DxO OpticsPro 10 is here

[BernardLanguillier]

No I didn't, you now seem to be making things up now to argue your case. 
I was only talking about support for out of camera files. Having to convert to DNG for use in Dx0 as you suggested, is a bodge as far as I am concerned.
Rather obviously, the fact that not all cameras that use an open file standard are not supported.

Really?

Dx0's a complete and utter waste of time in my view. For example as Jim mentioned above, it doesn't support DNG files as such and because Dx0 doesn't support the open DNG standard or many other cameras it is therefore is about as useful to me as a steaming pile of monkey poo. Yes it may support the odd camera that uses DNG, but that is not the same as support for DNG which is to repeat myself is an open standard. One invented to to avoid this very issue.

Cheers,
Bernard

[jjj]

Don't be such a doofus Bernard, I was quite specifically talking about out of camera DNG files that Jim had mentioned. I was most certainly not talking about files converted to DNG, which is another matter entirely
If you wish to interpret posts in a such a lazy way without bothering to read things in context, I'll not bother to read your posts at all.

[jjj]

The camera manufacturers you name are all renowned for high quality products. However the market statistics speak for themselves the major camera manafacturers have not accepted the "DNG Standard". This is the point I am trying to convey.
https://www.google.tt/search?q=camera+market+share+2013&client=firefox-a&hs=Ag1&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=0RlaVIO2CMGeNsGagKAP&ved=0CBwQsAQ&biw=1493&bih=688

No you, like Bernard  didn't bother to read posts correctly and made a spurious and irrelevant argument about DNG. Market share also has nothing to do with what was being talked about when it came to the point being made - which was despite DNG being a file standard that doesn't need software updating to be read by say Lightroom, does for C1 and DxO. If they can be bothered.

[BernardLanguillier]

Don't be such a doofus Bernard, I was quite specifically talking about out of camera DNG files that Jim had mentioned. I was most certainly not talking about files converted to DNG, which is another matter entirely
If you wish to interpret posts in a such a lazy way without bothering to read things in context, I'll not bother to read your posts at all.

You are really something JJJ. What's so hard with admitting that your apparent hatred of DxO is based on old information?

Cheers,
Bernard

[jjj]

My contempt for DxO is based on the latest version, which still has the same old problems.
Anyway you are the one making mistakes with your reading, own up to it.

Also why assume I hate it? Hating takes too much effort and is a waste of time. Disappointed that another possible alternative to LR is a not up to scratch, yes.

[BernardLanguillier]

MY contempt for DxO is based on the latest version, which still has the same old problems.
Anyway you are the one making mistakes with your reading, own up to it.

Fair enough, so what are the shortcomings of DxO 10 relative to DNG support?

Cheers,
Bernard

[jjj]

Really? You are really having to ask that again?
It doesn't support DNG files as such, it only supports specific camera models.  See Jim's posts above re this.
LR supports DNG files from any camera, no update needed which was a, if not the main reason for establishing the idea of DNGs.

The reality is people buy new cameras and then ignorantly whinge at Adobe, Apple Etc that their new camera is not supported by software which was designed long before the camera was manufactured. Apparently the only difference in a raw file that breaks the compatibility can be as basic as the model name. Which is something I recall someone like Thomas Knoll at Adobe saying at one point.
If Leica, Pentax etc release a new camera you can work on your raw files as soon as you get camera. No waiting months for a software update, after some pointless reverse engineering has been done.

[kirkt]

I think it is more succinct to state that DXO does not support the GXR.  The GXR is a specialized camera that permits the use of lens/sensor modules that plug into a camera body.  Some other raw converters support this camera, some do not.  To state that DXO does not support the DNG specification because it does not support a specific camera that uses DNG as its native output is a stretch.  Why DXO choose not to support the GXR is beyond my knowledge, and it appears that the original post regarding the GXR stated that the plea for support has fallen on deaf ears - an entirely different, but maybe more applicable, reason not to like DXO as a tool for processing your images.

kirk

[jjj]

I think it is more succinct to state that DXO does not support the GXR. 

Amongst other cameras.

The GXR is a specialized camera that permits the use of lens/sensor modules that plug into a camera body.  Some other raw converters support this camera, some do not. 

The physical construction of a camera is utterly irrelevant. We are talking about the raw files a camera outputs which is nothing to do with physical form factor.

To state that DXO does not support the DNG specification because it does not support a specific camera that uses DNG as its native output is a stretch.  Why DXO choose not to support the GXR is beyond my knowledge, and it appears that the original post regarding the GXR stated that the plea for support has fallen on deaf ears - an entirely different, but maybe more applicable, reason not to like DXO as a tool for processing your images.

Numerous cameras are not supported by Dx0, some with DNG, some without. It's quite tedious to find out which ones as rather than simply list cameras supported/not supported, you have to actively search and click on each individual camera model, if even listed. This kind of indicates to me they are trying to disguise their lackadaisical support for cameras. My last 3 pocket cameras are not supported for example, several Leicas, some Pentaxes and after that I lost the will to trawl through their user unfriendly interface.

[BernardLanguillier]

So DxO does clearly support the open format called DNG as of DxO 10:
- it supports most cameras outputting natively DNG files,
- it supports DNG files converted by Adobe for archival purpose for supported cameras.

There are just a small number of cameras that are not supported by DxO, but it has nothing to do with DNG.

This factual status is very different from what you implied several times is this thread.

Cheers,
Bernard

[jjj]

So DxO does clearly support the open format called DNG as of DxO 10:
- it supports most cameras outputting natively DNG files,
- it supports DNG files converted by Adobe for archival purpose for supported cameras.

There are just a small number of cameras that are not supported by DxO, but it has nothing to do with DNG.

This factual status is very different from what you implied several times is this thread.

How on earth did you draw that conclusion from where I state it doesn't support all DNG cameras beats me. Oh yes this is how....
See the part I bolded in your post, it directly contradicts your previous sentence.
In case you were wondering why -  'most' does not equate to 'all'. Which has been my point all along. Supporting DNG means all camera that output DNG, not just some of them.

I have no idea why people simply can't admit that a  product they like is flawed and have to defend it to the death and ignore awkward facts.
Personally I think LR is great programme, but heck I won't ever try and insist it's perfect. Because like all software it's certainly not without issues and dumb parts.

[BernardLanguillier]

You have a definition of "support" that is pretty unique. The reason being that DxO supports DNG in what must represent 99.5% of cases. Claiming non support because of the remaining 0.5% defies common sense.

Will U at least ackniwledge that?

There is no need to like DxO to state that.

Cheers,
Bernard

[jjj]

So are you just making up percentages now to try and defend your pet software?

[jjj]

BTW supporting DNG means supporting all DNG files regardless.
Adding support one at a time for individual cameras that use DNG is not the same thing.

[JimAscher]

Anyone following this thread might be also interested in a possibly more detailed discussion of this issue last year in the Photo Net forum.

http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00bj5j?start=0

[Denis de Gannes]

BTW supporting DNG means supporting all DNG files regardless.
Adding support one at a time for individual cameras that use DNG is not the same thing.

Your mythical perception that DNG is an accepted standard is what has clouded your mind to think others who do not use DNG files are inferior or deranged. Have a nice day.

[kers]

here an example - ACR vs DXO10   

a nikon 12800 images even a bit underexposed.

ACR much more grainy - but dxo smutches detail and has banding.. in the dxo image a patternis visible in the blacks - but not in ACR nor NXD
I do not mind the grain, but have to take care of the white pixels.

[BernardLanguillier]

here an example - ACR vs DXO10  

a nikon 12800 images even a bit underexposed.

ACR much more grainy - but dxo smutches detail and has banding.. in the dxo image a patternis visible in the blacks - but not in ACR nor NXD
I do not mind the grain, but have to take care of the white pixels.

Kers,

Did you use Prime here or the regular noise reduction?

Cheers,
Bernard

[Valdo]

I realy don't understand this jjj, he is spending so much time writing about something what he dont like.
What you like jjj? taking pictures when you are not busy troling in the forum? "testing" software in the free download period? Maybe something else?

I was reading this to find out something more about DxO, but what I get its only your shit.

Cheers!

My contempt for DxO is based on the latest version, which still has the same old problems.
Anyway you are the one making mistakes with your reading, own up to it.

Also why assume I hate it? Hating takes too much effort and is a waste of time. Disappointed that another possible alternative to LR is a not up to scratch, yes.

[Isaac]

I was reading this to find out something more about DxO…

Ignore the posters you don't find helpful and acknowledge those you do find helpful -- Don't feed trolls.