useful
anyway.

Regards,
Jean-François
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[tosca]

Why don't you try Darktable? You won't need Gimp anymore, as the new stable version comes with mask drawing, so I don't know what for you would need any other editing program.

As for pictures and metadata management, it's up to you to see if darktable can do everything you need, or whether you'll keep Digikam for that (my choice).

Marie-Noëlle

2014/1/2 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>

Hi list,

 

I'm reaching a point where digikams internal editor is not enough for me to do the postprocessing I want to.

 

I will have to use gimp or other to do additional work once in a while.

 

So do you have tips on a good workflow for that?

 

I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global adjustments, but after that I will need an external application, so

 

- which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

- concerns about metadata?

 

Any help appreciated!

 

--

Anders

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

--

Retrouvez mon portfolio et mes activités dans ma galerie personnelle, mes reportages sur Jingoo

Et bien sûr la page Photographe en Cévennes sur FB, et mon compte Twitter.

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Anders Lund]

Hi Jean-François,

 

Thanks for your input :)

 

On Torsdag den 2. januar 2014 18:15:57, Jean-François Rabasse wrote:

> Hi Anders,

>

> On Thu, 2 Jan 2014, Anders Lund wrote:

> > I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global

> > adjustments, but after that I will need an external application, so

>

> I use Gimp, I've been using it for the last ten years and I've kept my

> habits when starting using Digikam (three years ago only).

> (Humans are lazy and reluctant to changes :-)

>

> > - which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

>

> If you work with Gimp, probably the best working format is Gimp .xcf

> That way you will keep all your work, selections, layers, masks, etc.

> and just export to a web compatible format, .png or .jpeg, when

> creating the final image.

>

> To feed Gimp from your original photos, it will depend on how you

> want to process your raw files.

> If you do that inside Digikam, you'd probably be better to produce

> .png, as Daniel Bauer said, and edit it with Gimp (saving results in

> .xcf, and final result in .png or .jpeg).

> But Gimp provides a UFraw plugin, so if you work with UFraw (just

> another software based on Dave Coffin library, dcraw) you can open

> your raw files with Gimp, without intermediate format.

 

I'll give it a try, but I really like digikams editor and I find making global adjustments with that. Avoiding the extra file have some value :)

 

> A matter of taste...

>

> > - concerns about metadata?

>

> Current Gimp versions, 2.x, have a broken metadata support.

> It will change soon, with Gimp 3.0, but as for today don't expect

> Gimp to protect your metadata.

> The best way, inside Digikam, is to edit and produce sidecar files

> for your images. This will keep your metadata safe and off the way

> of XMP metadata killers programs.

 

Right, the XMP data. Gimp seems to keep exiv data OK though.

 

--

Anders

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Anders Lund]

Hi Marie-noëlle,

 

Thanks for your input :)

 

On Torsdag den 2. januar 2014 18:23:52, Marie-Noëlle Augendre wrote:

> Why don't you try Darktable? You won't need Gimp anymore, as the new stable

> version comes with mask drawing, so I don't know what for you would need

> any other editing program.

 

I actually installed darktable the other day, to see the tethering support it has. I tried it for importing RAWs a long time ago, but it seems to have changed quite a bit since then.

 

I'll give it a go, and see what I can do with it. I'm looking for masked adjustment layers, maybe darktable does a bit like adobe lightroom and provides brush and graduated filter layers? I

 

> As for pictures and metadata management, it's up to you to see if darktable

> can do everything you need, or whether you'll keep Digikam for that (my

> choice).

 

I'll see. I am not likely to let go of digikam, I used it since very long, and have always been very happy with it, now more than ever, with thumbs support during import and other niceness!

> Marie-Noëlle

>

>

> 2014/1/2 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>

>

> > Hi list,

> >

> > I'm reaching a point where digikams internal editor is not enough for me

> > to do the postprocessing I want to.

> >

> >

> >

> > I will have to use gimp or other to do additional work once in a while.

> >

> >

> >

> > So do you have tips on a good workflow for that?

> >

> >

> >

> > I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global

> > adjustments, but after that I will need an external application, so

> >

> >

> >

> > - which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

> >

> > - concerns about metadata?

> >

> >

> >

> > Any help appreciated!

> >

> >

> >

> > --

> >

> > Anders

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > Digikam-users mailing list

> > [hidden email]

> > https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

 

--

Anders

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Peter Mc Donough]

Am 02.01.2014 17:27, schrieb Anders Lund:
> I'm reaching a point where digikams internal editor is not enough for me to do the
> postprocessing I want to.
> I will have to use gimp or other to do additional work once in a while.
> So do you have tips on a good workflow for that?
> I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global adjustments,
> but after that I will need an external application, so
> - which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?
> - concerns about metadata?

I understand you use Linux.

You should keep the RAW original, write-only.
I let digikam generate all tags i.e. xmp-files.
It can also produce a jpg-copy from your Raw-file with a copy of the xmp
information. (Gwenview for example doesn't see Raw)

For processing there are for example UFraw + Gimp.
UFraw takes your original RAW file and sends it after basic
modifications you consider necessary to Gimp for the final touch.
If you want, UFraw produces a copy of its output in lossless png which
you could use as input for Gimp.
Gimp processes at present only in 8bit, so it is a good idea to have
decided maximum dimension (pixels) in UFraw before you send the picture
to Gimp. The xcf-file format of Gimp is also lossless.

As the final output then is in 8bit and you do not intend to modify it
further, there is in my opinion no reason to avoid lossy but compact jpg.

Alternatively have a look at rawtherapee and darktable which offer more
options for Raw developing, but miss some of Gimp's capabilities.

One last point.
You will not get around a color profile for your monitor, in other words
calibration of your tools, to avoid unwelcome color surprises

cu
Peter

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[tosca]

2014/1/2 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>

Hi Marie-noëlle,

 

Thanks for your input :)

 

On Torsdag den 2. januar 2014 18:23:52, Marie-Noëlle Augendre wrote:

> Why don't you try Darktable? You won't need Gimp anymore, as the new stable

> version comes with mask drawing, so I don't know what for you would need

> any other editing program.

 

I actually installed darktable the other day, to see the tethering support it has. I tried it for importing RAWs a long time ago, but it seems to have changed quite a bit since then.

It has changed a lot, and in the good direction!

I'm still waiting for the 1.4 version that is not yet in Fedora repos, but even the previous version is very good, though it still lacks the drawing masks.

The manual has also been completed/rewritten, and does a very good job to get you started with that UI that is not ... very conventional! See there: http://www.darktable.org/2014/01/user-manual-updated/

 

I'll give it a go, and see what I can do with it. I'm looking for masked adjustment layers, maybe darktable does a bit like adobe lightroom and provides brush and graduated filter layers? I

I've never used Lightroom (having given up on Windows several years ago) but more and more testimonies come that say that darktable is now equivalent or even better than LR.

 

As for pictures and metadata management, it's up to you to see if darktable > can do everything you need, or whether you'll keep Digikam for that (my > choice).   I'll see. I am not likely to let go of digikam, I used it since very long, and have always been very happy with it, now more than ever, with thumbs support during import and other niceness!

I only use darktable for developping RAWs that I export as 'master' pictures in TIFF or JPEG format, and do everything else with Digikam.

Marie-Noëlle

--

Retrouvez mon portfolio et mes activités dans ma galerie personnelle, mes reportages sur Jingoo

Et bien sûr la page Photographe en Cévennes sur FB, et mon compte Twitter.

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Photonoxx]

I personally recommend to give a try to Lightzone too.

Previously a commercial software, it is now Open Source/ Free Software since 2013. I found it very easier to use than Darktable which is a bit complicated for me, not very intuitive (in the same way, Digikam editor suffer of the same thing plus the lack of instant preview for many tool and local treatment possibilities).

Nicolas

Le Thu, 02 Jan 2014 18:23:52 +0100, Marie-Noëlle Augendre <[hidden email]> a écrit:

Why don't you try Darktable? You won't need Gimp anymore, as the new stable version comes with mask drawing, so I don't know what for you would need any other editing program.

As for pictures and metadata management, it's up to you to see if darktable can do everything you need, or whether you'll keep Digikam for that (my choice).

Marie-Noëlle

2014/1/2 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>

Hi list,

 

I'm reaching a point where digikams internal editor is not enough for me to do the postprocessing I want to.

 

I will have to use gimp or other to do additional work once in a while.

 

So do you have tips on a good workflow for that?

 

I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global adjustments, but after that I will need an external application, so

 

- which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

- concerns about metadata?

 

Any help appreciated!

 

--

Anders

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

--

Retrouvez mon portfolio et mes activités dans ma galerie personnelle, mes reportages sur Jingoo

Et bien sûr la page Photographe en Cévennes sur FB, et mon compte Twitter.

--

Utilisant le logiciel de courrier d'Opera : http://www.opera.com/mail/

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Anders Lund]

Hi Nicholas,

 

On Torsdag den 2. januar 2014 19:55:19, Photonoxx wrote:

> I personally recommend to give a try to Lightzone too.

>

> Previously a commercial software, it is now Open Source/ Free Software

> since 2013. I found it very easier to use than Darktable which is a bit

> complicated for me, not very intuitive (in the same way, Digikam editor

> suffer of the same thing plus the lack of instant preview for many tool

> and local treatment possibilities).

 

Never heard about lightzone before, so I'll try and take a look :)

 

I personally like digikams editor very much, amongst many other reasons for the nice previewing - I enabled mouseover before/after preview, so I can easily compare the current adjustment of any action with the previous image.

 

I have used it for years of course, and that makes it very comfortable for me, whereas gimp can make me cry, and darktable makes my shoulders quite stiff... ;)

 

> Nicolas

>

> Le Thu, 02 Jan 2014 18:23:52 +0100, Marie-Noëlle Augendre

>

> <[hidden email]> a écrit:

> > Why don't you try Darktable? You won't need Gimp anymore, as the new

> > stable version comes with mask drawing, so I don't know what for >you

> > would need any other editing program.

> >

> > As for pictures and metadata management, it's up to you to see if

> > darktable can do everything you need, or whether you'll keep >Digikam

> > for that (my choice).

> >

> > Marie-Noëlle

> >

> >

> > 2014/1/2 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>

> >

> >> Hi list,

> >>

> >>

> >> I'm reaching a point where digikams internal editor is not enough for

> >> me to do the postprocessing I want to.

> >>

> >>

> >> I will have to use gimp or other to do additional work once in a while.

> >>

> >>

> >> So do you have tips on a good workflow for that?

> >>

> >>

> >> I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global

> >> adjustments, but after that I will need an external >>application, so

> >>

> >>

> >> - which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

> >>

> >> - concerns about metadata?

> >>

> >>

> >> Any help appreciated!

> >>

> >>

> >> --

> >> Anders

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________

> >> Digikam-users mailing list

> >> [hidden email]

> >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

> >

> > --

> > Retrouvez mon portfolio et mes activités dans ma galerie personnelle,

> > mes reportages sur Jingoo

> > Et bien sûr la page Photographe en Cévennes sur FB, et mon compte

> > Twitter.

 

--

Anders

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Le 02/01/2014 20:17, Anders Lund a écrit :

> I personally like digikams editor very much,

so do I, it lacks just minimal photo editing feature (like removing sensor
dust), but it's ideal for basic day to day use

for the rest I use Gimp

jdd


--
http://www.dodin.org
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Anders Lund]

On Torsdag den 2. januar 2014 20:22:30, jdd wrote:

> Le 02/01/2014 20:17, Anders Lund a écrit :

> > I personally like digikams editor very much,

>

> so do I, it lacks just minimal photo editing feature (like removing sensor

> dust), but it's ideal for basic day to day use

 

I love digikam editor even more after trying to agree with darktable - that is really a UI nightmare, althoug it is probably possible to create usable images with it. :\

> for the rest I use Gimp

>

> jdd

 

--

Anders

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[tosca]

I love digikam editor even more after trying to agree with darktable - that is really a UI nightmare...

I agree. But the software is really powerful, and the new user manuel makes the learning curve much smoother; everything and trick is now clearly explained, and it can be read almost like a novel. ;-)

Marie-Noëlle

--

Retrouvez mon portfolio et mes activités dans ma galerie personnelle, mes reportages sur Jingoo

Et bien sûr la page Photographe en Cévennes sur FB, et mon compte Twitter.

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Photonoxx]

Le Thu, 02 Jan 2014 20:17:39 +0100, Anders Lund <[hidden email]> a écrit:

Hi Nicholas,

 

On Torsdag den 2. januar 2014 19:55:19, Photonoxx wrote:

> I personally recommend to give a try to Lightzone too.

>

> Previously a commercial software, it is now Open Source/ Free Software

> since 2013. I found it very easier to use than Darktable which is a bit

> complicated for me, not very intuitive (in the same way, Digikam editor

> suffer of the same thing plus the lack of instant preview for many tool

> and local treatment possibilities).

 

Never heard about lightzone before, so I'll try and take a look :)

Other advantage for Lightzone, it is avaible on both Linux/Windows/Mac, the "grey point" is, as the development just start again after some time of commercial hibernation, the access to the download link is get after subscribing an account. But I could give it if anyone is interested here.

I personally like digikams editor very much, amongst many other reasons for the nice previewing - I enabled mouseover before/after preview, so I can easily compare the current adjustment of any action with the previous image.

Yes, but it's a bit too abstract for me and take a lot of time to click preview each time and wait for processing. Lightzone, Darktable, Lightroom... offer a realtime preview, and it's easy in most of them to activate/unactivate the processing to see before/after.

For example with Digikam, I never get the impression to master the local contrast tool. In lightzone I just have to "play" with a slider and see the result to dose the effect.

Nicolas

I have used it for years of course, and that makes it very comfortable for me, whereas gimp can make me cry, and darktable makes my shoulders quite stiff... ;)

 

> Nicolas

>

> Le Thu, 02 Jan 2014 18:23:52 +0100, Marie-Noëlle Augendre

>

> <[hidden email]> a écrit:

> > Why don't you try Darktable? You won't need Gimp anymore, as the new

> > stable version comes with mask drawing, so I don't know what for >you

> > would need any other editing program.

> >

> > As for pictures and metadata management, it's up to you to see if

> > darktable can do everything you need, or whether you'll keep >Digikam

> > for that (my choice).

> >

> > Marie-Noëlle

> >

> >

> > 2014/1/2 Anders Lund <[hidden email]>

> >

> >> Hi list,

> >>

> >>

> >> I'm reaching a point where digikams internal editor is not enough for

> >> me to do the postprocessing I want to.

> >>

> >>

> >> I will have to use gimp or other to do additional work once in a while.

> >>

> >>

> >> So do you have tips on a good workflow for that?

> >>

> >>

> >> I will probably do the raw conversion using digikams editor, and global

> >> adjustments, but after that I will need an external >>application, so

> >>

> >>

> >> - which fileformat is best? png, tif, jpeg?

> >>

> >> - concerns about metadata?

> >>

> >>

> >> Any help appreciated!

> >>

> >>

> >> --

> >> Anders

> >>

> >> _______________________________________________

> >> Digikam-users mailing list

> >> [hidden email]

> >> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

> >

> > --

> > Retrouvez mon portfolio et mes activités dans ma galerie personnelle,

> > mes reportages sur Jingoo

> > Et bien sûr la page Photographe en Cévennes sur FB, et mon compte

> > Twitter.

 

--

Anders

--

Utilisant le logiciel de courrier d'Opera : http://www.opera.com/mail/

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

[Anders Lund]

Hi Nicholas,

 

 

On Torsdag den 2. januar 2014 23:11:40, Photonoxx wrote:

 

> Other advantage for Lightzone, it is avaible on both Linux/Windows/Mac,

 

Like digikam, darktable (well, linux/mac), gimp ;)

 

> > I personally like digikams editor very much, amongst many other reasons

> > for the nice previewing - I enabled mouseover before/after preview, so I

> > can >easily compare the current adjustment of any action with the

> > previous image.

>

> Yes, but it's a bit too abstract for me and take a lot of time to click

> preview each time and wait for processing. Lightzone, Darktable,

> Lightroom... offer a realtime preview, and it's easy in most of them to

> activate/unactivate the processing to see before/after.

 

I usually do not have to click. Some filters, particularly those that requires lots of CPU cycles - and time - have a "try" button, but mostly the preview is calculated immediately.

 

>

> For example with Digikam, I never get the impression to master the local

> contrast tool. In lightzone I just have to "play" with a slider and see

> the result to dose the effect.

 

You can not compare the local contrast filter of digikam with that of darktable.

 

That said, in digkam too, play with settings and look at the preview - even tough it takes a bit longer for some things.

 

 

--

Anders

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users