In other words it comes with its own way of doing things. It probably was inspired by it, but darktable is much more than a re-implementation. What helped me most while switching is to acknowledge that darktable is no clone of Lightroom. In addition darktable even has a dedicated maintainer for macOS. Downloads do not mean that people are actually working with it, but still serve well as a first indication. Direct downloads of the latest release (darktable-3.2.1.dmg) seem to be at 23,279. Homebrew share their statistics that show 4,739 installs within the last year. As darktable was originally created for Linux, I wanted to understand if there are also some users on macOS. When you choose an application, it is always good to understand if there is a community cultivating it, in case you need help or are expecting it to evolve overtime.

I am just wondering, why the hell did I not switch earlier? To share it upfront: I did not get disappointed nor frustrated by this decision.

In contrast the releases of 3.0 and 3.2 have been milestones in growing darktable into a serious and easy to use – not to say even more mature – alternative to Lightroom and it is time to do the final switch. The 2.x versions have not really been working for me. I was following darktable since a few years. With that preference in mind and if it is about RAW processing, you have the choice between digiKam, RawTherapee, and darktable. To be independent from the business needs of a company, the only option is to go for an alternative that is licensed under an Open Source license. Let’s not talk about Lightroom CC, its unstable desktop app, and a recent user nightmare. When Adobe stopped selling copies and only provided subscription options was one of the moments it became very clear that an alternative is needed. I started my digital photography life with a Nikon D80 and Lightroom 1.0 quite a while ago (2007).

Darktable lightroom