>>4467638
You mean that others I consider okay are actually worse? Im sorry, Im a bit confused.

>>4467037
As much as I hate to admit it, either I still cannot grasp Darktable enough or, like you said, the software itself is a bit messy. I was using 2.6 so far until it stopped recognizing half of my lenses (they were still in database and could be manually selected for lens correction but doing this every single time was annoying at best, it must be some bug) so I made separate installation/cache folder for 5.2 and basically had to re-learn the program and still encountered odd situations. To list some examples, it have now two modules for white balance, "white balance" proper (value + tint) and "color correction" which is the one user is supposed to modify as touching white balance module instead makes everything go bonkers. Unfortunately, I had to disable "color correction" module at few situations to safely modify white balance since it apparently assume that user selected proper value at the moment of shooting since if that value is too much off, "color correction" seems to behave oddly. Likewise, "filmic" module expects user to "expose to the right" during shooting but it still, at least in my opinion, leads to pretty much same results as sigmoid module (which is now on by default) - only less saturated as on pic attached and require more work (since you need to correct white balance first for neutral colors, adjust exposure for midtones, set relative white/black exposure). Unless I got something wrong but manual is still at 4.6 while software version got past 5.2 already (with developers encouraging community to write manual themselves).

Even at discount, Capture One might be costly but Im afraid that I cannot run on free software all the time anyway.