DxOĪlso new in this version of PhotoLab is the ability synchronize changes to an image file’s IPTC and EXIF data by applying the changes to images edited with other third-party applications. Having said that DeepPrime is really my only gripe about DxO and that is because you don't get to see the results on screen before outputting the final image and I don't really understand why.ĭxO doesn't have the sophisticated DAM available in LR - what does - but as I will still have access to the LR library function after my subscription ends that's a non-issue for me.ĮDIT: I find the DxO default template excellent for my NEF images and find I spend a lot less time editing individual images in DxO compared to LR.Metadata of individual photos or batches of photos using Photolab 5. Once I started to use DxO I felt comfortable with the way it works and really liked the look of the final output.ĭxO's in-built noise reduction is just as good as Denoise AI, maybe even better in the 2022 version, and not having to open a second app to get the job done speeds up the workflow significantly. Initially I was very taken with the final result from ON1 but was never entirely happy with the way it works or the interface.
LIGHTROOM VS DXO SOFTWARE
For the past year I have been trying alternative editing software and finally focussed on ON1 Camera RAW and DxO PhotoLab in readiness for this event. My Adobe subscription runs out at the end of November and will not be renewed. This was a an earlier version to be fair. I want to decide for myself particularly as it made some poor decisions. I did try Dx0 once but was put off by the fact that it automatically set sliders. I would rather have an accurate colour rendition before I make any changes. This means the colours I see are more accurate (not relevant for the IR camera). LR recognises the camera from the EXIF data so applies the correct profile each time. In fact I use four different cameras at various times from a FF DSLR, a infrared DSLR, a Bridge camera and more recent half frame ML. It was easy enough to produce the profile which is used by LR to render all images from that camera automatically. In fact even cameras of the same make and model can vary. I produced a bespoke profile for my camera. Most people probably just accept a default profile and then make a decision on the whole package based on that. In the rendering process the Raw data are translated to colours according to a profile and these profiles are going to determine how you see the image. I can send an image direct from Lightroom, into Affinity Photo or Topaz DeNoise, work on it and then it come back into LR, can you do this in PL? I have a LR plugin which helps generate keywords, I find this useful for stock images. I just wanted to know if anyone else has made the switch from Lightroom to DxoPhotoLab and what your thoughts were?Ĭouple of things I need to try and work out: I like the interface, different to LR but I think I could get used to it.
LIGHTROOM VS DXO FREE
So the difference between DPP and DxO PureRaw wasn't a lot so I looked at their PhotoLab software, downloaded a 30 day free trial, and that contains PureRaw. Now the resulting image looks much better doing it this way but I can't see it as a long term workflow. But it's a cumbersome addition to your workflow.Įxport to 16-bit TIFF (which generates a 200MB+ file)
LIGHTROOM VS DXO HOW TO
I thought the output from Canon DPP was the best, you'd expect this though right, they know better than anyone how to interpret their own RAW data. It started yesterday when I did a test, I had 3 RAW files from my R5, fed each one through Canon DPP4, Lightroom and DxO PureRaw, to see how each would look. This time it isn't about the subscription, although cancelling that would be nice, I've just been so unhappy with how LR processes the files from my Canon R5 and R6, I bought the Color Fidelity profile which has helped but I'm still disappointed.
I'm sure this has been talked about so many times, but I'm looking at an alternative to Lightroom again.
0 kommentar(er)
