Andrew,
Apologies. I called you "Greg" in my reply.
This was not very thoughtful.
Regards
Bertwim
On 2/20/21 11:32 PM, Andrew Greig wrote:
Hi Bertwim,
Before I moved to Darktable from Corel AftershotPro 3, I was shooting
RAW + jpg. And I stored my image files separately, thus
20210221-mo
Hi Greg,
Thanks for responding and thanks for sharing your workflow. I'll need to
study it in a bit more detail, to see if it will work for me.
So far, I have always considered the triplet of files (raw + the
corresponding jpg (possibly with edits, but fullsize!) + associated
xmp, if availa
Hi Bertwim,
Before I moved to Darktable from Corel AftershotPro 3, I was shooting
RAW + jpg. And I stored my image files separately, thus
20210221-modelname
20210221-modelname-RAW; 20210221-modelname-jpg; 20210221-modelname-exported
20210221-modelname-exported has 3 children
20210221
To export your images you have to select them first and export them.
Before changing the selection you do: history stack / write xmp and you
are done.
Cheers
Philippe
On 20/02/2021 08:12, Bertwim wrote:
Hubert, thanks for your response.
I understand that "modified" is not a well-defined conc
I do not import jpgs. Only raws.
On 2/20/21 12:48 PM, Bernhard wrote:
Bertwim schrieb am 20.02.21 um 12:35:
Such a default .xmp is misleading: if one would create a jpg-image
using the info from such a default generated xmp, this generated
'default jpg" is (very) different from the camera
Dear Bernhard,
This is just semantics. I'm afraid you don't get what I am after.
It seems hard to convey the message that I need a workflow such that
when DT is not used to do any "edits", I don't want to see any redundant
xmp files. If I know that any existing xmp-file can be used to
regene
Bertwim schrieb am 20.02.21 um 12:12:
Looking at export makes more sense. I consider the exported files
(say, the jpgs), as the final product of DT. After all, It is the jpg
that I show, send to others, publish on a webpage etc. Pretty sure
this holds for many people. That is why I want to
Bertwim schrieb am 20.02.21 um 12:12:
Looking at export makes more sense. I consider the exported files
(say, the jpgs), as the final product of DT. After all, It is the jpg
that I show, send to others, publish on a webpage etc. Pretty sure
this holds for many people. That is why I want to
Bertwim schrieb am 20.02.21 um 12:35:
Such a default .xmp is misleading: if one would create a jpg-image
using the info from such a default generated xmp, this generated
'default jpg" is (very) different from the camera generated one.
Which is understandable, as the camera has its built-in
To answer your question:
/"But why do you want to write an xmp file against the jpeg... Dt is
useful to treat raw files! Xmp files are useful to preview raw files in
Dt!"//
/
This is because the exported jpgs are the ones that will be used e.g. to
send to others, upload to a photo album, etc
Hubert, thanks for your response.
I understand that "modified" is not a well-defined concept, as DT needs
to do a lot of stuff which can be considered as 'modifications' on the
raw picture. Nevertheless, in LightRoom mode there is a filter "select
untouched", the meaning of which is intuitivel
With XMP files creation on import is IMO mandatory, as only the XMP file
contains any modifications at all, sice darktable does not and will not
ever modify RAWs or processed files. You can totally disable xmp generation
and rely only on db which has a downside of possibility of failing when
needed
Sorry Dimitry, but how does this help me implementing the export of
xmp-files of modified images?
Regards
Bw
On 2/20/21 9:49 AM, Dimitri Gathy wrote:
In the module import, there is "parameters" & the "ignore jpegs". When
you export, you can choose the destination. Read the manual.
Le sam. 20
In the module import, there is "parameters" & the "ignore jpegs". When you
export, you can choose the destination. Read the manual.
Le sam. 20 févr. 2021 à 09:43, Bertwim a écrit :
> I might do that, but I am considering implementing it myself.
> I am not very familiar with the darktable interna
I might do that, but I am considering implementing it myself.
I am not very familiar with the darktable internals (yet), Perhaps
somebody from this dev-list kan give some suggestions how to tackle the
problem.
Regards,
Bertwim
On 2/20/21 9:31 AM, Martin Straeten wrote:
Then you may file a f
Then you may file a feature request at
https://github.com/darktable-org/darktable/issues/new?assignees=&labels=&template=feature_request.md&title=
and be patient until someone implements it ...
> Am 20.02.2021 um 09:23 schrieb Bertwim :
>
> Hi Martin,
>
> Sure, but that is not what I am loo
Hi Martin,
Sure, but that is not what I am looking for. I don't want unnecessary
being being generated.
Kind Regards,
Bertwim
On 2/20/21 7:31 AM, Martin Straeten wrote:
You can use the collection filters just to display edited images using
darktable related tagging
Hi Patrick, thanks for responding.
Sure, this is what I do: only importing the raw files.
But I don't want .nef.xmp xmp-files for images that I have not
touched. They are redundant, serve no purpose, only wrongly suggesting
that I have edited images.
Regards,
Bertwim
On 2/19/21 10:51 PM, P
You can use the collection filters just to display edited images using
darktable related tagging
___
darktable developer mailing list
to unsubscribe send a mail to darktable-dev+unsubscr...@lists.darktable.org
Then ctrl+a
* Bertwim [02-19-21 16:48]:
> Hi,
>
> My camera creates an image both in raw format (Nikon, nef) and a jpg. When
> the camera-produced jpg is good enough, I just want to keep it, leaving it
> untouched by DT. No xmp-file needed or even desired. For the others
> pictures, I use DT to process the
Hi,
My camera creates an image both in raw format (Nikon, nef) and a jpg.
When the camera-produced jpg is good enough, I just want to keep it,
leaving it untouched by DT. No xmp-file needed or even desired. For the
others pictures, I use DT to process the the raw image and export a new
jpg,
21 matches
Mail list logo
