Michael Gerdau | 31 Aug 13:29 2014

Using camera RAW settings by external RAW converter (was: Preview is "better" than RAW conversion?)

Hi list,

not wishing to hijack an existing thread I created a new one.

> What you see in the preview is the jpeg embedded in the Raw file (which is
> a quarter size).
> That preview jpeg has had all the treatments applied to it that a 'normal'
> in camera jpeg would get, including brightness, contrast, and saturation
> adjustments, and noise reduction and sharpening.
> If you do your own RAW development, those adjustments are not
> automatically applied (although some RAW developers from the camera
> makers do apply them).

This is an issue I'm facing eversince I started shooting in RAW.

Most of the time the JPG created by the camera (Nikon D700 here) is
just fine and works nicely. Occasionally I need some tweaking though.

When I do this in Digikam I never got results even as good as what the
camera does which as I learned after some searching of the web is due
to me not applying the proper parameters to the RAW converter.

So far so old (w/r to knowledge).

For me this resulted in owning a small Windows Notebook with Capture NX
(Nikon's RAW converter) installed to do the job.

Now my question:
(Continue reading)

Niels Ott | 31 Aug 12:09 2014

Preview is "better" than RAW conversion?

Hi there,

I take my pictures with a Pentax K-7 in PEF format. When I view the PEFs
in DigiKam, they usually look quite nice already.

However, when I use the RAW converter to convert a batch of images, I
just don't manage to make them look as good as in the preview.
Especially the contrast is often too low. I don't know what's going on here.

It doesn't matter really to me for good shots which I manually "develop"
in the image editor, but for giving someone a bunch of pictures, it's a
shame that those images always look flawed compared to cheap jpeg
shooters. 8-)

If DigiKam does quite well automatically in Preview, why can't it also
ofter the same automatic quality in the RAW converter?




Niels Ott
Bassist und so bei Delta B
Victor Engmark | 30 Aug 14:04 2014

Can't specify input colour profile

I've enabled colour management and set the working colour space and
monitor profile. Both of those lists show a whole bunch of profiles,
from /usr/share/color/icc and ~/.local/share/icc according to the
"default locations" pop-up. But all input profile selection lists
("Camera and Scanner", "Printing and Proofing", image editor pop-up
for uncalibrated images) are empty.

I also tried putting AdobeRGB1998.icc into ~/.color/icc. It was
detected but only listed in the output profile selection lists.

digiKam output in case it's relevant (removed repeated lines):

$ digikam
Object::connect: No such signal org::freedesktop::UPower::DeviceAdded(QString)
Object::connect: No such signal org::freedesktop::UPower::DeviceRemoved(QString)
QSqlDatabasePrivate::removeDatabase: connection 'ConnectionTest' is
still in use, all queries will cease to work.
digikam(6346)/digikam (core): Do not use transformForDisplay for
uncalibrated data but let the RAW loader do the conversion to sRGB
digikam(6346)/digikam (core): No input profile: invalid Behavior flags 2097152
digikam(6346)/digikam (core): Do not use transformForDisplay for
uncalibrated data but let the RAW loader do the conversion to sRGB
libpng warning: iCCP: known incorrect sRGB profile

Stuart T Rogers | 30 Aug 09:49 2014

What am I doing wrong?

I just used the batch queue manager to add a text watermark to some 
images and save them as a new file name. The original files were some 
6.6MB in size but the new copy was only about 1.9MB but were the same 
pixel sizes and still had metadata. What am I doing wrong here as what I 
expected was simply a new file with the same file size but with an added 


Website: http://www.stella-maris.org.uk
or:      http://www.broadstairs.org
cerp | 28 Aug 09:43 2014

How to stop "watermark" reducing the size of the pictures?

Dear all,

We use the watermark function to add the copyright in the bottom right  
corner of the pictures.

The pictures are taken using in camera jpeg generation, which normally  
has very high quality.

When we watermark in digikam, it reduces the size of the jpeg file  
from approximately 4Mb to 1.8Mb with a considerable loss of quality.  
We have tried setting all the parameters we could think, but without  
being able to stop this behavior. What I would like is the original  
picture with the watermark saved at the same resolution without  
additional compression  .... how do I achieve it?

Thanks for your help.


Corrado & Rina

Dr. Martin Senftleben | 25 Aug 15:58 2014

losing usability


I'm sorry I'm complaining again. I just got started with digikam 4.2 and
feel really sad, because what is probably considered an improvement, has
made things worse - at least for me (and I guess I'm not the only one).
Right now there's only one thing I want to mention:
When editing an image, after applying "local contrast" you get the
option to try it out. If you do, you get a split image, one side before,
the other, after. It's impossible to tell what is better because now
both sides compete with each other. It was much better when it was
possible to look at the whole picture in both states by moving the
cursor over the image or moving it away. This way one had the chance to
compare the entire image. Now, I have no idea how the other half of the
image might look like, and this may be vital as the other half can be
entirely different in light composition (just think - one half in the
shadow, the other in the light - it becomes useless).
I admit, I haven't dug my way through the settings yet, but if there is
a possibility to choose another way of display, then it should be right
there. It's already annoying (my impression) that I have to click the
"try out" button before I get any result. I know some people may want to
alter the settings before they apply the changes, but I was always
content with the available settings, so for me it's a step more in
working with my images.
And I still want the thumbnail list of the album images back in the
editor without having to select them first. For what is the thumbnail
sidebar if not to make it possible to have all other images available?

Well, I guess I have to put up with it, as there are no good
alternatives. But I don't really understand why digikam seems to be
loosing in usability with every new release.
(Continue reading)

Niels Ott | 25 Aug 10:51 2014

Color depth in lossless formats

Hi there,

I recently got a new used camera with 14MPix and now I feel like
re-thinking my archiving options for edited images. So far, I had a
6MPix Pentax from whose PEF files I created PNG files. But with the
14MPix of the K-7, the PNGs range from approx. 69 to 76MB per image.
Outch! So I checked out the other formats that DigiKam supports.

Example (compression rates depend on particular image, of course):

PEF/RAW:  14,7MB, "16 bpp", "not calibrated"

TIFF:     72.6MB, "16 bpp", "RGB"
PNG:      70.9MB, "16 bpp", "RGB"
PGF:      62.6MB, "48 bpp", "RGB"
JPEG2000: 31.5MB, "0 bpp",  "unknown"

Now I'm wondering: What's up with the bpp values? Shouldn't they all be
the same: 48bpp (3x16 bit per pixel in RGB mode)

Also, I'm stunned by JPEG2000's apparently superior lossless performance
(and flabbergasted by the tremendously slow implementation) - or is
there simply something going wrong here?

My DigiKam Version is the one of Ubuntu 12.04.5, namely 2.5.0

I know that disk space is cheap nowadays, but I'm also doing audio
recording and video stuff, so I fill up disks quickly and the JPEG2000
compression level seems awesome to me. But how to check that it doesn't
fool me and how safe is this to still work in the future? JPEG2000 is
(Continue reading)

Anders Lund | 25 Aug 10:38 2014

flickr export crashes

Hi list, 

Here, digikam crashes brutally when I attempt to export images to flickr. 
Sometimes it claims that the token is bad, and when asking for a new one, 
there is an error.

I'm using digikam 4.1 until I find time to update.

Anyone else with the same experience?

Christoph Huckle | 25 Aug 09:44 2014

Kipi Plugin DLNA export not recognizing miniDLNA

Hello All,

on my setups, I cannot get the DLNA export plugin to work with miniDLNA.

Digikam Versions I tried: 3.5; 4.1; 4.2

I realized that at some point they changed the miniDLNA binary to miniDLANd

Any ideas?

Digikam-users mailing list
Peter Albrecht | 22 Aug 13:06 2014

Tag Manager: Reverse alphabetic sorting of tags

Hi list,

I just installed digiKam 4.2.0 and am playing around with
the "new Tag Manager" (my previous digiKam version was 3.5.0).
(BTW: Big thanks to Veaceslav for all those tagging

One strange thing on my machine:
Tags in the Tag Manager are displayed in reverse alphabetic
order. E.g.


The "Tags side view" on the left side displays them
alphabetically sorted:


Can someone else reproduce this behaviour?

Stuart T Rogers | 22 Aug 11:51 2014

Photos not showing in album after copy

I have just been copying some photos between albums and sub-albums and 
now when I go back to the original album the copied photos do NOT show 
up, however they are there as I can see the correct file names in 
Dolphin. I am running Digikam 4.1 btw. Is this a known bug?


Website: http://www.stella-maris.org.uk
or:      http://www.broadstairs.org