RapidRAW: A non-destructive and GPU-accelerated RAW image editor

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

AI assistance and age framing

  • Several commenters note the project was built as a personal challenge with heavy use of Gemini; reactions range from impressed to mildly uneasy about using age as a marketing hook.
  • The developer says prior LLM experience let them use Gemini effectively while understanding its limits.

Sidecar files vs library catalogs

  • RapidRAW stores edits in sidecar files; rationale given:
    • Robustness to folder renames/moves.
    • Easy portability between machines.
  • Some users push back, saying Lightroom can work fine with a central catalog and relinking, and dislike clutter from extra sidecars (especially when XMP already exists).
  • Others argue sidecars are the de facto standard for non-destructive editing and avoid vendor lock‑in, but acknowledge cross‑app edit compatibility is limited and app-specific.

Mac code signing and Apple ecosystem

  • Some want a signed Mac build soon; the developer plans to do it but is focused on core features.
  • One side argues the $99/year and Apple bureaucracy aren’t worth it for a noncommercial app and that build/run‑from‑source is acceptable for this niche.
  • Another side says this misrepresents code signing: notarization doesn’t require App Store submission and provides a real quality‑of‑life improvement; the fee is modest compared to Windows code signing.

Performance, architecture, and web-based UI

  • Multiple reports of sluggishness and UI lag on macOS and Windows with large folders or 24MP DNGs.
  • A commenter inspects the code: thumbnails are CPU‑rendered, base64‑encoded in Rust, then sent via Tauri IPC to a React/WebKit UI, causing multiple memory copies; called “vibe coding” and contrasted with native pipelines.
  • The developer acknowledges this is suboptimal and plans to improve it.
  • Broader debate on web/React/Tauri UIs: some say web-based UIs are inherently heavy for image editors; others cite fast browser-based tools as counterexamples and emphasize heavy GPU/Rust usage underneath.

Feature requests and metadata

  • Requests include luminosity masking and built‑in camera/lens profiles.
  • Questions about how edits/metadata are stored (one sidecar per RAW vs catalog) and whether the format is open/portable; answers are not fully clear in the thread.

Comparisons to existing RAW editors

  • RapidRAW is seen as promising but “nowhere near” mature tools like Darktable, Ansel, RawTherapee, ART, Capture One, or Lightroom, especially in algorithm quality (e.g., tone mapping) and performance.
  • Long subthreads compare open source tools vs commercial ones:
    • Many praise RawTherapee’s technical depth but criticize its UI and curve widgets.
    • Darktable is described as powerful but extremely complex and badly designed UX-wise; some users defend it after a steep learning curve, others say it’s a strong advertisement for Lightroom.
    • Capture One and Lightroom are favored for denoising, speed, UI, presets, and integrated DAM, despite subscriptions/price.
    • Ansel, ART, and others are mentioned as forks or alternatives trying to fix UX or add HDR.

RAW workflows, simplicity, and open-source gaps

  • Extended debate on “simple vs powerful”:
    • Some want easy, Lightroom-like tools that still exploit RAW latitude (exposure, WB, basic masking) and dislike ultra-technical UIs.
    • Others argue that deep control (demosaicing choices, color science) inevitably adds complexity and is needed in scientific/technical or demanding artistic work.
  • Many complain that open-source editors are made by “coders, not photographers,” with lots of low-level options but missing high-impact workflow features like good AI masking and modern UX.

Other technical and documentation notes

  • Clarifications on RAW vs bitmap/BMP: RAW is sensor data with higher bit depth and mosaic pattern; bitmaps are already-demosaiced pixel images, usually 8‑bit/channel.
  • Praise for the README’s visual GIF demos, but concern that large GIFs make the page heavy; suggestion to use embedded video instead.
  • Some users are enthusiastic and plan to contribute or “keep an eye on” the project as it evolves.