Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Other Raw Converters => Topic started by: RW_Hendricks on October 30, 2019, 08:47:32 pm
-
I am wondering if there are sufficient users of DxO to warrant creating a DxO-dedicated topic at the same level as for PS, LR, etc.? How would we go about determining the interest, and how would we create such a group if there were sufficient interest?
-
Create a Poll?
-
I rarely use Lightroom anymore, was using DXO for a long time sporadically but now it's my primary raw converter especially since I switched to qimage one for printing.
-
I'd be happy to participate since DxO is my primary converter.
-
Sure. Use it alongside photoshop and nic plugins in photoshop.
-
We don't know how many users are currently using DxO, but if the past number of posts is an indication, it barely makes sense to have a top level topic for it.
How about a topic at the same level as the archived Aperture sub-section of the forum?
Cheers,
Fabien
-
What is DxO? I guess that shows my interest!
-
I have been running a test between LR6, Capture One 20, Iridient and DXO PL latest ver.
I had tried DXO several years ago and was not comfortable with it.
Only 3 days into the latest version BUT I'll be buying it next sale they have!
Quite impressive, and getting even better the more I learn.
Thus, I'd vote for a tab or our own.
-
I have been a big fan of DxO raw converters since Optics Pro version 8 or 9, and currently PhotoLab 3 is my main one. So I'm interested.
Also, at this point, I have to believe that DxO is a lot bigger than Aperture, which has its own "Child Board".
-
DxO is best in class in optical correction, local adjustments, film simulation and noise reduction.
I used to find colors sub-par but they have fixed that now.
In my book it ranks #2 behind only C1 Pro, that is if Capture one fixes the performance problems on the new Mac Pro...
So yes, I believe that DxO deserves a separate forum category.
Cheers,
Bernard
-
I've used DXO since version 5, in the past primarily for noise reduction and lens correction. Since the revamp beginning with the PhotoLab era it's become a viable stand alone raw converter and image processor. I too would like to see a separate board for DXO.
-
I'm now using this as my main RAW processor - far superior to Lightroom.
I would also like to see a DxO topic. I actually think it should be at the same level as Capture One, not a subtopic like Aperture.
-
I'm now using this as my main RAW processor - far superior to Lightroom.
I would also like to see a DxO topic. I actually think it should be at the same level as Capture One, not a subtopic like Aperture.
what we have reflects what people use... outliers like DxO or SilkyPix or others have their deserved place as simple topics once in a while... this topic (posts quantity) here simply illustrates the fact - section "Other Raw Converters" is the right solution.
-
Just tried DXO again and still prefer LR + enhanced detail...
I have some good results and some bad results with C1... I don't use the damm of LR only the raw converter.
I like the LR workflow - the only thing i do not like of LR is that you cannot cancel Lenscorrection with the S-Nikkor lenses.
A big deal to me.
DXO topic or not- lets us read about how well it is... instead of a post over a topic or not... I read the article of Dan wells and he is convinced it is in more than one way better than LR.
I am not a adobe fan, but just like the results i get.
-
I have used DxO since the first version, which I saw at Photo Expo years ago. I used it sporadically for quite a while, but never a lot, though I kept it updated. With the past couple version, Photolab2 and Photolab3, it's really come into it's own. LR is still better at recovering highlights, but DxO is much better with noise and sharpening. Now that you can use the DCP profiles (the same as LR), color is much better for my Canon cameras.
I still prefer aspects of LR workflow better (and of course, printing), but have grown to really like DxO on it's own. I like that there is no need to import! You work right from your folder of images. Too damn many DAMs out there!
-
DxO seems good for beginners. It gets you results faster than camera raw or lightroom but doesn't offer the same advanced capabilities. I did a review on it on my YouTube page here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaLxmaXLm5Y
-
DxO seems good for beginners. It gets you results faster than camera raw or lightroom but doesn't offer the same advanced capabilities. I did a review on it on my YouTube page here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaLxmaXLm5Y
You are welcome to your opinion, but for years I used the current versions of both Lightroom and DxO's raw converters (first Optics Pro Elite then PhotoLab Elite), and in my experience DxO has consistently had the more advanced raw conversion capabilities and the better raw conversion results. Currently for raw conversion, IMO Lightroom runs third to both DxO PhotoLab 3 Elite and Phase One Capture One 20; FWIW, this website recently ran a review that reached the same conclusion (https://luminous-landscape.com/printing-part-iv-software-part-1-raw-converters-and-editors/ (https://luminous-landscape.com/printing-part-iv-software-part-1-raw-converters-and-editors/)).
A cynic might observe that as of just now, you've made a grand total of three posts at LuLa, and with that link you may be trying to drive traffic to your videos on YouTube, for which you can get paid. I'll withhold judgment on that. But I think that an expert whose review / opinion is worth considering would have skipped the unexplained sweeping generalization and instead given detailed reasons for the opinion that Lightroom's raw conversion capabilities are more advanced that DxO's.
(To be clear, I totally understand why some people continue to use Lightroom: they need or want its DAM, it's a good raw converter (IMO just not as good), they like its Print module, it integrates well with other Adobe products, they're familiar with it, etc.)
-
I now regularly use PhotoLab 3 as a front end for Lightroom, because I do find it gives better results with my m4/3 raws.
I probably wouldn't have much to contribute, at least at first, but I do think it merits its own topic
-
I've been using DXO as my RAW converted "for ever", maybe 10 yrs.
So, yes, I'm interested.
Richard
-
So, how do we get this accomplished and start sharing?
-
Wouldn't a POLL produce some notion of the interest???
Personally, I only use DxO Nik Collection 3 (since before Google and DxO bought Nik) and I'm a Fuji X shooter so I'm not interested in other DxO products.
-
DxO deserves its own topic. I would suggest it is pulling away from the crowd in terms of output quality.
*