trey_a_12

Hey, there you go. I’ve yet to encounter one myself, but the Fairphone 6 seems to finally be “viable” for most people. Battery’s still on the weaker side and performance is a bit behind most comparable phones, but in terms of ethics and sustainability, they’re unmatched.

I’d love to check out a budget flagship-killer like the Nothing or CMF Phones, but software update support was crucial enough to have kept me from fully switching to Android for years. I happen to be partial to Samsung after having their tablets for so long, but other brands (so long as they offer comparable update support) have stepped up significantly. Since Fairphone does have that much down though, go for it.

Oh yeah, it’s great. I use it for my Digital Garden website for in-page navigation.

Shame… that stinks. Well, if it’s any consolation, Samsung phones are finally at the 7 years of software update promise, so you might be able to get an S24 or A34 (or higher, of course, just two options), load it up with Material-style launchers and icon packs, even maybe the open Pixel Camera app from that one website, and turn it into your new “Pixel” until the battery FULLY dies. That, or you can embrace ONE UI or another Android skin entirely, up to you.

Okay. You’re now the second person I’ve seen to have Linux issues. It sounds like it’s much more optimized for macOS and Windows for now, as everything worked well with macOS and Windows 11 (the latter in a virtual machine via VMware Fusion) on a 16 GB M4 MacBook Air. You might just want to submit an issue for optimized Linux support. The developer’s still focusing on building out core functionality, but optimization is definitely key.

It might be worth trying one or two other launchers (Nova and Microsoft, perhaps?) and checking OS versions to see if it’s possibly a Pixel issue, an OS issue, or something else entirely. I think recall vaguely hearing about Google discouraging third-party launchers, but I don’t know that they actually did anything to make them worse.

A simple change, but a welcome one to be sure.

Could be. Full file format support is hit-or-miss with newer programs – even if it can read and write the data, it may not be able to fully interpret it. Try running through *Adobe DNG Converter or converting it to a TIFF, then see if that works any better, perhaps? Also check if there’s already a “full resolution editing” suggestion on the GitHub, and if not, make one! I’m away from my computer right now, but if you find/make one, please link it here so I can also share it.

*Adobe DNG Converter is the one Adobe tool I do use since it’s 100% free and offline. It JUST converts images to “standard” DNG files or JPEGs, and I do this for iPhone ProRAWs or other unsupported images when trying to edit in Darktable. I had to make some “iPhone DNG presets” and all since ADC removes the Apple DNG-specific data, but it works well beyond that.

That’s definitely odd. I mean, it is still definitely WIP (even core-functionality wise), but at least on macOS (via M4 MBA with 16 GB RAM) and Windows 11 (via VMware Fusion with 8 GB RAM and 3D Acceleration on the same ARM Mac, mind you), RapidRAW ran well with my test 48 MP shot and some quick edits.

1. I think you have to release (or hold the mouse still) on an adjustment to see it rather than instant live previews, but aside from that, things generally worked pretty well in my testing. That might be the “issue” with it being “slow,” but if you mean just general scrolling around, that might be an actual bug or lack of Linux optimization yet.
2. The proxy resolution cap is definitely understandable, at least while the program’s still heavily WIP and probably not fully optimized for Linux (hence not being available as a Flatpak or AppImage which would be universal).
3. The highlights “falling apart” sounds like a bug. I know there was one bug where the slider directions for two things (possibly highlights and shadows) were accidentally reversed, so it might be worth looking into that, and if this is another issue, report it to the developer’s GitHub.

I’m with you though – Darktable’s an excellent piece of software, but I’d love a “Lightroom-esque” program and this looks promising!

Oh yeah, I literally just mean in terms of power and use case. I’m 100% for Darktable and have been loving it since version 3.0. I recognize Lightroom and LrC’s purposes though, and (at least for the tech support and recommendations I do for others) believe it important to keep these things in mind for anyone else looking to switch.

You’re entitled to your opinion about the interface (I personally think it’s quite sleek, especially for a user coming from Lr or other simpler editors but not wanting to get into Dt-levels of complexity), but it’s not intended to compete against Darktable in the first place. I would argue that it looks more like Adobe Lightroom (its actual competitor, as stated even in the developer’s ReadMe) than anything.

Keep in mind:

• Adobe Lightroom is the lighter, more streamlined editor with more of the ease-of-use. This is closer to what RapidRAW is trying to achieve. This is shown in the more lightweight interface with fewer options and controls.
• Adobe Lightroom Classic is the heavier, more powerful editor that tries to have all the features. That’s more of Darktable’s area. This is shown in the more detailed interface with more options and settings.

↑ LrC vs Lr interface

Not everyone needs both programs – most people would probably be fine with just Lightroom and don’t need the power/want to deal with the initial complexity of LrC. For people who want those programs without the Adobe, however, that’s where RapidRAW and Darktable come in.

Understandable – and that’s not what this is trying to be. Just as Lightroom ≠ Lightroom Classic, RapidRAW ≠ Darktable. Dt is much more suited to be a LrC competitor, and RR is much more of a Lr competitor in terms of features and usability.