dtourolleandClaude Opus 5
3bb68cff69
Export sizing could bound an image but not fix it. Long edge, short edge and percentage all preserve the aspect ratio by letting one dimension fall where it may, which is right for most work and useless against a display that accepts one resolution and rejects everything else — a television's art mode, a digital frame, a wallpaper slot. FR-EXP-3 has always listed both halves of the answer, and this adds them. **Fit box** scales to fit inside a width and height, so nothing is thrown away and the result is smaller than the box on one axis unless the crop already matches it. **Fill box** scales to cover the box and cuts the overhang off the middle, so the file is exactly the pixels asked for. Fill is the only mode in the file that discards image data, so two things about it are worth stating. The overhang comes off symmetrically: the crop tool is where a photographer decides which part of a frame survives, and this stage having an opinion of its own would fight it. And locking the crop to the same ratio leaves nothing here to cut, which is the workflow the two features are meant to be used in. With upscaling off and a source too small to cover, a fill box keeps its *shape* rather than falling back to the source's: exporting a 3:2 file where 16:9 was asked for is silently wrong in exactly the way the mode exists to prevent, so the box shrinks instead. The existing rule — clamp, never fail — is otherwise unchanged. Four panel sizes are offered as buttons beside the fields. Getting 3840 x 2160 by typing four digits twice is a step at which the mistake is discovered after the upload rather than before it. They fill in the numbers and nothing else, in particular not the fit/fill choice: both are legitimate against a screen, and guessing would discard the edges of a photograph for a user who wanted them. The list is panels rather than platforms, because a screen has one exact pixel count for ever where "what a photo site wants" would rot in the file. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
DarkRoom
A cross-platform, non-destructive RAW photo editor for Linux and Android.
Status: early. v0.1 is a remote library viewer — see docs/milestone-v0.1.md.
Documentation
| Document | Contents |
|---|---|
| requirements.md | What the software must do — 122 numbered requirements |
| architecture.md | How it is built — crates, GPU pipeline, data model, sync |
| milestone-v0.1.md | The first buildable milestone |
| faces.md | Face detection and identity — the models, the licence problem, and what S14 measures |
Building
Desktop:
cargo run -p darkroom-desktop
Android (containerised toolchain, see docker/android):
./docker/android/build.sh cargo ndk -t arm64-v8a build --release
Current state
Working: workspace, GPU context and compute pass, adaptive Slint shell, Android cross-compilation of the core crates.
Not yet working: the zero-copy display path. The build currently uploads frames through the CPU, which is exactly what ARCH §6.1 forbids — measured at 96% of frame time at 4K. Replacing it is spike S1, the project's highest priority.
cargo run -p dr-gpu --example bench --features readback
reproduces that measurement.
Licence
GPL-3.0-or-later.