Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Other Raw Converters => Topic started by: Garnick on May 27, 2013, 09:48:56 am
-
I've just downloaded and installed Raw Therapee. Dragged the app into the Applications folder as usual, Mac 10.7.5. After opening the program, the only way it will shut down is with a "Force Quit". Neither the Command/Quit nor the Menu/Quit will work. I then downloaded and installed the version for 10.6 on a 10.6 OS. Same issue, will not shut down without Force Quit. Any idea why this would be happening?
Gary
-
I've just downloaded and installed Raw Therapee.
Hi,
Which version of RawTherapee did you install? Have you checked on their forum whether your issue is a known issue?
Cheers,
Bart
-
Hello Bart,
I've installed v.4.0.10.72 on a late 2010 Mac pro, OS 10.7.5. Also v.4.0.6.3 on a white MacBook, just to see if it would work. Same issue, no shut down without Force Quit. I haven't noticed anything on the RT forums about this yet, but also haven't had an opportunity to search all of the posts in the different categories. Not a problem yet, since I only want to do a bit of testing. However, this is obviously something that shouldn't be happening.
Thanks for the reply Bart.
Gary
-
no shut down without Force Quit.
Gary, Bart,
Same issue here. RawTherapee 4.0.10.72 on MacPro running OSX 10.8.3 only closes with Force Quit.
Apparently this has something to do with the assignment of ctrl-Q (http://code.google.com/p/rawtherapee/issues/detail?id=1496), adding image to que. Mac has both ctrl and cmd keys, where Cmd-Q is the OSX shurtcut for closing an application. Just could be that because of this ctrl-q key combination in RT Cmd-Q and the menu quit command does not work in OSX.
Maybe far fetched, just a thought.
Jaap
-
To quit the application, click on the red window-close-droplet thingy in the upper left corner of the main RT window.
kirk
-
Jaap,
Actually the Ctrl key on the Mac OS has a totally different function. I've been using Macs for longer than I wish to admit and have never seen an instance when Ctrl-Q would close/quit an application. On a PC(Windows) the Ctrl key has the same function as the Command key on the Mac, so of course in that case Ctrl-Q would indeed quit an app.
Kirk,
Thanks for the suggestion. Since the little red "thingy" has always been a method to simple close a window and never to quit an app, I probably wouldn't have thought of that approach. However, indeed it does work. Good one!
Gary
-
The newer version of RawTherapee 4.0.11 is released, including Mac OS X 10.6
You can download from http://rawtherapee.com/downloads
Windows build will be uploaded soon, meanwhile it is available at http://www.visualbakery.com/RawTherapee/Downloads.aspx
-
On a PC(Windows) the Ctrl key has the same function as the Command key on the Mac, so of course in that case Ctrl-Q would indeed quit an app.
Gary,
True, and that made me think possibly this was the reason Cmd-Q was not implemented in the Mac build. At least we have the red dot to the rescue.
Kirk,
Thanks also works on 10.8.3, but as Gary said red dot almost always closes application window not the app.
The newer version of RawTherapee 4.0.11 is released, including Mac OS X 10.6
Michael,
Not 10.8?
Jaap
-
Maybe I shouldn't be breathing life into an old thread but this one has the the title that particularly suits my experience with Raw Therapee and that is it keeps crashing. I'm running the latest version on Windows 7 and every now and then it just stops doing whatever I've asked and a diminutive dialogue box pops up telling me that Windows has found an error with it and do I Want Microsoft's finest to try and fix it? They never do so I just have to close it down and start again. Thankfully nothing important has been lost but I'm now thinking that perhaps I shouldn't be so tight and buy a 'proper' converter.
Anyone else suffered this?
-
Justin, if you report such issues in the google code or Rawtherapee forum threads they could be addressed by the development team.
http://rawtherapee.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=3639
http://code.google.com/p/rawtherapee/issues/list
-
Michael, my impression is that you have been successfully using RawTherapee for some time, so I wonder if you could point me to some past LuLa comment where you had waxed lyrical about what you see as the benefits?
Please don't feel that I'm asking you to write something new, I'm not.
-
You could probably search through my earlier posts to find any particular one you are referring to.
I simply have a better confidence in this software and the project than other commercial software, although I have licenses for them as well.
RawTherapee always provided for me features when other software would not at that time.
I feel in better control when using this open source product.
-
Michael, my impression is that you have been successfully using RawTherapee for some time
Isaac, just keep in mind that Ezra does participate in RT development (codewise), so he is not a regular user of RT... that does not mean that RT is bad, that just means that his experience is tainted ;)
-
Isaac, just keep in mind that Ezra does participate in RT development (codewise), so he is not a regular user of RT... that does not mean that RT is bad, that just means that his experience is tainted ;)
Tainted seems to have a negative tone. I suppose biased could also be seen in a negative context, even though the term may be more accurate.
I will jump in to give my recommendation of the software. The biggest advantage is the level of detail brought out by the de-bayer algorithms. AMAZE in particular seems to do a very fine job, pun intended. It also has a great deal of flexibility in the number of tools available. Maybe too many as they can seem overcomplicated in the impact on the image. If the program has a weak point it is the creation of thumbnails when you open a folder. This can take a long time.
The quality of the image output is excellent.
-
Tainted seems to have a negative tone. I suppose biased could also be seen in a negative context, even though the term may be more accurate.
Let's just say - better informed than a typical user ;)
-
Raw Therapee can be very challenging on the Mac platform. I keep downloading new versions as they become available, only to delete them after a period of frustration and disappointment. Perhaps it runs better on Windows, but my observation of the actual output tells me that it is not worth the effort to learn such a hugely complex program for what it delivers in terms of IQ. Just compare it to Photo Ninja, and you will see what I mean. I truly admire what the community of developers are attempting to accomplish, working on their own time and providing the program for free to anyone who wants it, but there are other free raw converters that produce far better results (e.g. Raw Photo Processor--RPP).
Rob
-
It's true that RawTherapee has tougher to learn than many other raw converters, but I'd say that once you got the hang of it results are indeed very good. So it's not results that is the problem, it's the interest it requires to learn it.
The main reason which makes it a bit hard to get into is that you can process an image in several ways. Say if you want to control saturation, you can do it with sliders in RGB space, in Lab space in CIECAM02 space, and you can also do it with curves in various ways. We should probably reduce the number of tools to make it more accessible, but the current user base have various preferences in how they like to process images. We also like to let it be a bit of an "experimental box" for new interesting algorithms that developers want to try out, the software is both for users and developers.
The new 4.0.12 version has some slight OS X improvements made by the way. It's still not a native mac app though (the software is cross-platform), cmd-q is the only mac native shortcut that works.
We know about this criticism though so we do make some effort to simplify things, it's an ongoing process.
-
Here is an example of RT output. One frame out of a big 3x9 pano. 100% crop with morning sun hitting the ice sculpture. CA? Nada.
Thanks again to the people that worked on this program.
-
RawTherapee is two versions behind on the Mac OS. I just downloaded ver 4.0.12.154, which is advertised as Mac OS 10.7. You can't quit it from the app drop down, you have to Force Quit. I can't conceive why a relatively mature app for Mac would not comply with Mac OS conventions after all this time.
Maybe it is the greatest thing since granola, but I find it opaque and troubling.
The site says ver 4.1 will be on the street soon. I'll try it, but I don't have much hope for an app that doesn't have one of the simplest Mac user features.
-
We should probably reduce the number of tools to make it more accessible, but the current user base have various preferences in how they like to process images. We also like to let it be a bit of an "experimental box" for new interesting algorithms that developers want to try out, the software is both for users and developers.
Which is what I've pointed to in the past as the reason I no longer use RT - I was a user waaaay back from when Gabor was solely responsible, and a huge advocate for years - and I've been shouted down for saying it: RT has become primarily a coders' playground, and far less, a photography tool.
Nothing wrong with that, but I continue to maintain that until the unnecessary (I use that word deliberately and advisedly) complexity is robustly addressed, it will continue in the direction in which it has been inexorably heading since going Open Source - more and more an offputting, overly complicated (for no obvious advantage) niche product with little to attract most photographers.
Rob mentions Photo Ninja up the page: quality of output apart (and like Rob, I'm a PN fan), it too has some very clever, very versatile coding, but it's hidden from the user, working as it does, behind the scenes of an apparently quite limited feature set and UI: this allows the photographer to focus on results, without having to deal with and work past the almost guaranteed (unless you coded it) paralysis of RT option overload.
-
Which is what I've pointed to in the past as the reason I no longer use RT - I was a user waaaay back from when Gabor was solely responsible, and a huge advocate for years - and I've been shouted down for saying it: RT has become primarily a coders' playground, and far less, a photography tool.
Nothing wrong with that, but I continue to maintain that until the unnecessary (I use that word deliberately and advisedly) complexity is robustly addressed, it will continue in the direction in which it has been inexorably heading since going Open Source - more and more an offputting, overly complicated (for no obvious advantage) niche product with little to attract most photographers.
Rob mentions Photo Ninja up the page: quality of output apart (and like Rob, I'm a PN fan), it too has some very clever, very versatile coding, but it's hidden from the user, working as it does, behind the scenes of an apparently quite limited feature set and UI: this allows the photographer to focus on results, without having to deal with and work past the almost guaranteed (unless you coded it) paralysis of RT option overload.
They really need to add some tutorials. It may be irrational, but most people hate reading software manuals. Several 3-5 page tutorials, or youtube tutorials, would go a long way to helping people understand what all the weird features are. The number of tools in the ciecam02 section for example. What is it? Why does it need all these things? What is the difference between the normal sliders and this section's versions?
-
I'm not manual averse myself - I actually contributed to early versions of the RT manual, and I used to provide RT tutorials on my site - but it's beyond that now: the manual that would cover ever possible purpose, use-case and nuance of the complexities of RT these days (CIECAM02 being a perfect example of that) would be immense - to the point of complete unusability.
-
It is a pity. There are some things (e.g. noise reduction, tone mapping, sharpening) that RT does better than any other raw converter I have tried (absent a host of plug-ins). But the absence of a clear road map explaining the when, why and how of the multitude of tools puts many people off even trying.