3 ms·
Is it something like ART, a fork of RawTherapee? http://art.pixls.us/ http://art.pixls.us/ It's interesting how bloated those open-source editors are. There a
by t0bia_s 2y ago
Is it something like ART, a fork of RawTherapee?
http://art.pixls.us/ http://art.pixls.us/
It's interesting how bloated those open-source editors are. There are a ton of useless options. Instead of focusing to implement needed tools like AI masking or lens correction, we have bunch of de-mosaic non function methods or multiple sharpening tools that are non practical to use in classical workflow. Even defaults render broken RAW files!
It's like many volunteer programmers doing software without ever actually using RAW development professionally.
- gazook89 2y agoPeople come to volunteer with the interests and skills they have. It’s easier to let problems that are hard or not interesting fall to the wayside, and for the maintainers to take what they can get (especially if they think that happy contributors will contribute more).
- Almondsetat 2y agothis is the same as GIMP and Audacity and many other FOSS projects: a proliferation of menus and niche features and zero overarching design and ideas
- gmueckl 2y agoThat's because the incentives don't align between developers and users on OSS projects when they aren't catering to developers. There is no product management as a go-between that is tasked with understanding the user base and edits feature requests and developer contributions into a coherent package.
- imtringued 2y agoBasically this. The "scratching your own itch" approach to open source development doesn't work if your users aren't software developers. Or the inverse. If your open source developers aren't photographers.
- t0bia_s 2y agoBoth is wasting of potential and energy. Projects became abandoned soon or later because it miss supply on demand. Which is beneficial for proprietary software development. Which sucks a lot and ignore purpose of open source development.