A workflow conundrum now that PureRaw has XD

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Member's gallery
Do you use another DAM tool?

I love Lightroom as a DAM, but am neutral on it as a RAW processor. I like DXO's RAW processor, but I think PhotoLab is a primitive DAM tool.

Using LR for DAM and Pure RAW/PhotoLab as a RAW processor gets you the best of both worlds as a user experience, and PhotoLab seems a bit of a waste of $100, then. The issue is that LR's and DXO's non-destructive edits don't play together, so you're either having DXO create giant piles of TIFFs with edits baked in (which LR can see) or you're having DXO write .dop sidecars, which don't create TIFFs, but can't be seen by LR.

If you rarely touch your files, LR+Pure RAW seems a good approach to gain access to DXO's noise reduction improvements. But if you edit most of your files, your library will bloat and you lose the speed-of-operation and batch editing features of a LR-only workflow. If you edit a high percentage of your files, PhotoLab for "everything" seems a better approach, but it's not very good as a DAM.

(Off-topic, but my wish is that DXO improve PhotoLab to parity with LR as a DAM tool. Then I can finally eliminate LR.)
 
Member's gallery
Well perhaps DXO has shot themselves in the foot with PR3. I use PR2 all the time with LRC. Photolab is ok - but it does not have the masking tools that Adobe has and as a result I no longer use It.
I will be upgrading to PR3 soon and dropping PL.
 
I use lightroom for the library but do most of my editing in Photoshop, or at least finish in Photoshop, so it seems PR3 Would be the new path forward now that it has XD.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
I use lightroom for the library but do most of my editing in Photoshop, or at least finish in Photoshop, so it seems PR3 Would be the new path forward now that it has XD.
Click to expand...
Similar to my workflow. I use Bridge/ACR/PS. Once I've culled and processed my images, I import them into LR for the catalogue features. Been doing that for years.

If I need DxO NR, Topaz Sharpen AI or ???, I do those first. Then proceed with ACR and PS. Then LR for cataloguing.
 
Member's gallery
One of the features that I like in Photolab is the Smart Lighting with spot weighted function. I'm not sure that it's available in Pure Raw...also Clear View Plus, and wide gamut.
 
AlexY said:
One of the features that I like in Photolab is the Smart Lighting with spot weighted function. I'm not sure that it's available in Pure Raw...also Clear View Plus, and wide gamut.
Click to expand...

I don't think the gamut is an issue. It is slightly smaller than Prophoto which is what the lightroom develop module uses.
 
AlexY said:
One of the features that I like in Photolab is the Smart Lighting with spot weighted function. I'm not sure that it's available in Pure Raw...also Clear View Plus, and wide gamut.
Click to expand...

And I think the spot weighting is accomplished via curves in lightroom. Remind me what clear view plus does?
 
Member's gallery
Clearview Plus:

DxO Clearview Plus.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

DxO Smart Lighting...give it a try in your Photolab software, especially the Spot Weighted function.

DxO Smart Lighting.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
The question is Pure Raw or Photolab, the decision made more difficult because they now have identical demosaicing, lens correction, and denoising. Is it Lightroom to Pure Raw and back to Lightroom for basic editing then out to Photoshop or is it Lightroom to Photolab to do what Lightroom used to do then out to Photoshop.
 
Another difference seems to be that Photolab gives a little loupe preview window of the effects of the NR settings along with the larger preview of the other settings. I believe but am not certain that deep prime doesn't give any preview of the effect of the NR settings. Anyone know for sure?
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
Another difference seems to be that Photolab gives a little loupe preview window of the effects of the NR settings along with the larger preview of the other settings. I believe but am not certain that deep prime doesn't give any preview of the effect of the NR settings. Anyone know for sure?
Click to expand...
Not sure if this is the confirmation you seek Bill. This is from DxO tutorial page on noise reduction.


* HQ (fast) is a very powerful processing to be applied by default on raw photos.
PhotoLab’s preview window (the main window that shows corrections) includes HQ processing all the time.
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
Another difference seems to be that Photolab gives a little loupe preview window of the effects of the NR settings along with the larger preview of the other settings. I believe but am not certain that deep prime doesn't give any preview of the effect of the NR settings. Anyone know for sure?
Click to expand...
If you were asking whether PureRaw gives a preview, no it does not. It is pretty much black box software.

This morning I downloaded the trial version of PureRaw and have been running a few files to compare results between PL6 and PureRaw. So far after only a few files I'm about 50/50 identical results vs some lighting and geometry differences. Still trying to nail down what's causing the differences.
 
NorthernFocus said:
If you were asking whether PureRaw gives a preview, no it does not. It is pretty much black box software.

This morning I downloaded the trial version of PureRaw and have been running a few files to compare results between PL6 and PureRaw. So far after only a few files I'm about 50/50 identical results vs some lighting and geometry differences. Still trying to nail down what's causing the differences.
Click to expand...
Interesting. DXO is saying the engine is the same for lens correction and NR. If you export as NR and Lens only you still get differences? Is NR and Lens turned off in Lightroom?

Yes i like having the preview even if the tiny loupe screen, looking at different parts of the image and adjusting the amount.
 
Member's gallery
The problem with DXO is that there is always a long time before they include the latest lenses : I downloaded the trial version, and neither the Z 400mm or Z 600mm is included. Btw, when I was using Photolab 4 and got my Z9, well sorry sir, you need to upgrade to version 5, we do not support the Z9 in PL4. And wait for the high efficiency nef support...
 
Member's gallery
bleirer said:
Interesting. DXO is saying the engine is the same for lens correction and NR. If you export as NR and Lens only you still get differences? Is NR and Lens turned off in Lightroom?

Yes i like having the preview even if the tiny loupe screen, looking at different parts of the image and adjusting the amount.
Click to expand...
Of course I think I've got everything consistent but must be overlooking something. I use presets in PL6 so should be getting the same settings every time. And everything looks the same in LR. I'm going to start over with some totally un-edited RAW files and see what I get.

Loggitie said:
The problem with DXO is that there is always a long time before they include the latest lenses : I downloaded the trial version, and neither the Z 400mm or Z 600mm is included. Btw, when I was using Photolab 4 and got my Z9, well sorry sir, you need to upgrade to version 5, we do not support the Z9 in PL4. And wait for the high efficiency nef support...
Click to expand...
As Bill said above DxO is a tiny company. I mean literally like 10 employees. They have to purchase the new hardware and then do all of the testing. Regarding the upgrades, Adobe is the same. Open LR6 and try editing RAW files from any of the current generation Z bodies. And regarding the compressed NEF files, that's a Nikon issue. Nikon elected to use a proprietary format that requires all of the software companies to pay licensing fees if they want to support the format. Typical of Nikon. Great that they are trying to use the best available technology. Bad that they don't really consider how it will affect the user/customer.
 
Member's gallery
I use DXO-PL and not pure RAW.

My version of DXO-PL Elite is now 6.4.0 as I just updated it for the new features to process Nikon Z9 NEF High Efficiency files and some Fuji files too. My upgrade did not cost me anything. And 6.4 and a few previous versions of Elite allowed me to use all four Noise reduction options including Deep Prime XD.

Pure Raw users need to pay a fee to get PureRaw 3. I think if you start with PureRaw, a Tiff is created for use in other programs. With DXO PL this is not the case uless you choose the Tiff format when you export a finished image.

I wish that DXO was faster on lens info for auto adjustments. However I have not found this to be an issue. On tele lenses there is usually little change to the image. If distortion i visible, you can fix it manally in DXO PL.
 
Member's gallery
joe43 said:
... I think if you start with PureRaw, a Tiff is created for use in other programs. With DXO PL this is not the case uless you choose the Tiff format when you export a finished image.

I wish that DXO was faster on lens info for auto adjustments. However I have not found this to be an issue. On tele lenses there is usually little change to the image. If distortion i visible, you can fix it manally in DXO PL.
Click to expand...
I'm also a PL6 user currently trialing PureRaw. PureRaw does offer the choice of outputting jpeg, DNG, or TIFF.

One of the things I like best about the PhotoLab lens profiles for telephotos isn't the geometry corrections but rather the sharpness "corrections". It is basically the equivalent of capture sharpening and in some cases makes a big difference as a starting point for further PP.
 
Member's gallery
NorthernFocus said:
I'm also a PL6 user currently trialing PureRaw. PureRaw does offer the choice of outputting jpeg, DNG, or TIFF. One of the things I like best about the PhotoLab lens profiles for telephotos isn't the geometry corrections but rather the sharpness "corrections". It is basically the equivalent of capture sharpening and in some cases makes a big difference as a starting point for further PP.
Click to expand...
 
Member's gallery
I forgot to add to my previous post just above. When I downloaded ver 6.4.0 of DXO PL it asked me if I wanted to download the Optic modules for the Z mount Nikon 100-400mm S lens. I am glad that module has been completed.
 
Member's gallery
Loggitie said:
The problem with DXO is that there is always a long time before they include the latest lenses : I downloaded the trial version, and neither the Z 400mm or Z 600mm is included. Btw, when I was using Photolab 4 and got my Z9, well sorry sir, you need to upgrade to version 5, we do not support the Z9 in PL4. And wait for the high efficiency nef support...
Click to expand...
I purchased DxO PL6 and have asked their support more than 3 times to include the Nikkor Z100-400 zoom and the Z TC1.4. It has been more than 4 months and their reply is either nothing or it is "when we feel like it".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top