Create Better RAW Files? Testing DxO PureRAW
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 апр 2021
- Testing out DxO's PureRaw software.
PureRaw allows you to apply DxO’s noise removal and lens corrections to raw files without having to give up your favorite imaging software, such as Lightroom or Photoshop. The idea of creating raw files with enhanced ISO noise removal, sharpness and lens corrections while maintaining a Lightroom and Photoshop-based raw workflow intrigued me so I wanted to check it out and thought you might too.
Other videos on DxO PureRAW:
PhotoJoseph: • Best Raw Processing So...
Robin Whalley: • DxO Pure RAW Reviewed
Jim Nix: • DXO PureRAW: First Imp...
Download the original Canon R5 ISO 12800 raw and PureRAW file here: seandownload.s3.amazonaws.com...
My vids and TK panel: www.outdoorexposurephoto.com/...
#seanbagshaw
![Sean Rii, Karyon, Sharzkii - Taungule [My Love] (Official Music Video)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/eJoMuypbSzQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Great comparison, and thanks for the shoutouts! That 12,800 ISO image comparison is fantastic.
Thanks, Sean, I cut the cord from ADOBE, this makes so much more sense. More fun to shoot now. My micro 4/3 Panasonic Lumix G9 now has new life. Higher ISOs are not a problem anymore, everything has its limits but this is a game-changer. You and DX0 pure raw have given my camera new life for maybe another 2 to 3 years. Unless Panasonic comes out with the G9 successor soon, then I'll have to put my foot on the gas. Cheers thanks for the video and information, great video.
You are a legend my friend. Ten years back i started watching you tutorials on luminosity masks. Its been so helpful. Nowadays i dont use those techniques at all since the iso is so good and the DR is very good. I always underexpose my photos 2-3 stops without any problem at all. Using a z6 nikon. Awesome camera.
Well thanks! It is wonderful how far things have come.
@@SeanBagshaw yes indeed. I think your channel deserves way more attention though. High quality is an understatement.
I tested, it was amazing, an underexposed ISO 6400 on my old d7100 looked very nice
Tried again going to the max, 25.600, some photos really impressed me. I'm done with lightroom, moved to dxo photolab4
Thank you for reviewing this new software... Looks like it has a real place in the workflow of those who have been shooting digital for decades!
An excellent comparison and summary of the benefits, thanks!
That is unbelievable shadow recovery. I was literally sitting on the couch with my mouth hanging open in disbelief at the 12800 iso image. Huge thanks for posting this video!
You bet Dario! It is pretty cool.
You have to test it to really believe it, the dngfiles are spectacular, no less.
after spending some time with this software I do have to say that it's got some great potential. I personally think to make it a part of my workflow they need to offer a way to tame down the sharpening. I find it does a really good job on most of the image but then I also notice that it over sharpens to the point where it introduces halos and artifacts in certain parts of the image. I have adopted using this software for noise removal in some areas of the image and then used the original raw file for other parts of the image. Its a great tool. although by doing this I turn off the lens correction in DXO Pure Raw so I can properly align the image with the original raw file. Hopefully they can give some options to reduce sharpening soon.
I bought this on your recommendation. That evening I took a helicopter ride for some local arials. Shot Nikon Z7 50mm 1.8 at 800 ISO to assure no camera shake... Ran a few images though DxO PureRaw... Cannot believe the improvement. Really smooths out noise vs Lightroom. Buildings sharper & cleaner. Trees cleaner but crunchier... Comparing against Lightroom's fuzzy trees, if fuzzy is a natural look, which it might be, ,a crispy look can be distracting. But overall, an amazing improvement. I'm looking for detail & DxO brings it out better than Lightroom, which has a tendency to smear when luminance noise reduction is applied... One downside is that a 61mb file is changed to a 173mbyte file, a huge difference I can live with. Not for every photo, but this software is very impressive!! Thanks again for putting this out there!
You've given me something to think about. Thank you for your timely posting.
Man, tried the trial. First picture i just "ditched" i pulled through DXO pureraw and redid a lightroom run. And now its in the desktop backgrounds folder. Truly amazing what this program can do. Yes its pretty darng heavy the deep prime option. A single picture on my pretty beefy gaming PC takes like 10-20 seconds to process. But its so worth it. Topaz software doesn't match the power of DXO. With topaz denoise i had alot of times noise area's stay around inside tail feathers, in the neck area of a bird etc. DXO just cleanly does it.
Great illustrations. I can definitely see it.
Thanks for this video, Sean. It helped me decide to get it. It really does a better job with noise than I was able to do in PS.
I think you identified a great use for this; being able to go back and reprocess older images. Great video.
Thanks Joel!
Really nicely done. Thanks!
This earned a Sub for sure. Perfect for a newbie photographing the stars at night. and even past that its nice in general before adjusting them in ACR. thank you :)
Great tutorial Sean !!! Thanks million
The heavy over Sharpening can be mitigated if click the “Modules” button and disable the use of the module during processing. The program still performs the excellent DeepPrime noise reduction and reduction of demosaicing artifacts, but it does not do sharpening or lens correction.
Thanks Suzanne!
Thank you, great review!
I've been using it for over a week now and it's transformed my high ISO concert images, love it.
That seems like it would be a perfect application.
Would you have any examples posted anywhere?
@@alfonsoperez9575 hey Alfonso, my Instagram has a few concert shots cleaned up using DxO PureRAW instagram.com/joshmainka.photography/
One of my genres low light stage/dance, often shooting at ISO 6400. I've just done one set with the trial version and I'm blown away. Thanks Sean, I essentially gave it a go because I value your opinion highly.
That seems like a perfect application.
Looks like another good tool for editing. Thanks for sharing,
Thank you Sean for a very good demonstration of PureRAW. I have been playing around with DXO for noise reduction and optical corrections for a while now and my experience is that an over-sharpening may happen due to the fact that most of the applications (Lightroom, Capture One, etc.) unfortunately apply a basic sharpening on-top of the sharpening that have been made in the DXO process when we import the DNG file back into these programs. This results in an over-sharpened image. To avoid this we need to turn down the sharpening tool either in our raw converter or in DXO. In DXO PureRAW this is currently not possible but in DXO PhotoLab it is. I think this is something to be very aware of because an over sharpened image is more or less a ruined image, in my opinion.
Also, the DXO applications apply an (excellent) optical correction based on the camera/lens info to the image. This correction should not be applied twice to an image therefor it is advised to turn that function off in our raw converter when we import the DNG back in.
If we prefer to do all the sharpening and optical corrections in our normal raw converter then PureRAW is the wrong tool for us. But in DXO PhotoLab we have full control over every tool we like to apply and can therefore apply just the noise reduction and switch back to our normal raw converter for all the other stuff we want to do to our image.
I hope that helped?
Thanks Free Tibet. I think I mentioned all that in the video but thanks for the review.
Thank you for this Sean. I broke off from working through your excellent Smart Object course to give PureRaw a try, and your review has really helped point to its use on higher ISO images. I agree about the 'over sharpening' using DeepPrime. I find it's more modest sharpening on Prime or HQ, but as I don't have very high ISO images I can't speak of the noise reduction on those settings. I'll take some and give it a try!
Interesting for nightscapes for sure.
Thank you for such a great overview and comparison! I'll look into this since I have quite a few older 5D III files that could benefit from the extra detail and shadow recovery. Maybe I'll start using the 5D III again too since I really miss the colors :)
If you don't like the oversharpening just don't use the modules, as simple as that. Just run the core PR and it will remove all the noise while not making any other corrections.
Great video. I’m really loving DXO PR. You’re right in that deep prime offers extremely sharp images. I find the Prime setting a happy medium. Especially given that I often use orton effect it’s kind of counter productive to have something SO sharp. That aside I haven’t used Topaz Labs Sharpen or Denoise AI since I purchase this so they must be doing something right!!
I can vouch for drone photos however. It works really really well on my Mavic 2 Pro RAW’s!
THX for the good presentation. Unfortunately the Fuji X-Trans sensor is not supported yet. So I continue and upgrade my Topaz tools.
Wow, thanks a lot Sean for your test: I was an early adopter of Optics pro/ Photolab but switched to LR simply for the superior selective editing tool implementation. Also, the output files certainly were very sharp but upon close inspection looked unnatural, like the engine cranked up the clarity slider globally. Now then, you got me thinking: for low light shots involving extensive shadow recovery, your PureRaw examples show that the 30 day trial is warranted. I wonder if I could actually rescue some of my higher ISO D90 wildlife shot with the following workflow: PureRaw -> SuperResolution -> LR or CameraRaw -> Photoshop 😉😁 probably wishful thinking, I will let you know either way! Merci, David
Similar to me although I tokk another road, went from years with oprics pro/labs to capture on because of the workflow but miss the prime nr. Til now that is, pure raw (HQ) will be first step after files on disk.
Thank you very much for the review. Have downloaded trial but although results are excellent, I found that the images were very over sharpened with halos. A great pity. Let’s hope that an upgrade allows you to adjust this.
Nice video as always. May be the best thing to do is trying the trial version in order to see if it fits the need. In any case, your video is helpful...
Absolutely a good idea to do the free trial and judge for yourself. :-)
Thanks Sean. I started using this about a week ago and see what you have demonstrated here. I do think the corrections are better, but wish a way to back off the sharpening was available. Still, I think it is worth the money especially for those high ISO raw files. Another great video!
I'm definitely finding that the sharpening is pretty close to what I want in higher ISO images and I probably just won't use it on low ISO images because it isn't needed.
I agree with sharpening! Way too harsh with haloing on edges. A great pity!
@@nickshepherd8377 I am hopeful that they listen to us and make this an adjustment of some sort in future releases. I would suggest we all make that known to them via your best vehicle.
@@SeanBagshaw just to let you know that I made the point about sharpening on their Facebook site. They said they are already working on it! Great news
Nice video well put together, the software is great I have been very happy with it, just one issue it will increase file size!
Thanks for the comparison Sean, really enjoy your content and courses! Had a question - is DxO able to embed Canon camera matching profiles into the dng? I’ve got an R5 as well and I’m missing those camera matching profiles in lightroom/ACR the way I had them with my 5D.
I haven't seen anything about that anywhere. PhotoJoseph is probably the best person to ask about that.
...hard to believe technology has come this far!
Interesting video! Lots of comments so maybe someone has already mentioned wondering if PureRAW is returning a 16-bit TIFF in the DNG wrapper. If so then the use case will be more for images where you are of with giving up control over the larger dynamic rage o a real RAW file. Probably plenty of use cases for that, but not for all images i would think.
Sean - great video - quick question in Photolab4 there is an option on how much noise reduction is applied for deep prime. Is there a way to reduce the amount of reduction done in PureRaw?
There isn't so far.
Tried it, and didn't notice any sharpening on Sony raw files. On Canon and Nikon raw files it's doing miracles
For amators who can shots sports and some birds in low light and cant spend all money for great lensen its great :P I use canon 80D and 55-250 f4-5.6 and shots with ISO 3200-10000 after process by PureRAW looks good and I no need new body and lens cost a lot of money to use it few time in week. For amators who take pictures for fun its good program I like it so much :D
Excellent review, thanks Sean! I have Photolab 4 and am blown away by the Deeprime tool! Unbelievable sometimes. Can you imagine combining this tech with the upscaling tech by Topaz? Man sure those old cameras got a new breath in them! Would love to hear your thoughts on Topaz’s new update to their upscaling software. Cheers from the North Cascades!
Thanks! I still need to load the latest Gigapixel update and try it out. Not enough hours in the day. haha.
@@SeanBagshaw lol I bet! Thanks in advance Sean.
I've been doing exactly this for some time using DxO PhotoLab 4 and exporting the DNG back to ACR. This new app is much more user friendly, especially if you don't use PL4 as your editor.
Precisely! :-)
Great review @Sean thank you... wonder how it goes again Capture One.... have you had a look?
I haven't...but I'm guessing someone has. :-)
Pure Raw seems better on shadows, but in the first waterfall image, a lot of sharpening halos on the bare branch that sticks out over the water. Any controls in PureRAw to apply only to shadow only?
I have noticed those halos on very contrasty edges like that branch. They do not have a way to apply only to shadows...and because the lens corrections are different than adobe it probably won't work to layer file out of Lr to mask out those areas.
Great video! I'm curious how this would compare to using software like Topaz Denoise Ai when tweaked. Definitely seems like it could give my raw files from the pre-full frame days a new lease on life.
There are some other videos on RUclips comparing the two if you do a search. I think people are tipping towards PureRAW. The main thing for me is that PureRAW outputs a raw file so I can maintain my raw workflow.
@@SeanBagshaw Yeah, I had a look at a couple but they seem to test Topaz Denoise at default settings which in my experience is never that great. But yes, your right. Having that raw output is a big plus. Cheers.
Looks amazing. I would say that the process should be limited to those shots that pass the composition and interest test. From what I saw, it also increases the file size by 2 or 3, which could results in almost .5GB raw files for uncompressed sony a7r4 files.
Agreed. I'll probably only use it on my top-tier images and only when noise or lens distortions are a problem. It does increase files size. Canon R5 raw is 57 MB, PureRAW DNG 158 MB. Interestingly, Lr Detail Enhanced DNG is 217 MB.
In line with my findings, I did convert 1000 files from d500 and file size increased with more than a factor two.
That is interesting to hear! This is the first place that mentioned the file size difference. Expanding by 2-3 times is pretty huge. And what happens if you have to pass the DNG to another app for processing and you get a TIF back? That file will likely be larger than the DNG again! It'll eat up your disk space rapidly. Suddenly my 1TB SSD isn't that big anymore...
I seem to see many people are reporting file size changes from 3-4 times as large (not just 2-3)!
I've been using it for a while. For shooting macros without the tripod it helps a lot, you can easily boost the isos to maintain a high shutter speed, especially when the wind blows. With a Nikon D3 used with the wonderful Nikkor 105mm f 2.8 it works great, the dxo deepPrime brings back all the details hidden under the noise. No comparaison with other denoising softwares, PureRaw is far, far away ahead...
If the software was to denoise too much by default, does this mean you’d need to add some back so the image doesn’t look too plasticky?
Hi Sean, I've been using DXO Pure Raw; you were saying in Lr on Windows that you cant drag and drop, I don't use Lr however in Bridge I've been able to drag and drop without a problem, hope this is helpful
Good to know you can drag out of Bridge. Thanks!
DXO noise reduction is awesome but the camera module for lens collection is still faulty.
believe it or not , it adds vignette to my RAW file !!!
My camera : Sony a7RIII
Lens : Sony 20mm f1.8 G
And I just have found that if we do not want DXO to sharpen and lighthen our RAW image, Do not click " Camera Module"
The RAW will be only denoised and the rest will be kept in original.
A shit load better from my experience. Still like to use LRc too... love the Black and White Point and the Masking with the Alt Key...
Must say though that DXO is very intuitive I love the zooming by scrolling with the Mouse Wheel
I really hate working with DNG files, it makes any machine sluggish. But knowing what it can do, it still might be worth running on individual images
Thanks for posting Sean. I also use the Canon R5 and Adobe doesn't handle the (CR3) files too well. Quick question; Have you compared the Canon R5 files with using the Adobe LR/Cam RAW, Canon's DPP & DxO RAW conversions? I currently use DPP to process my RAW files before importing them into my normal workflow , however DxO maybe (given the examples of this video) maybe another step above on the noise and sharpening values? Cheers
I haven't tested Canon DPP recently. There are certainly some advantages to it...but I could never get it to integrate with my flow the way I wanted.
I was disappointed myself with Adobe's color outpoint from R5 files. I first added Color profiles from Color Fidelity, and they helped. Latest updates in LR have also improved the colors. But the Beautiful colors Canon is known for are best after DXO IMO.
Nice review Sean. At lower ISO, you sure need to do a lot of pixel peeping to see any difference (I couldn't in some places in your video). I use the suite of Topaz AI apps and have sworn by Denoise AI. But from what I've seen, Pure RAW appears to beat Denoise AI quite handily. Still, I've missed the intro deal on Pure RAW and the $129 USD come to about $160 CDN....that'll give me pause for sure.
Very helpful Sean. I'm still not sure which way I should go. Topaz DeNoise or PureRaw. If there would be some way to make settings about the amount of sharpening. At the moment I will bite the bullet and go for Topaz without the chance to apply it on the RAW file ;-) I have my problem rely on an algorithm done by an engineer/sw developer without a chance to intervene there. From my point of view, the shadow recovery and the noise reduction are great, but I think sometimes this oversharpening can destroy an image. Thanks a lot for doing this video Sean!
All good points! :-)
That’s pretty cool Sean! Looks like a good piece of software to have at your disposal. I wonder how it would do for wildlife photography shot at higher ISO compared to using something like topaz denoise
I can tell you: it's unbelievable. Read my answer above about general use, but here is my take on birds, perched and bif: details extracted is mind blowing, e g feathers. Try it out, game changer (if you want me to post examples I'll do that because this is bordering to sci-fi, been into computers and software for 30 years)
@@805atnorafertsera6 I would love to see examples. When Shawn posted that iso so 12,800 image and what it did to it I thought that’s pretty crazy. I’m sure it would do a really good job with a bird image and how much lower ISO range. Topaz Denoise for me is pretty good but often misses patches of noise or completely hammers certain parts of the image with noise reduction making the software hard to use with consistent reliability. If you have any examples to post I’d love to see it. This has me interested and I’ll probably download the free trial to mess around with it as well
@@wademorales I'll fix it first thing tomorrow (Sweden, night night here), suggestion to a more private channel?
@@805atnorafertsera6 awesome, thank you. I have a Facebook or maybe I can drop box or Google drive The images? I look forward to seeing the results
@@wademorales I'll try to find you on FB tomorrow
I currently use Topaz Denoise AI for this purpose. Have you done any comparisons of PureRaw vs Denoise? I think that would be a very useful video!
I didn't do this comparison because a couple of other channels already have videos covering it on RUclips, so search for those. For me, even if results are comparable (which I don't think they quite are) I like that DxO maintains the raw data.
Amazing. If this was available last year I would sell my a6000 to get a7r2 LOL
If the dng is a raw file, couldn't you dial back sharpening or noise reduction in PS or LR by going negative?
Not actually. The PureRAW sharpening is separate from the Lr/Ps sharpening and it appears to be cooked into the DNG. I already set Lr sharpening to zero and it doesn't go negative. Even if it did this would be a separate adjustment not directly working with whatever PureRAW has done.
Few questions. Since Dx0 converts the file to DNG can you use any of the older version of LR to process the DNG file and not have to buy into the Adobe monthly LR/LR Classic programs. In other words, can you process the DNG files with say LR5 or older after the conversion of the
Raw files from Dx0.? Are Canon and Dx0 working together?
I no longer have a non CC version of Lr available so I can't test that...but I think it should. DNG is DNG. And as far as I know Canon and DxO aren't working together...but I'm not really in the know on that kind of stuff.
@@SeanBagshaw Thanks. I think I will try the 30 day trial and see how it works.
Does the sharpening of PureRaw negate the need for sharpening at the end of work flow editing? I've always been under the assumption that sharpening should be the very last step. Thoughts?
It's probably a case by case basis for me? I tend to think about sharpening in 3 places: 1 - input sharpening to the raw file. 2 - Creative/selective sharpening/clarity during processing. 3 - Output sharpening specific to different outputs (screen, print, etc.) PureRaw creates quite sharp files so when using it input and output sharpening may not be necessary but I still test it on a case by case basis. When sizing for the web I would certainly still apply output sharpening regardless.
@@SeanBagshaw thank you for your reply!
Thank you for a great video Sean. I have DXO PL4 elite so do I really need PureRaw? Is the only difference that it creates and returns a RAW file (dng) or am I missing something?
You probably don't need it. PureRAW is mostly for people who want to maintain their workflow in other software, such as Lr, Ps, Luminar, etc. but still get the advantage of the DxO deep prime noise and lens corrections.
@@SeanBagshaw You can use PL4 Elite to do the same thing as PureRAW by enabling only DeepPrime and the optical corrections. And you can send a dng over to Lightroom.
Hi! What about the Enhanced detail from Lightroom?
Yes...I should have compared that as well...but I was worried the video was already too long. Ha! I did test it, however. Lr Enhance Detail is slightly better but still not close to PureRAW.
What if you have DxO's Photo Lab 4 software do you think you need to get this software at all?
Probably not.
'Comparison is of the chart' = quote of the day... I agree with you in every aspect except 'it isn't cheap': 90 $ is a bargain, we are talking about more than a full stop! I put a 1000 raw files over night for my computer to crunch on after already been thrown out of the chair with the dngfiles PR produce, quickedited some in capture one today. Compared. It's magic, clean optically corrected files not comparable with the original. Color is very accurate - I do compare with Nikons intended colors heme via nx-d.
What body plus lens increment will 90 box give you? Right, not even a 32 GB xqd card.
I also agree with you about the aggressive sharpening and while it is welcome in some cases I'd much more prefer to have the possibility to tune it down. Maybe a feature in a future update?
Thx for this review, on of the better.
Agree. With the sharpening, I'm finding that in files that have a lot of noise or softness it is just about right for me. I doubt I'll use it on clean, sharp files so no problem there.
Sean: Nice overview video. I've been playing with it for a couple of days to see what it can do as well. A couple of observations. I'm on a Mac, so the drag and drop is very nice. One caveat though. If you don't have LR set up to use separate XMP files (and I do not), any adjustments made to the original raw file will not be carried over to the Pure RAW DNG. Personally I think that is better because then I don't have to mess around with turning off any settings in Details (sharpening, NR) or Lens corrections. I did a couple of tests where I saved the Metadata to an XMP and re-tested. Turns out that only some of the settings were then applied. I haven't figured out which set are consistent, but not all of the adjustments I had made to the original raw were carried over. All in all, I'm impressed by the results. The workflow integration for LR users is very nice and fast. I've done some testing against Topaz Denoise AI and for my tastes, Pure RAW is a better solution (and WAY faster). Of course that generalization is based on running only 50 or so files through Pure RAW and comparing. For each user, YMMV.
All great info Keith. Thanks for sharing. I agree about the XMP. I write to XMP because I often need my Lr adjustments to "travel" but I think turning everything off in the PureRAW DNG and starting from scratch is the way to go at this point. I also noticed that some settings didn't transfer and other settings that did transfer didn't match up.
Can one import Pure Raw files into DXO Photolab5 or is Pure Raw part of PL5?
I believe Pure Raw is part of PL5.
I'd like to see a comparison between dxo PureRaw and Topaz DeNoise.
Do a RUclips search...I'm pretty sure someone has done a vid on that. If I recall, PureRAW did somewhat better, but the big advantage to me is you don't have to apply it to a TIF copy, it's still a raw file with full raw image data and adjustability.
I'd say it's miles apart. I stopped using Topaz due to corrupting my photos, especially colors, blown highlights and more.
Still prefer Topaz Denoise. Topaz offers manual adjustments which Pure Raw does not. Pure Raw also did a few strange things on some of my photos. Same can happen with Denoise but I can make adjustments and correct any issues.
@@alphat4551 I do agree on the option to set the strength on some parameters, but from my experience so far I'm on the verge to automate conversion to dng via PR, only wish it was doable from a command line
I wanted to purchase this but I don't think it works on Fuji files. I'll have to check it out again.
I tested it yesterday. Files from the XT2 are accepted and processed. But the results weren‘t good. The files from the XT4 are not accepted.
@@markusschwendimann397 Thanks!
Software magic :-)) it would be interesting to report how it effects dynamic range.
I don't have a quantitative way to measure DR myself, but my guess is that dynamic range isn't increased...just how clean the shadows look when recovered.
@@SeanBagshaw I was thinking something like these chart images that have 20 or so gradations / bars from pure white to pure black. And shoot over/underexposed at different iso and see how many bars comes out.
Sean how does DXO PURERAW stack up against Adobe Super Resolution enhancement?
Super Resolution is for upsampling to double the file size...but it does also apply Adobe's Enhance Detail in the process. I did a comparison of PureRAW to Enhance Detail (without Super Resolution) and PureRAW is better.
@@SeanBagshaw thank you
Love it, own it, will use it sparingly. That being said, why, of all the reviews I have seen so far, is nobody talking about the 3x file size impact?
That is definitely something worth mentioning. File size is usually one of my lower priorities (under things like image quality and non-destructive) so I didn't even look at that until someone pointed it out, to be honest. Also worth mentioning that Lightroom Enhanced Detail DNG is even larger...about 4x.
@@SeanBagshaw Indeed! I did a test with a smaller 20 Mb file and after running it through both ACR Super Res and PureRAW, I ended up with a 300 Mb file!
Not bad Sean but, I miss a control over sharpening. I don't often use high isos so, I am not sure if it is worth the investment. Thanks as usual for your fantastic videos
Unfortunately, as Sean pointed out, there is no way to control the amount of sharpening applied in PureRAW. For that you need DXO PhotoLab instead. In that software you get all the benefits from DeepPRIME noise reduction together with full control of the amount of sharpening you like to apply. But it doesn’t stop there; in DXO PhotoLab you will find so many other very useful tools to enhance your raw files with, and then export it as a DNG, if you like. One thing that worth mentioning again is the excellent DXO profiles for correcting optical distortions in the specific camera/lens combination your image was captured with.
@@freetibet1000 Thanks Free Tibet. I am not fond of having a lot of developing tools. With C1, Tony Kuyper and Photoshop for me is more than enough. I tried out DxO, Luminar, Topaz, On1 and I feel I don't need them. Pure Raw is interesting but nothing I can't do with my usual tools. Regards
@@1964ilovebears I understand. My primary tool is Capture One too. But recently I’ve been trying out the DXO for the excellent noise reduction DeepPRIME. I’m not a big fan of too much sharpness so I discovered that in DXO PhotoLab I was able to control that (which is not possible in PureRAW from DXO).
@@freetibet1000 Thanks ever so much for the information, Free Tibet 😉
Saw the comment about Sony files. Is this product supposed to work with Sony raw?
I thought so but I don’t have Sony. I think they list compatible raw files on their site?
Interesten but online For high iso images...
Great review. I have DXO Photolab and thought I might use this as an alternative. However the sharpening kills it for me. I agree that it is not only too aggressive but prefer to do very conservative sharpening separately at the end of my workflow.
DXO is cool, but it doesn't improve your RAW files; it just processes and exports them. If you went through your normal workflow, then ran the Topaz denoise filter, you'd get about the same result. The benefit to processing it in PS or LR first is that you denoise the cropped final image, which runs a lot faster. Unless you only output uncropped 4x6 (and who does?), there's no benefit to preprocessing. I tried DXO and Topaz side by side and can't see a difference between them.
Can the PR DNG be saved directly to our hard drive and then opened in Camera Raw instead of LR?
Hey Tony! Yes it can. That's what exporting to Photoshop does.
Can you use drone dng?
Not sure but I don't see why not. I would check the DxO FAQ to see if they have a list of all raw files it works with.
Does really good job with my Mavic AIR 2 blue hour
RAW Auto processing from DXO PureRaw need to integrate in DXO Photolab.
DXO Photolab has no auto processing like Adobe Lightroom.
No thank you. I have left Fujifilm because of Lightroom worms so had to take the files into dng first. I didn't like capture one. You also mention the dxo pure raw drag option doesn't work in windows so already given up. What a performance.£80.00 for your trouble & over sharpened images.It is all too many steps for little gain.
Glad what I could share helped you decide if it would be useful for you or not. :-)
Good software but not suitable imho for studio portraiture. The skin is way over sharpened and leaves some strange artifacts, almost an orange peel effect in places. It would be good if the amount of sharpening was adjustable.
Original raw better than pureraw