cl: dxo photolab--don't get excited

[gteague]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

was excited to get an email saying photolab had been updated thinking surely the tl and cl would have been added to the modules database. sadly, this is not the case. the d-lux 7 and the q2 were added, but not the cl and the tl. until they are added, i won't be processing any raw images.

/guy

 

[lykaman]

8 minutes ago, gteague said:

was excited to get an email saying photolab had been updated thinking surely the tl and cl would have been added to the modules database. sadly, this is not the case. the d-lux 7 and the q2 were added, but not the cl and the tl. until they are added, i won't be processing any raw images.

/guy

 

I was suprised to find that Photos (iMac) will not process RAW files from the Canon 90D.. I haven't tried the RAW/DNG from my D-Lux7.. maybe I should try.. L

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

Why don't you use Darktable?

[lykaman]

8 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Why don't you use Darktable?

Aloha, if you are referring to my Post, Until I get my eye Op, I'm just using jpegs..   L

[gteague]

because i detest editing at all and dxo is not only one of the universally recognized best quality raw processors available and has the actual data collected over decades of laboratory testing to perform corrections, but is the best at selecting the corrections needed automatically. thus, 98% of the time all that is needed is to load your images, let the batch process work, then save them back out. cropping and rotating and resizing i can do in the native mac /preview/ app, but it's really poor at exposure corrections and sharpening &c.

 i do have affinity which is very well reviewed, but i haven't dug into it enough to know how to use it. i believe it shares the lens correction modules with adobe lightroom/cc though.

/guy

Edited March 18, 2020 by gteague

[ramarren]

Tried DXO and disliked their user interface and their defaults on raw conversion. 

After testing a bunch of other raw processors—wanting to ditch Adobe—I ended up getting Lightroom Classic. It produces the nicest results on the defaults for the CL that suit what I'm looking for. Many raw files out of the CL process to perfect without touching a single adjustment, and the hardest to render image I've got out of the CL that I really wanted (over the past two years and some, 18,000 exposures) took me 45 seconds to finish. 

Whatever works is all that matters to me.  

G

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hmm...

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8219582047/raw-converter-showdown-capture-one-pro-7-dxo-optics-pro-8-and-lightroom-4/6

Same here. Whatever works. I  always come back to Photoshop; I detest presets. I don't want somebody else determining what my photograph will look like. Photoshop gives the best control and has the tools I need.

IMO the act of creativity does not stop with pressing the shutter. I am from the Ansel Adams school. The darkroom, today postprocessing, is at least as important in producing a photograph. The only process that limits the photographer to using no more than the camera is the slide.(and of course, vintage direct processes)

[ramarren]

10 hours ago, jaapv said:

Hmm...

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/8219582047/raw-converter-showdown-capture-one-pro-7-dxo-optics-pro-8-and-lightroom-4/6

Same here. Whatever works. I  always come back to Photoshop; I detest presets. I don't want somebody else determining what my photograph will look like. Photoshop gives the best control and has the tools I need.

IMO the act of creativity does not stop with pressing the shutter. I am from the Ansel Adams school. The darkroom, today postprocessing, is at least as important in producing a photograph. The only process that limits the photographer to using no more than the camera is the slide.(and of course, vintage direct processes)

I like presets ... but not canned presets delivered by a vendor.

I have bunches of presets that I use in LR: I defined them all myself and they make for efficient and consistent operations in image rendering, import of new work, export of finished work, assigning metadata, printing, etc etc. This is extremely useful stuff. 

Image processing apps that depend entirely upon provided "black box" presets ... I avoid completely.

G

[robgo2]

I don’t understand not shooting in raw, because a particular raw converter does not support your particular camera. DxO does a very nice job, but it is slow, and the user interface is amongst the worst that I have seen.  Almost any other raw converter you could name will give better results than out-of-camera jpegs, and some are very easy to use. But the choice is entirely up to you. 

BTW, I expect that the CL2 will have been released before DxO gets around to the CL. 

[jaapv]

On 3/19/2020 at 7:04 PM, ramarren said:

I like presets ... but not canned presets delivered by a vendor.

I have bunches of presets that I use in LR: I defined them all myself and they make for efficient and consistent operations in image rendering, import of new work, export of finished work, assigning metadata, printing, etc etc. This is extremely useful stuff. 

Image processing apps that depend entirely upon provided "black box" presets ... I avoid completely.

G

The preset types of postprocessing programs, like ON1 have full tweakability in the right sidebar (the presets are in the left) and the changes can be saved. 

[Marac]

I'm the same as RAMARREN, tried DXO did not like it, I still use bridge, I still use Lightroom (although it is getting annoying) RAW POWER is an interesting option for editing RAW's, ACR through bridge is maybe my preferred solution.

 

Horses for courses. 

[jaapv]

DXO is not my favourite program either, I cannot say the results are the best on the market and I thoroughly dislike the UI. Most modern programs beat it in my hands, but I don't think that the "quality of raw conversion" is a valid distinguishing parameter any more. The conversions are often too close to call between the various contenders.

[nicci78]

DXO should be avoided. I don’t see the interest for a Raw processing software, that to do not recognise half existing cameras. Most of Leica’s are missing. All Fujifilm with X-Trans sensors are not recognised. 
They do not really support DNG files. 
Other software can at least open any DNG, even the most recent camera ones. 
 

I cannot understand, what they are thinking. They should support every cameras or just give up the business altogether. 
 

Its situation is way worst than Capture One. A software that is held down by its too selective camera support. In short, every cameras that look like a threat to Phase One medium format cameras, will not be supported : all Hasselblad and Leica S lines. 
Fujifilm is the exception. Thanks to their sensor and software partnership. 
 

[gteague]

dxo has been falling further and further behind over the last 3-4 years. but when you realize they are 'mapping' lens anomalies and programming corrections and doing this for sometimes a dozen or two bodies, the workload must be staggering. and they had some sort of bankruptcy intervention about that time as well, so i suspect a lot of lab techs got laid off. it's a shame because to me it's the easiest editor to understand and use.

/guy

[jaapv]

It is so personal - when I want to make life easy on myself there is only one option: Bridge-ACR-Photoshop CC 2020.

ACR holds my colour profiles, home-cooked presets and offers a quick run down the sliders, SS has my actions and plug-ins like the Topaz suite, so 85% of editing after crop-dodge-burn is one-click. I don't have to use more than a couple of minutes per image normally, although some images do get tuned precisely.

[nicci78]

16 hours ago, gteague said:

dxo has been falling further and further behind over the last 3-4 years. but when you realize they are 'mapping' lens anomalies and programming corrections and doing this for sometimes a dozen or two bodies, the workload must be staggering. and they had some sort of bankruptcy intervention about that time as well, so i suspect a lot of lab techs got laid off. it's a shame because to me it's the easiest editor to understand and use.

/guy

Mapping lenses are pretty much useless now. Because, lens manufacturers baked required lens correction inside Raw files. 
So DXO is just wasting its time chasing windmills. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by nicci78

[Marac]

They just updated RAW POWER, very nice too. Any user of ACR/Aperture/Bridge will be very familiar with the layout and functionality of this.

[JayBird]

I too was disappointed by DXO not supporting the CL. What was even more disappointing was they do not support all of the APS-C lenses for the TL. Nothing like a half hearted effort.. I also looked at ON1 but they dont support the CL either. In the end, I renewed my light room subscription. I may have to try darktable.

[jaapv]

CL files work just fine on ON1. You should have downloaded the trial.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[ramarren]

On1 works well, but the required workflow was making me a little crazy. I gave up on it and went to Lightroom Classic ... which annoys me a little with all its Adobe-isms, but works well. 

I just downloaded the latest RAW Power so I'm going go to do some testing with that now. AND I need to study and learn Hasselblad's Phocus image processing app too. 

G