Ansel

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Ansel, a new open‑source photo editor forked from Darktable, is drawing attention for its attempt to streamline a powerful but often-criticized raw workflow tool. Commenters highlight long-standing usability and UX problems in Darktable—such as inconsistent controls, duplicated modules, and steep learning curves—and see Ansel’s opinionated cleanup, scene‑referred workflow focus, and code pruning as a welcome reset, even if the project’s messaging feels combative. Others question choices like weak macOS support and GTK-based UI on desktop, while still welcoming more serious competition to commercial tools like Lightroom, Capture One, and DxO.

Ansel and its origins

  • Ansel is a fork of Darktable by a former core contributor who strongly disagrees with the main project’s direction, especially around UX and code quality.
  • Goal: strip Darktable of “bloat” and half‑broken features, remove/replace ~40k lines of code, and focus on stability, performance, and a streamlined toolset.
  • Database compatibility exists only with Darktable up to v4.0, and may diverge further over time.

State of Darktable & reasons for the fork

  • Darktable is still actively developed with regular releases; some users rely on it as their primary RAW editor, including professionals.
  • Criticisms:
    • Very steep learning curve; many Lightroom users report feeling lost.
    • UX described as inconsistent, surprising (e.g., mouse‑wheel behavior), and cluttered with overlapping modules.
    • Perception of “lead by committee,” lack of clear vision, and resistance to removing legacy features.
  • Supporters counter that Darktable is powerful, non‑destructive, and highly capable if you invest time to learn it.

Technical philosophy: scene‑referred workflows

  • Darktable has been moving from “display‑referred” to “scene‑referred” workflows; the fork’s author was a key driver of that shift.
  • Some users embrace scene‑referred editing and the physics‑based approach to tone and color.
  • Others feel their existing display‑referred workflows were already good enough and resent breaking changes or added conceptual complexity.

UX, workflows, and “too many options”

  • Many commenters find Darktable’s lighttable (DAM) and filtering confusing and over‑engineered.
  • Complaints about duplicated modules (e.g., multiple white‑balance tools), hidden but useful modules, and settings that unexpectedly change behavior across versions.
  • Ansel is praised by some early adopters as more streamlined for first‑time users, with deprecated modules hidden and dangerous UI removed.
  • Others argue that the fork removed useful modules and that they care more about results than about internal cleanliness.

Open‑source governance & design culture

  • Long subthread on how many FOSS apps lack cohesive product vision and professional UX input.
  • Designers describe trying to help FOSS projects, but encountering defensiveness, bikeshedding, and a culture that values coding over usability.
  • Some maintainers say it’s hard to attract UX contributors; designers respond that piecemeal tweaks aren’t enough and wholesale redesigns are rarely accepted.

Platform support, builds, and technical issues

  • Windows build exists but has installer issues (no signing, EXE not MSI, odd console flashes).
  • macOS support is effectively unsupported: very few users, fragile CI, toolkit (GTK) issues, and the maintainer doesn’t own Mac hardware.
  • Several users struggle to build on macOS despite CI scripts; maintainers explicitly warn it may not work.

Comparisons to other tools

  • Darktable / Ansel are compared with Lightroom, Capture One, DxO, Affinity, RawTherapee, ART, LightZone, RAW Power, and GIMP.
  • General pattern:
    • FOSS tools are praised for power and flexibility, especially advanced masking and scene‑referred workflows.
    • Commercial tools are preferred for smoother UX, better catalog management, mobile/iOS integration, modern export formats, and more consistent color/HDR behavior.

Reception and overall sentiment

  • Many are excited to see an opinionated fork that tries to impose a coherent vision and fix long‑standing UX issues.
  • Others are put off by the fork author’s very aggressive tone toward Darktable and find similar problems persisting in Ansel (over‑complexity, odd defaults, non‑standard widgets).
  • Consensus: the fork highlights both the power and the governance/UX weaknesses of complex FOSS creative applications; whether Ansel becomes a “Blender‑moment” for photo editing is seen as uncertain.