So should I just suck it up and pay for LR CC? I'm really not keen and gonna hate paying for it when not using it during more busy or uninspired periods. It is possible to switch the creative cloud subscription on/off as you need it? Once you switch it off, can you still export your previous edits?
It's really up to you. It depends on your workflow. If you find that you have the best workflow in that software, why not? If you are not a fan of SAAS, then it's time to look for more perpetual or more FOSS alternatives.
Darktable is powerful, and there is a learning curve, but it's well supported and updated regularly with at least one new version each year, sometimes two. Well worth the effort.
I remember that during the lockdowns, the versions jumped quite a lot. Modules got added aggressively per version release.
The new model (scene referred workflow) that darktable has transitioned into may be technically better for professional purposes but the clear plus for display referred workflow was that you started with modules and settings that somewhat closely resemble an in-camera JPEG, give or take a few tunings.
I remember a lot of people complained during the transition to scene-referred workflow. I believe that's what made it a bit less user-friendly. There was a complaint about their RAWs being a bit more raw. The software translates the actual embedded-matrix RAW instead of the camera-matched auto standard which RawTherapee instantly applies.
From reading the ART site, the Fork was taken to make the package easier to use. For a new user- they succeeded.
Using Darktable and ART - ART is much easier and more intuitive to use than Darktable.
Yes, for a newer user, RT is easier to use than DT.
Someone posted that they couldn't understand the tutorials. Aurélien Pierre is the main developer and ridiculously technical. Try Bruce Williams on You Tube, he breaks things down in layman's terms and has a separate video for each module, plus some overall software videos to get started.
Aurélien Pierre's explanation of the Filmic RGB module is very useful. He even has tutorial for colour science.
Here are some minor observations as I use RT and DT. ART and RT are much easier to use than Darktable, even for me, especially for minor camera adjustments.
- Film simulations in RT are also flooded and are easier to setup and apply. RT as a DAM is better more straightforward vs the add film roll in DT.
- If one likes in-camera profiles, the DCPs can be applied in colour management in RT, whereas in DT, there isn't that option. Even the lovely l.monochrome.d is available to be applied once you have the DCP. According to the authors, DT is for us to create our own colour science.
- RT handles Pentax Pixel-Shift images like a king. It's probably the best in that category.
- RT uses black-relative exposure and white-relative exposure in Highlights and Shadows, eliminating the "halo" that most processing software have when lifting shadows or clipping highlights. Darktable also has this but in Filmic RGB, which almost eliminates the need to use the Shadows and Highlights module. With DT, the lifted shadows and clipped highlights in a separate module can give the halo artifact but can be eliminated by compression.
- DT has drawn masks, its greatest advantage over any PP software available. Even NR can be localised, much like AI denoising software.
I use and like both, depending on the need/goal. I think these two (or three including ART) must be considered because they are proper software. If one is into film sims, I find the ones in RT are really good, especially when printed. My favourite film stock, Agfa Vista 200, is well-represented there. DT's drawns masks are so powerful and we are flooded by a lot of possibilities that we can experiment on. Contrast/gradient can also be customised using different ways in different modules.
Going back to the original question,
@hazwing, have you tried RT or ART already? Cheers.