One thing I did learn from reading the manual is that you can edit what you did in PL6 starting in lightroom by clicking the original raw and resending it back to PL6. PL6 recognizes and applies it's own previous edits as a starting point for further tweaking and when you save back to Lightroom it gives you a choice to overwrite the existing dng or assign a unique name.
Any DXO Photolab 6 users out there?
- Thread starter bleirer
- Start date
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).
One thing I did learn from reading the manual is that you can edit what you did in PL6 starting in lightroom by clicking the original raw and resending it back to PL6. PL6 recognizes and applies it's own previous edits as a starting point for further tweaking and when you save back to Lightroom it gives you a choice to overwrite the existing dng or assign a unique name.
I haven't seen that in PL6...I've searched the help files and cruised through the various menus, but nothing popped out. That would be useful, but since I do my final processing in LR, I've not felt the need for such a tool in PL.
I've done this, sort of. I've taken a raw file that has been previously processed in PL and sent for further processing in LR and finally saved as a jpg file. After updating from PL5 to PL6, I've started to look at the ability - in the Color tab in Customize - to choose either the Classic (Legacy) working color space as used in PL5 (Adobe RGB) or the DxO Wide Gamut newly introduced in PL6. I've been taking some of my PL5 processed raw files into PL6, applying the same presets, but changing the working color space to DxO wide Gamut, then sending them as dng files to LR for further processing. I choose to give it an alternate name, so as to have a dng file saved for each working color space. I'll try your method of applying a preset, going into LR and processing, saving the result as a jpg then going back to PL and switching the color space and going back to LR....tho' I suspect that I will have to reset my various LR settings to default values and process from scratch, which is what I did before to try to get the most pleasing result to my eye.
I've got to admit that it's a bit weird for a Canadian to type color rather than colour
I was an early user of PL years ago. I skipped version 5 but bought the upgrade to the current version. I rarely use it. My primary use is for when I decide to print an image and I will use PL for their optical/camera corrections and I do this out of blind faith since I am not sure it makes a difference but the techy in me says it is the right thing to do. For prints it is the only thing I use PL - convert the NEF to optically corrected DNG with no other edits.
I occassionally use PL for a very hard to edit image shot in low light and high ISO. I find their Clearview helps me salvage an image easier than playing around with photoshop and camera raw.
I occassionally use PL for a very hard to edit image shot in low light and high ISO. I find their Clearview helps me salvage an image easier than playing around with photoshop and camera raw.
Alex...since you have been using PL6 with LR could you maybe answer this questions? I have a question about using the plugin option in LR and returning the image from PL6 running deep prime XD. It returns the image to both the source file and creates another one in a collection file. It then pulls LR to the collection file when it returns vs. the original file. So annoying. Is there a way to change this?
My solution: Save to disk and then sync the folder (simple R click in windows) in LR. You can turn off the dxo sidecars, but if you use the return to LR function you are stuck with the dxo collection.
I vaguely remember seeing a programming solution that required altering a dxo program file, but I have no idea if it would work with the current version.
It's not creating two image files. Collections are not folders full of files. Collections simply tag image files. The file is sent back to the location of the original and stacked with the RAW file. But as you describe when you're passed back to LR it opens the window on the newly created DxO collection. All you have to do is right click and then click "go to file in library" and you're back where to the location of the original file. I agree it is really annoying. But no more onerous than the @SandyW suggestion to export to disk and then snyc. It's annoying either way.
Every once in a while I go and delete the whole DxO collection set. It doesn't hurt anything in either PL6 or LR. Next time you send a file over to PL6 and send the .dng back to LR it will simply create a new collection set/collection.
Hi Kim...
Good question - I've been asleep at the switch, so Sandy and Dan have answered the question. I do as Dan suggests - delete the DxO collection in LRC every now and then. It is indeed annoying, but the results I get from Photolab make it worthwhile for me.
Cheers, Alex
bobfriedman
Well-known member
I use Photolab + Photoshop all the time... Usually in that order.
Ok. Thanks for responding. I might reach out to support about this if I have plenty of spare time.
lwan
Well-known member
Photolab is brillant in many regards, especially deep prime XD. The only feature that remains unmatched (in my opinion) in lightroom/camera raw, is the basic controls for highlights/shadows and white/black points. Every raw processing software I have tried are seriously lacking in this area in comparison, quickly producing unpleasing results when you need more than a minor adjustment. ACR/LR really does it differently in a way that is a lot more natural-looking, while others tend to look like poorly processed HDR images when going too far with the sliders. It's a shame as it's probably just a matter of using a different tone mapping approach.
They all seem very oddly similar to what you can expect from libraw, and I wouldn't be surprised it's actually the reason.
For this reason, photos that need a little more adjustment or photos that really matter to me are exported to DNG from Photolab to get some touch up in ACR. And I don't really enjoy that extra step.
They all seem very oddly similar to what you can expect from libraw, and I wouldn't be surprised it's actually the reason.
For this reason, photos that need a little more adjustment or photos that really matter to me are exported to DNG from Photolab to get some touch up in ACR. And I don't really enjoy that extra step.
That is interesting about the tone mapping. I hadn't noticed anything special about Lightroom and haven't really explored that part of Photolab yet. I mostly work in Photoshop, just trying to get a reasonably balanced image to send there, where the real fun begins.
lwan
Well-known member
Don't get me wrong, photolab is my primary step no matter what just for the noise reduction and lens profiles (in this regard, if some people feeling the Nikon 400/2.8G+1.7TCII should get a profile from DxO, please join me in the request
).When I used to work mostly in the 3D area, we've used everything from pre-made tone-mappers to in-house ones and there is a very clear difference in how "pleasing" an image is when the tone-mapper is global or local. Local clearly sucks unless you fine-tune it carefully until it.... looks like a global tm. But well, long story short, I find ACR/LR's "tonemapping" (after all it maps 14 bit tones down to 8, it's not like 32 to 8 but that's still tone mapping) is vastly superior in the sense that it considers the picture globally when raising shadows and lowering highlights (for example). But also the ability to define your white and black points are immensely useful, as the other sliders will act based on those "limits", which other raw converter usually lack.
In one LR training I watched, they started by moving Highlights to 0, Shadows to 100, then holding down the Option key (Mac) and moving the black and white sliders to adjust the histogram. Holding down the key shows the clipping. How does this relate to your statement here please?Don't get me wrong, photolab is my primary step no matter what just for the noise reduction and lens profiles (in this regard, if some people feeling the Nikon 400/2.8G+1.7TCII should get a profile from DxO, please join me in the request
When I used to work mostly in the 3D area, we've used everything from pre-made tone-mappers to in-house ones and there is a very clear difference in how "pleasing" an image is when the tone-mapper is global or local. Local clearly sucks unless you fine-tune it carefully until it.... looks like a global tm. But well, long story short, I find ACR/LR's "tonemapping" (after all it maps 14 bit tones down to 8, it's not like 32 to 8 but that's still tone mapping) is vastly superior in the sense that it considers the picture globally when raising shadows and lowering highlights (for example). But also the ability to define your white and black points are immensely useful, as the other sliders will act based on those "limits", which other raw converter usually lack.
joe43
Well-known member
My workflow in DXO PL6 Elite edition and NIK Collection 5 and I almost never any Adobe product. If I need Adobe, I use Bridge and ACR.
If you are a Adobe PS user and a NIK user, there are some very interesting things you can do in NIK and PS that you cannot do in DXO PL and NIK. I believe it falls under Smart Objects.
My understanding is that if you want to use DXO's Noise reduction features before you use LR, you would use DXO PureRaw2 on the front end before you do anything in LR. Check out videos by Robin Whalley and Photo Joseph and Dan Hughes. Here is one of them.
Same net effect but with more control is to use PL6 to apply camera/lens profile corrections and DeepPrime NR. Then export as DNG file to LR with "denoise and optical corrections only".
Oosty
Well-known member
I used PL4 as my RAW converter and PS Elements 11 for a year or two before subscribing to Adobe. I like the deep Prime noise reduction very much as well as Clear view Plus (Imo far superior to ''dehaze" in LrC). Used in conjunction with Nik Collection 3 I got some very nice results.
My only reason for preferring LrC now is convenience in masking a PL4 masking is finicky. Also FWIW I preferred Nik 3 to Nik Collection 5
I won't be upgrading as I've become "locked in" to the lazy masking in LrC and Camera Raw
My only reason for preferring LrC now is convenience in masking a PL4 masking is finicky. Also FWIW I preferred Nik 3 to Nik Collection 5
I won't be upgrading as I've become "locked in" to the lazy masking in LrC and Camera Raw
joe43
Well-known member
I have been using DXO PhotoLab Elite edition for about three years. Right now I am using DXO-PL 6.2.0.103 Elite as my RAW processor for my Nikon NEF images. When needed I access NIK Collection 5 directly from DXO-PL. If NIK is used, DXO PL creates a Tiff that gets moved to NIK.
In DXO PL I apply the level of Nosie reduction and sharpness that I think I might need.
My normal processing in DXO-PL starts with applying a preset, usually DXO Standard. Then I check all of the Color settings and make any changes needed. Usually this amounts to just tweaking White Balance. I then go to the Light panel and make any needed global adjustments. The last is usually the Tone Curve where I apply an S curve as needed. Denoising is done with the Detail panel. There are four choices with Deep Prime XD as the most aggressive. Depending on the image you can select Unsharp Mask in the Detail panel. I rarely ever move the sliders to the right. And sometimes I turn it completely Off. Here is why.
For my nature images like birds and insects or mammals, I do sharpening as a Local Adjustment by applying sharpening to a selected portion of the image using a Control Point. The local adjustment tools I use the most are Control Points and Control Lines. With Control Points and Control Lines there are three adjustment categories with a total of 14 different adjustments . I use Control points a lot on subjects and Control Lines on skies. After all global and local adjustments are made the final step is selecting noise reduction in Detail panel before I Export an image to DXO like a Jpeg or access NIK for additional processing. When you access NIK, noise reduction is applied to the Tiff.
Within NIK I use Color EFex Pro especially the two Contrast filters, Pro Contrast and Tonal Contrast. The other filters I might apply for nature are Brilliance/Warmth and Darken Lighten. These all be be used globally or locally through Control Points. Sometimes Graduated Neutral Density Filter is used to tweak brightness levels in the image. The Tonal Contrast Filter has shadows and highlights and Midtones sliders that are very useful in minimizing background distractions.
Once the adjustments in NIK are done, the processed Tiff shows up in DXO Pl. Then I can process it or crop it if needed in DXO or just Export any needed file type or size using Export in DXO.
I have Adobe suite on my computers but I have not used it in three years.
In DXO PL I apply the level of Nosie reduction and sharpness that I think I might need.
My normal processing in DXO-PL starts with applying a preset, usually DXO Standard. Then I check all of the Color settings and make any changes needed. Usually this amounts to just tweaking White Balance. I then go to the Light panel and make any needed global adjustments. The last is usually the Tone Curve where I apply an S curve as needed. Denoising is done with the Detail panel. There are four choices with Deep Prime XD as the most aggressive. Depending on the image you can select Unsharp Mask in the Detail panel. I rarely ever move the sliders to the right. And sometimes I turn it completely Off. Here is why.
For my nature images like birds and insects or mammals, I do sharpening as a Local Adjustment by applying sharpening to a selected portion of the image using a Control Point. The local adjustment tools I use the most are Control Points and Control Lines. With Control Points and Control Lines there are three adjustment categories with a total of 14 different adjustments . I use Control points a lot on subjects and Control Lines on skies. After all global and local adjustments are made the final step is selecting noise reduction in Detail panel before I Export an image to DXO like a Jpeg or access NIK for additional processing. When you access NIK, noise reduction is applied to the Tiff.
Within NIK I use Color EFex Pro especially the two Contrast filters, Pro Contrast and Tonal Contrast. The other filters I might apply for nature are Brilliance/Warmth and Darken Lighten. These all be be used globally or locally through Control Points. Sometimes Graduated Neutral Density Filter is used to tweak brightness levels in the image. The Tonal Contrast Filter has shadows and highlights and Midtones sliders that are very useful in minimizing background distractions.
Once the adjustments in NIK are done, the processed Tiff shows up in DXO Pl. Then I can process it or crop it if needed in DXO or just Export any needed file type or size using Export in DXO.
I have Adobe suite on my computers but I have not used it in three years.
Interesting. I could see it replacing Lightroom, not Photoshop though.
Bill it's hard to compete with the new masking tools in Lightroom though. Although I suppose you get it with PS smart objects ACR though. I still would like DXO to support HE* but they aren't being clear. Some have said they promised this year.
The DXO noise reduction is liked by many.
Topaz has told me they are in discussions with PICO re HE*
The DXO noise reduction is liked by many.
Topaz has told me they are in discussions with PICO re HE*
The masking in Photolab 6 is also quite good. But yes, Photoshop has the best selection tools, in my opinion. Since I always end up in Photoshop anyway I do the heavy lifting there.
Anyone using DXO can you tell me is you see color shifts variations between DXO after running it through Denoise and NX Studio?
The reason I ask is that they likely interpret the RAW differently. Not saying which is better or worse, but I have noted using Topaz that when I use it directly with RAWI do get a color difference vs when I use it with a TIFF. Again no good or bad. Just learning about how things get done.
I know some people run all their images through this first. I am not inclined to do that and mostly use Adobe. I usually edit first and then decide how bad the noise is for me to consider another program. With the very advanced masking in Adobe now, I don't usually have that many images I feel the need to use another program. Also I like to have ACR/Lightroom have the full camera settings in RAW vs if I use DXO or Topaz I think the DNG doesn't offer that if I am not mistaken.
Thanks in advance.
The reason I ask is that they likely interpret the RAW differently. Not saying which is better or worse, but I have noted using Topaz that when I use it directly with RAWI do get a color difference vs when I use it with a TIFF. Again no good or bad. Just learning about how things get done.
I know some people run all their images through this first. I am not inclined to do that and mostly use Adobe. I usually edit first and then decide how bad the noise is for me to consider another program. With the very advanced masking in Adobe now, I don't usually have that many images I feel the need to use another program. Also I like to have ACR/Lightroom have the full camera settings in RAW vs if I use DXO or Topaz I think the DNG doesn't offer that if I am not mistaken.
Thanks in advance.
I have compared Topaz DeNoise, DxO Deep Prime and Topaz Photo AI. The only images I looked came from Topaz DeNoise. DxO images were "muddy" and would need more focus processing that was unnecessary with the Topaz products. Photo AI didn't to do a very good job of removing noise, not up to the standard of DeNoise.
You should download a trial version of DxO and try for yourself - I've always found it best to test and see for oneself
Cheers,
Alex
With Photolab 6 you can start from lightroom and send to Photolab and choose to apply only noise and lens corrections back to lightroom as a dng to continue your usual loghtroom routine. Or another choice is to apply other develop corrections in Photolab then get a dng sent back to lightroom or Photoshop, or if preferred get a tiff sent to Lightroom or Photoshop. The tiff option reduces some Lightroom options for example profiles. The dng keeps all options open in lightroom but you would turn off noise reduction and lens corrections since you did that in Photolab.
Try the free fully functional 30 day trial.
Try the free fully functional 30 day trial.
- Status