Jump to content

DXO v5 raw converter


hankg

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The new demosaicing engine in the coming DXO raw converter looks to be pretty amazing:

 

DXO v5

 

Maize or basketweave patterns are easily provoked in Phase One C1 pro and you have to give up a little bit of detail to keep them suppressed. Still I prefer it to the other raw converters. I wonder if the hack that was used for Aperture could be used to try DXO's converter with M8 files when the demo is available.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

x

They don't support Leica and are not likely to as there lens correction software needs info about aperture and focus distance that is not available to the M8. However the new raw converter and some of the other features like color, ICC and lighting controls are not lens specific.

 

Aperture did not support the M8 either and Eoin came up with a hack so M8 files could be processed. If the DXO software does represent a dramatic step forward (remains to be seen) it might be worth a hack to use it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't support Leica and are not likely to as there lens correction software needs info about aperture and focus distance that is not available to the M8. However the new raw converter and some of the other features like color, ICC and lighting controls are not lens specific.

 

 

There is no reason that f-stop, distance or other info. couldn't be entered manually. That is how distance is supported with Canon although the new Canon bodies will save and communicate distance info. via the EXIF.

 

For that matter, even if DxO can't justify testing a lot of Leica lenses, all that DxO really has to do is support the raw file format, and allow most optical correction adjustments to be made manually. They could be saved as presets for easy use later. It may not be as accurate or convenient as the tests and correction that DxO makes on supported lenses, but could still be useful. I don't understand why DxO doesn't do this as it would extend their market. I'll be at the PhotoExpo in NYC next week and plan to talk to the people at DxO about this. (I've written them before with this suggestion too.)

 

I think the DxO raw converter is good enough (and very feature rich) that this will appeal to people even if it is less automated than with fully supported cameras and lenses.

 

DxO has a form you can fill out where you can indicate interest for support of cameras and lenses. Maybe if a lot of M8 users request support, something will be done. Here's the link:

 

DXO - Simply better images

Link to post
Share on other sites

For that matter, even if DxO can't justify testing a lot of Leica lenses, all that DxO really has to do is support the raw file format, and allow most optical correction adjustments to be made manually. They could be saved as presets for easy use later. I

 

DXO doesn't need to offer any lens profiles if the v5 raw converter, lighting and color tools are good enough, they can compete as a raw converter even for users who use cameras and or lenses that there are no lens specific DXO profiles for. Even a lot of Canon lenses are not supported so lens support should not be the limiting factor.

 

Up until now it was the lens profiles that where the selling point as the raw software was nothing to write home about -but the samples of the v5 converter output looks really promising. No digital artifacts. So they should consider widening the camera support for the non-lens dependent tools.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DXO doesn't need to offer any lens profiles if the v5 raw converter, lighting and color tools are good enough, they can compete as a raw converter even for users who use cameras and or lenses that there are no lens specific DXO profiles for. Even a lot of Canon lenses are not supported so lens support should not be the limiting factor.

 

Up until now it was the lens profiles that where the selling point as the raw software was nothing to write home about -but the samples of the v5 converter output looks really promising. No digital artifacts. So they should consider widening the camera support for the non-lens dependent tools.

 

I agree with you that irrespective of lens testing, DxO should be sold as a raw converter.

 

I wouldn't say that up to now the DxO raw converter is "nothing to write home about." I've used DxO version 4 for a year and favor it over C1 that I had been using exclusively for all of my work the previous three years. I have noticed very slightly more moire or faint color patterns in some fine detail on occassions, but other than that, the DxO images are superior. Of course any improvements in version 5 will be welcome. There have been several updates to version 4 in just the past year that have added features and increased performance. So it even before the announcement about version 5 it was clear to me that DxO is constantly trying to improve the program and incorporate user suggestions.

 

Here are links to a comparison I did when I first got DxO:

 

http://goldsteinphoto.com/dxo-c1.jpg

 

Keep in mind that even with unsupported lenses, some of the optical tools still work in manual mode. For instance, I use a Nikon 35PC on my Canon and I can still adjust the c/a and purple fringing. Although the distortion and vignetting controls won't function. Also some geometric corrections can be carried out and not others. I am not sure why they can't give more manual control for unsupported lenses as this would be better than nothing. With my "unsupported" Canon TSE lenses, these are at least recognized by the program as 24mm and 45mm lenses and allow more optical and geometric corrections to be adjusted manually. I am not sure why there is a distinction, but there is a difference between levels of "unsupported" lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that even with unsupported lenses, some of the optical tools still work in manual mode.

 

I have used DXO for several versions and even have very good results batch converting Lightroom output TIFF's from M8 files.

 

One of the snags for DXO is that it can output DNG-files. So convert DNG to DNG ?

 

What we all need is a tool that permits to write, preferably in Batch to an exif file. Does that exist?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What we all need is a tool that permits to write, preferably in Batch to an exif file. Does that exist?

 

If you're familiar with command line stuff on computer, this is quite easy ... I use Phil Harvey's exiftool to extract EXIF from any number of files in batch to an single text file.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I use Capture One for the Raws of my M8 und of my Canon 5d and now I tried the DXO V5 Demo with the Raws of the 5d.They offer a version for the 5d and my 70-200 L, but not for the M8.

I really found no reason to change to DXO, there is nothing within the DXO that´s not possible to manage with the Capture One.

I will not change, the Demo of DXO is still deletet.

 

 

Dieter

Link to post
Share on other sites

They don't support Leica and are not likely to as there lens correction software needs info about aperture and focus distance that is not available to the M8. However the new raw converter and some of the other features like color, ICC and lighting controls are not lens specific.

 

Aperture did not support the M8 either and Eoin came up with a hack so M8 files could be processed. If the DXO software does represent a dramatic step forward (remains to be seen) it might be worth a hack to use it.

 

Hank.. it's second time i read on here today that Aperture do no support the M8.

I'm using Aperture since July.. here the link to the Aperture list of supported cameras.

 

Regards,

EM

 

http://www.apple.com/aperture/raw/cameras.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I use Capture One for the Raws of my M8 und of my Canon 5d and now I tried the DXO V5 Demo with the Raws of the 5d.They offer a version for the 5d and my 70-200 L, but not for the M8.

I really found no reason to change to DXO, there is nothing within the DXO that´s not possible to manage with the Capture One.

I will not change, the Demo of DXO is still deletet.

Dieter

 

 

 

I beg to differ. How much time did you spend with DxO and how many images have you adjusted? I've done several thousand with each pogram. There are a lot of functions in DxO that are simply not available in C1. (Also - I don't know how you demo'd version 5. I did not see that it was available yet. Where did you find this?)

 

Here is a partial list off the top of my head:

 

Optical correction - c/a (and lateral c/a), vignetting, purple fringe, uneven sharpness, lens distortion.

 

Geometric controls - keystoning, force to rectangular, anamorphosis adjustment

 

DxO Lighting - there is nothing in C1 that can do this to bring out shadow detail.

 

Multi point color balance.

 

Plus I think the color controls in DxO are more powerful and work better than those in C1. My one caveat is that C1 does a very good job with portraits. Wheras DxO trys to get the most detail out of a portrait and can make it look harsh. When I process portraits in DxO, I have to turn down a lot of settings to make a look that is similar to what I'd get in C1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use DxO for my Nikon D200. DxO's main reason for being is to correct lens aberrations. This is not much of an issue for Leica, and there is probably not a large enough M8 user base (relative to Nikon, Canon, etc.) to justify the effort to do all the necessary modeling of camera and lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I use DxO for my Nikon D200. DxO's main reason for being is to correct lens aberrations. This is not much of an issue for Leica, and there is probably not a large enough M8 user base (relative to Nikon, Canon, etc.) to justify the effort to do all the necessary modeling of camera and lenses.

 

Don't forget about the 6-bit stuff, folks ... Leica shots are already corrected in the M8. I bet DxO knows about this and that leaves not much they can do. :)

 

If every camera company starts doing this ... actually Nikon already started, Canon probably will follow ... who will buy their software?

 

One another thing, both Nikon and Canon actually build decent raw converters ... not sure why many folks automatically skip the Capture NX and DPP, and the later comes free in box. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not interested in the lens correction. It's the examples of the quality of the new v5 raw conversion engine and lighting and color tools that interest me. If the raw converter is as good as it looks maybe DXO should not be limiting their marketing and market to lens profiling/correction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...