Stop Using Adobe to Process your RAW files - DxO Pure RAW is Amazing!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 июл 2024
- FREE TRIAL VERSION OF DXO HERE - tidd.ly/3dzAxdH
MY R5 SETUP GUIDE & COLOUR SETTINGS - bit.ly/2P4uggI
In this video I look at a new piece of AI software from DXO called Pure RAW. It does a MUCH MUCH better job at processing the RAW files from the new Canon cameras than Adobe Lightroom or Camera RAW. Check it out using the link above and you will be amazed!!
_____________________________________________________________
Please be sure to like this video and subscribe to my channel.
Glenn Bartley is a professional nature photographer who focuses on photographing birds in their natural habitat. He resides in Victoria, British Columbia on Canada’s West Coast.
To see more of Glenn’s images visit: www.glennbartley.com
To sign up for Glenn’s FREE monthly newsletter with updates, images and photo tips click here - www.glennbartley.com/mailingli...
Glenn also leads instructional photo workshops to exciting destinations around the world including:
- Peru
- Vancouver Island, Canada
- Ecuador
- Costa Rica
- Churchill, Canada
To learn more about Glenn's photo workshops visit - www.glennbartley.com/photowork...
![Does applying noise reduction to RAW files really make a difference? [Topaz Photo AI Tutorial]](/img/1.gif)
Thank you Glenn for this video. I've just downloaded a trial version of DXO and tried it on one of my old photos - a Booted Racker-tail Hummingbird. Wow, it has completely transformed how it looks, amazing stuff! Its process is so easy to follow. It is definitely a software worth of having! Thank you again!
Cheers!
It was a pleasure meeting you in Ecuador Glenn. Thank you for letting us use your set-up. I saw this video when you released it and I downloaded the free trial version. I liked it so much I bought it the first week. Unfortunately I shot all my pictures in Ecuador with my Nikon Z9 and DXO labs so far do not have a firmware update and it wont open my files. Thank you so much. I watch all your videos.
Hopefully they will support the Z9 soon. Nice to meet you!
I've been using DxO Raw2 for a few months. It's excellent in most circumstances on my Sony A7r4 RAWs. Where I've found problems is with long exposures on cloudy skies. I've noticed abrupt/edges on tonal transitions in skies as opposed to the smoother tones rendered in Lightroom. I've tried a number of workarounds but to no avail.
Thanks Glen. I have now purchased DXO Pure Raw and am amazed how it handles my R5 images. Previously I was really disappointed with the noise reduction in ACR, DPP and NIK dfine, although the NIK filters sometimes came close to OK. DXO is head and shoulders above all the others. The noise reduction on astro and night photography s truely amazing. One minor comment. I suggest you get a better graphics card. Mine takes about 20 seconds max to process an R5 file.
Glad I could help!
And I just upgraded my whole PC. Just setting it up now. Cant wait to save time!
Glenn, it's amazing, I just tested it on an R5 file and the result was much better using DxO. hugs from Brazil and thanks for sharing.
Great to hear!
Thank you, also DPP does not work in the newer Macs. I appreciate. I was very disappointed in the R5 noise handling, not anymore.
Amazing. Glad you found it useful!
Wow what a difference! It is really amazing.... used it with a macropicture (1000 iso) taken with the 7DII. Also the butterfly looks sharper... thanks a lot!
Awesome! You are welcome 😎
Very interesting comparison. With Topaz, do you use the denoise as the first step before doing general edits?
Wow!!!
This is an amazing video. Thanks for your efforts in making such a useful video.
You are most welcome
Interesting. I shoot weddings...in all kinds of light and light levels. I've honed in LRCC to work quickly and efficiently...considering I produce over 1,000 images on a two photographer shoot.This software you're promoting does have some nice features where if the client wants an album, I might use this software on 'those' images. It might even open up my creative bug to shoot more images 12,500 ISO and see what I get. Some reception lighting can look real moody and romantic. Thanks for the introduction...nice job.
Thank you for making me aware of PureRAW. It is amazing. Maybe the results are a bit oversharpened, but now I need not shy away from ISO 1600 as I did before.
Glad to hear you found the video useful.
Very cool Glenn, I've just tried it with some recent pics from my 7Dii basically it's witchcraft !
Unfortunately it's extremely slow too on my old 2013 macbook pro and topaz is as well. It took about 12 hours to process 53 raw files. Perhaps if I choose the medium setting without the anti aliasing program ?
Great video Glenn, what about for images shot at base ISO on the R5 is there any advantage to first run them through DXO or in this case just fo straight into ACR / LRC
I think blow 1600 is not needed...
Glenn, nice to see you are happy with the results. Now, if this is taking so long for your PC to process this file is may be lacking some processor power and not so much video card power. Great results as usual!
Yes I have a pretty old computer. I'm sure most people's would work faster.
For comparison, I've tried on my notebook with a Rtx 2060 and it takes 16 seconds to process 7D Mark II RAWs.
Thanks Glenn - very informative. I share your distain for DPP. I downloaded the demo of the software and gave it a try right after watching your review. I was quite impressed with the RAW files that I could process, but was very disappointed to find out that not all lenses are currently supported (which includes my main bird photography lens - a Canon EF 800mm f/5.6L). I found that DxO does have a webpage where you can "offer suggestions" for support, but that is little consolation unless they act on it...
Surprising they wouldn't support that lens. Although TBH I'm not sure how much profiling a super telephoto really matters. AS long as you can still process the file and get rid of the noise.
@@GlennBartley With a little playing around, it seems using the profile for an EF 400mm f/4 DO II + 2x Extender III works fine
Thanks for this info. Still struggling with the best way to handle my RAW files with DXO Pure Raw. I am "still" using the 7D MK2 and DXO is adding a lot of color and contrast to the RAW images. I unticked the lens correction (and the other one) and still not okay. For me ON1 Denoise AI does a much better job on the 7D mk2. Luckily I did not buy DXO, just used the trail version after watching this video.
Tried it myself and I have to admit, it’s a lifesaver for high iso images. Not only do you have a cleaner image to begin with, but also the result at final output is much better too. I shoot Sony btw.
Good to hear from a happy Sony shooter too!
Thanks for the video. I agree that DPP is clunky and tedious -- but my biggest problem is my favorite lens is a Sigma ...and DPP does not support it (or any other non-Canon lens). I'm looking forward to seeing if DxO Pure RAW solves the problem. I'm mainly looking for CA mitigation -- the rest I can fix elsewhere.
Finally bought DXO Pro -- It auto-senses which lens I am using, does all the lens corrections, and fixes camera noise. I'm using it at the start of all raw photo editing for all of my lens/camera combos. Fast conversions, ready for my editor.
Thank you kindly, I appreciate all the information…. I’m confused though, how are you previewing your photos first? Which software do you use to weed through all of your photos? Then are you importing them somewhere first since you are dragging the file in? Thanks!
For previewing and culling I use breeze browser. Great program.
@@GlennBartley will Breeze browser show thumbnails/previews of raw files?
Hi I am thinking of buying the DXO Pure Raw but I have Nikon cameras - Nikon Z6II and an old D750 plus a couple of film cameras. How do you rate the DxO for these? TY
Hello Glenn, all you did is run DxO DeepPRIME which is similar to Topaz DeNoise AI.
I however am really interested to see how Canon software handled noise, if you could only share any of the raw files from your cannon so i could check for myself?
Thanks, I will definitely add this software in my workflow: as you said "almost magical"...
Enjoy!
Can I process raw files from Nikon D500 in dxo pure raw2?
Hi Glenn, I downloaded the trial DXOl and the difference is amazing with R5 files even though not starting with Topaz. I will check out your setings video next.
Glad its working for you.
Mindblown
Considering this vid was from its first version
Btw which one is faster
Topaz or this?
Thank you very much for the review. After watching, I did download a trial but must admit that although the results are excellent, I found the images over sharpened with some haloing. Did you find this?
Every once in a while I find one gets over-sharpened. But I dont find it to be the norm.
Were you running higher ISO images through? like ISO 3200 +
@@GlennBartley various ISO’s used but as you implied, worse at low ISO’s. I feel sure that at some stage they will provide a sharpening control. Hope so!
Glenn, do you make any changes to your R5 import settings in Lightroom if you use DxO first?
I do not use Lightroom. I use ACR. The settings I use are in my R5 setup guide here - www.glennbartley.com/purchase.htm
It looks interesting. I currently use Capture One with Topaz AI photo. I get great results. The nice thing is I can open Topaz from CO and save the edited file right back to CO for more editing. I will give DXO atry because your results looked great.
A perfect combination (imo) is DxO's noise reduction, preferably DeepPRIME XD from PhotoLab 6, combined with a handy raw editor like ACR/Lightroom - in that sequence.
Hi Glenn, I'm not sure if I understand it right - you process CR§ files first with DxO Pure RAW, than go with generated DNG file into Adobe Camera RAW and then first step ist use Topaz denoise?
What is your workflow now, with the new Adobe profiles for R5? And why do you not use the detail slider for sharpening/ Noise reduction in ACR?
Correct
Insane difference.. Cant really believe it. Only downside is the file size but you probably delete the DNG processed bu Dxo after you Edited the image and keep the original raw file? Thanks alot for this!
Hi Glen I've just watched your video! I'm not very good at editing my photos but I have been using DXO Pure Raw with images from my Canon 7dmk2. i have recently bought a R7 but the raw files coming from there, CR3 are not loading on my DXO. It is saying they've already gone through the DXO or they are corrupt! :( Any ideas? I see the files you are uploading are CR3, what am i doing wrong? Please help
Which gpu u had in this video? thanks
Thanks for this video. But in cases where we are taking stacked images in landscape then i think it is better to process them in ACR. DxO pure RAW cannot handle presently the stacked raw files. For single shots perhaps yes.
Perhaps. That is a very specific scenario that I have no experience with. I'll take your word for it!
Glenn, you convinced me but I am confused about workflow. Where do I view and cull my images before sending the keeper RAW files to DXO? I do not believe LR will "export" a RAW file. LR converts exported files to DNG, TIFF, JPEG etc.
I use Breezebrowser for all of my culling.
I just tried on some 1DX3 files and it does such a better job than Topaz! Thank you for sharing this with use Glenn!
You're welcome!
Has Lightroom now improved when processing R5 files? If not I'll try DXO.
Is it better to get the full photo lab or is pure lab and viewpoint sufficient ? I’m mainly going to use it to photograph my art, so the most important feature other than other correction features is to fix distortions easily.
I only use DXO for noise. If I were you I'd start there and see if it does what you need.
While I agree that DPP is terrible to use, as in your last video on the R5, the sample shown using DPP really looks like the software has applied some sort of noise reduction (in the previous vid it looks very heavy, all plastic like). So I'm wondering if DPP is indeed applying some noise treatment, or does it default to an "AUTO" noise treatment in the settings? I just can't see how there would be such a massive difference in the way the files look between DPP and ACR on the exact same Raw file. Seems odd.
It seems like (from my readings on the internet) that Adobe is not profiling the new Canon sensors. Either way it doesn't really matter. The point is you simply can not get good results from Adobe at high ISOs no matter what settings you use. In my opinion at ISO 3200 and above you need to use either DPP or something else. This DxO software works great and allows me to still use my normal Adobe workflow. Cheers!
Gleann, I liked the DxO PR, but it seems to oversharpen the images. I clearly see "jagged" lines on some parts of the image. Would be nice if we can control the amount of sharpening that would be applied in a preview window before applying the conversion.
I agree a sharpen slider would be fantastic.
Far too sharp at well defined edges...I will wait for an upgrade which hopefully will incorporate some degree of control. Pity...
@@nickshepherd8377, I'll do the same.
Glenn, do you know if there’s the same issue with processing raw in Adobe for the EOS R? Thanks Kim
I am not 100%...but if you google which cameras are supported by ACR you should find an answer.
Hello Glenn, greetings from Brazil, thanks for the excellent video! Does this also apply to 7D Mark II RAW files?
Sorry, just noticed you showed a 7D Mark II file in the video.
Yes absolutely. Grab the trial version from the link above and give it a go!
Should this be better than PS, LR and TopazDenoise, if I use a Nikon D500 and the 200-500 lens?
Above ISO 3200 I think you will see advantages. Obviously I dont use that camera so can't say 100%. Grab the free trial and give it a go!
FREE TRIAL HERE - tidd.ly/3dzAxdH
Thank you for the video. One question though, once the image is raw processed in DPP, couldn't it just be converted to DNG or TIFF and then used on Photoshop with the same output quality than going through DxO ?
As I said. I hate DPP and dont want to use it. Also I believe DxO gives a better result.
@@GlennBartley Yes, that's interesting, although somewhere one should compare how the same raw file comes out straight between DPP and DxO.
Because not everyone would invest in DxO if, with a DPP that would give the same RAW results, one can just output TIFF or DNG from it and then use it wirth PS.
Because , although it's clear you say you hate DPP, and I believe many do, if the RAW output to TIFF is about as good as with DxO, some might not want to buy an additional program just for that. since they can do their edit elsewhere and just use DPP for the converter.
(Ok I might have a slight tooth with DxO right now, but that would be understood by the Nik collection investors that ended up with not so usable plugins (scaling and bugs) on WIN 10 and 4k screens (not mentioned when you buy), and have to wait till DxO updates NIK on that... but it's been monthes already...)
Now another consideration, I wonder how long it will take to Adobe to finaly come with good profiles for the R5/R6 and when they do, if they'll finaly catch up with the actual excellent DxO raw outcome, or if they'll still be way behind...
But for now with the R5/R6 DPP and Dxo seem to be the ones, although I wonder if what is said to be one of the best RAW editor of them all, Capture One, comes with good results with these cameras, or if, as Adobe, they're also behind...
Very good review. And very true what you are saying.... Thank you. 🙂
Glad it was helpful!
So you have no control over noise removal in PureRaw? For example, is there a way to just get rid of the chroma noise?
It's pretty much just click and go.
Does a great job
Will it be possible to use this software on photos captured using a lens extension, like a 1.4 extender,
Yes. They have modules for most combos.
Quick question. When you move the file from DXO do you disable the Lens Profile and Aberration in ACR?
I leave that on. But disable the global sharpening.
FUJi users have the same problem but I use DXO photolab 6 elite which has the same denoise processor as Pure Raw. My workflow is to batch process all the files I am keeping with a preset in PL6 to apply Deep Prime XD which is what is also used in pure raw. Photos I really liked were further processed in PL6 and then everything was batch saved to a processed file. I thought I would enhance these in LR because of their very good masking but for some reason LR applied a profile I didn't like and I ended up deleting all the LR versions.
Thanks for sharing your workflow...
Just found this video. Any idea when DxO will update their software for the Z9, not sure what the delay is? Still have to use Z7II for low light wildlife photos. Cheers from Australia.
I'm not sure. They do seem a bit slow on the updates though!
Do you recommend DXO even for a Canon 80D or do you think that Adobe is best for this camera?
I think it will benefit any images from any camera shot at high iso
Thanks Glenn... top software 👍
Very welcome
Thanks for sharing the information on this new software. Did you run the ACR examples through Topaz DeNoise also or just the DXO ones? I would think it would only be a fair comparison if both were ran through Topaz. Or ideally, none were run through Topaz. I thought DXO PureRaw and Topaz DeNoise were basically competing products trying to achieve similar things. I didn't realize they should be used in tandem? It is no secret that ACR/LR NR is subpar on higher ISO files but this has always been the case. I haven't noticed any difference between R5 files and previous Canon files. It is true that Adobe doesn't have camera matching color profiles for Canon cameras anymore but those typically don't have any bearing on noise/sharpening.
Hi Geoff. Yes both went through Topaz.
In my experience DxO Pure Raw and then also Topaz Denoise did fantastic work!
@@GlennBartley Thanks. Currently I'm using LR (ie ACR engine) with all Sharpening and Luminance NR set to Off. I then run that through Topaz DeNoise (usually the AI Clear option). I will download the DXO trial and see how it goes as you certainly demonstrated a noticeable difference.
Great info. I just looked through there website, it doesn’t say if this is a one time purchase or an annual subscription. Do you know which one it is? I’m assuming one time purchase, but pay for updates I’m guessing.
I'm not 100% sure. But I'm 99% sure its not subscription based. I would guess one time payment and future updates (at least for a period of time) are also free.
@@GlennBartley That is the normal DxO model. They don't do subscriptions. New camera/lens combos are regularly added and are free of charge. They will charge if there is a major update to the software.
I think DXO PhotoLab 4 Deep Prime is a better because you have control over the luminance slider o sometimes go from 40 to 55 to remove background noise.
I probably agree in some cases. My issue is it then adds in an extra step with too much additional input of time on my end. I rank it somewhere between Pure RAW and DPP for my particular workflow.
Cheers!
Hi Glenn, thanks for the video. However, I am not clear if DXO Pure Raw is any better than the Topaz Denoise AI, specially since the latest version of Denoise allows us to export DNG file , just like Pure Raw. Keen to know your thoughts.
I havent done a complete side by side comparison....But in my experience DXO does a better job with high ISO RAW files. I then also use topaz as kind of a second pass as you have a bit more control. When used in combination the results are pretty amazing. With the R5 I can use up to ISO 25,600 now :-)
@@GlennBartley Thanks for your revert. I have heard that DXO Pure Raw is better than DeNoise for photos shot at ISO12800 and above. Have you had a similar experience with that ? If so how much of a difference do you think it is , in your experience? Finally, if one is to buy just one of them for noise reduction ,which one would you recommend?
so you use it in conjunction with Topaz Denoise?
On high ISO images yes. But I always do Topaz as a second layer so can mask as needed.
Saving money for this, amazing 👏
New wannabe wildlife photographer here, is this best: shoot raw, upload to DXO to denoise/correct and then move to Lightroom to edit and then save photos directly from Lightroom?
yes that sounds good!
Hi Glenn, does it still make sense to run Topaz denoise after the DXO DeepPrime ?? I believed both were serving the same purpose ..
By watching this video only half a year after it was made, I'm getting the impression you teached Jan about DXO PureRAW, and he maybe teached you how bring the audio and resolution of your video closer to the excellent level of your content 😛
I still use it as part of my regular PS workflow. It doesn't have to work very hard any more but provides a nice amount of capture sharpening.
Yes we are sharing secrets!
@@GlennBartley Thanks for this interesting insight. I recall Jan found DXO actually to be over-sharpening, but that was when using its lens correction settings. But DXO doesn't have the correct correction for his 600mm plus extender. For my old Tamron 16-300 the correction do wonders, for my Canon L glass the corrections are much less visible (of course)
Because today in Europe the R5 and R6 cost exactly the 'same' (meaning 100Euro per megapixel 😛), I have just upgrade my 70D to the R6. And with the bad lighting these weeks, images at high ISO still look amazing on the camera .. and on the PC the noise (after DXO) is no concern, but they clearly lack sharpness. And I clearly miss the APS-C range.
The first thing I should do is lower my shutterspeed to stay in lower ISO.
But I was also wondering whether adding Topaz Gigapixel or other Topaz stuff to my DXO Photolab flow should improve things ..
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've never used lightroom. Not a fan of the program.
Dxo spits out a dng. You can open in lightroom just like a raw.
@@GlennBartley Thanks.
Hi, Please can you tell me if you can send images direct from Adobe Lightroom to this DXO app and have them sent back to Lightroom? Thankyou.
Yes it is fully integrated to lightroom. Cheers!
@@GlennBartley Problem is that the software was made from or drawn from the DXO flagship so as to allow people to have a raw converter without having to splash out extra money for the whole main DXO software however it would have been better if they had allowed PureRaw to be accessed from an external source like Lightroom or On1 photo RAW, I like many use Lightroom as a way of storing and categorizing images so if I use PureRaw I need to open the folder from Lightroom (in my case Win Explorer) send it to PureRaw and then re-import it to Lightroom in a new DXO folder created by PureRaw, most any other software seems to allow an image to be stacked next to the original source image and that makes life a lot easier in the workflow. I cannot see how this can be done with PureRaw can you help please? Thank You, Russ.
Great video Glenn. I have seen other reviews where photographers have spoken about experiencing variation in the noise performance of the r5. With sometimes iso 800 being noisy, when other times iso 6400 was clean. Have you noticed this at all?
Just depends in your exposure. I've had ISO 3200 shots look cleaner than ISO 400 on 1DXIII even, if you expose poorly and have to raise later.
Always exposing as far right as you can/towards highlights will produce the cleanest images.
I also try to even shoot ISO 50 on R5 when I can, since it gets like 1 stop more DR vs. ISO 100. ISO 200 is cleaner than iso 100 from charts I've seen or better DR. I think ISO 320 maybe is even better than ISO 200.
@@mattli911 thanks for the reply Matt, how did you find the high iso performance of the r5 vs 1dx iii?
@@upendrawerake5991 Honestly I'm quite happy/surprised with the R5. I tested alot against the 1DX. Pushing the files really hard sometimes on purpose.
Really the R5 was close/not far off from the 1DX. Or at least, I didn't think it was night and day personally. I mean, the 1DX IS cleaner... but... you are at
@@mattli911 Cool, because I currently shoot with the canon 7d ii, which is great as it provides reach, but suffers when I am on safari before the sun is up. It is good to hear that the r5 has the best of both worlds.
@@upendrawerake5991 Yeah I shot 7dII for 6-7 years, and 1DX for a bit, but now R5. R5 is yes, basically best of both really. 1DX has it's place in a way/some things above R5. But R5 with much smaller/lighter body, flip screen, Eye AF, 45MP/IBIS and so on... it's really quite nice... Also 1DX is so loud with mechanical vs. r5 mechanical or silent 20FPS.
Glenn, one of the problems with using Adobe with the Canon R5 is that native camera profiles are not supported, such as camera neutral or standard. Does DXO raw provide the ability to choose these? Thanks
DxO raw is basically set it and forget it. They have profiled the camera and lens combos.
I recommend downloading the 30 day trial for free and seeing for yourself - tidd.ly/3dzAxdH
@@GlennBartley "Set it and just don't question it"
Hi Glenn
Most informative and thanks - a polite point of note, please check youor sound recording system, it was very difficult to hear, similar to many of your other videos.
thanks again as well as for your kind assistance in Fremantle.
I just got a new mic so hopefully things will start sounding better :-)
@@GlennBartley If you haven't already, once your video is on RUclips, start it playing, right click anywhere on the video to open an information panel. The bottom option "Stats for Nerds" will reveal your audio level. See Volume/Normalized values especially Content Loudness. This clip is "-14.2 dB" which means it's way below what's allowed. You want to get that dB kissing up near 0. Even -6 dB would be decent. Adjust that in your editing software, post some short samples until you get your workflow dialed in for your particular system. The microphone is not the problem.
As a consolation I watched someone else's video that was Content Loudness -22 dB and it was brutal when the ads come on. Blew my eardrums out because the tutorial narration required my speaker volume cranked.
DXO, amongst other things, applies noise reduction and sharpening, to the RAW file. ACR does nothing to noise reduction or sharpening unless you manually apply it. So I don’t think you are comparing apples with apples.
For example, you open an image of the Pacific Wren in ACR, without applying NR or sharpening, and complain about the noise. You then process the RAW file in DXO, which applies NR, and marvel how good the lack of noise is.
I would suggest you take the RAW file from LR or PS and process in Topaz DeNoise. Compare this with DXO. My tests showed DXO oversharpened the image.
The big disadvantage of DXO is that you cannot fine-tune noise reduction or sharpening, which you can do with Topaz.
I’m sticking with Topaz.
To each their own!
In my opinion the best final result will come from using DXO to pre-process the RAW file. Then use a normal Adobe workflow.
I agree it would be great if you could tweak sharpening settings in DxO.
ACR carries out both sharpening and noise reduction by default.
I am pretty sure Adobe applies sharpening by default. Which would make noise even worse. I know on my computer, raw files look better without processing them in acdsee than any Adobe software. I have watched two or three comparisons of dxo to Adobe. Dxo beats Adobe hands down.
I have Adobe Elements 11 I don't think it would plug-in with that.
Perhaps not...you'd have to check with DXO
I photograph birds too. I am trying out the trial version of PureRaw. I find the sharpening applied to my olympus raw files to be so over the top it makes the subjects and detail so fake, unrealistic and ugly looking even though PureRaw did an excellent job removing noise. The extreme oversharpening puts me off buying this. Hopefully they add in an option to select the sharpening level or to turn it off completely (right now, we have to de-select modules which also turns off optical corrections which isn't ideal).
I agree it would be nice if you could throttle the sharpening.
But with a super telephoto I just turn off the optical corrections if over sharpened. Seems to work well.
Fantastic info Glenn. Exactly what I wanted to know.
Glad to be of assistance :-)
Whats better if i can afford one dxo or topaz?
If you are happy with your RAW files in Adobe then go for Topaz. Otherwise DXO.
Is this unique to Canon, or are Nikon/Sony/etc also affected?
DXO will benefit all camera models and high ISO images.
Hasn’t dxo had more processing done before it opens? Not sure it’s that easy to compare, yes both raw files, but dxo has added processing like Adobe camera raw does but more of it.
You need to think of it this way.... Try whatever software you want to use and try to get the best possible final result. Use whatever settings are available to you in that software. Then compare the results. In my opinion Adobe can not touch the files (pre) processed in Dxo.
Unfortunately there is a problem here. DPP4 is as you say very clunky, but the colour profile is stunning. If using DXO pure raw, you are still left with the colour profile problem. I did an experiment processing the same image through Dpp4 and then Pure raw.....The DXO handles noise beautifully, but how do you then apply the Canon colour profile to the image. In effect, with DXO, you are left with a cleaner image to then process in photoshop but with the terrible colour profile of Adobe. I have tried 3rd party colour profiles that are all no where near the canon profile..... A question for you....how do you get around the colour profile issue of not using DPP4, which is the only reason why i use DPP4.
You are correct....I have started using the color fidelity profiles and find them quite good.
I describe my entire new workflow here if you are interested - www.glennbartley.com/ProcessWithMe9Ebook.html
Thank you for the review dear Glenn, DXO is very good and much cheaper than a new Camera :)
Very true!
I am amazed at how good it is!
I'll have to do more tests, but in my initial comparison, on an ISO 3200 photo in rain/bad light, it looks pretty damn good vs. LR + Topaz as I normally do.
Like you said, going straight from LR/PS into Topaz, it was looking pretty mushy/rough in comparison in my example. The DXO one looked much cleaner/smoother or more detailed.
I honestly don't even need to sharpen/touch Topaz in this one test, since it's already good enough.
Pretty amazing isn't it! Thanks for adding your findings.
@@GlennBartley Overall it's been as good/better than Topaz yet I think. Sometimes maybe it's a tad too aggressive in NR, but not sure if you can adjust that or not? But I still do find it produces less artifacts generally vs. Topaz.
I have this program and I must say that it is really fantástic !!
It is isn't it!
Not perfect... But what is?
Where do you cull before moving the photos to pureraw? I do all my culling in LR
If you are PC I recommend Breezebrowser. That's what I use.
And if you are Mac?@@GlennBartley
Like you said, at the end of the day, its the final result that counts. But perhaps the title of your video is a bit misleading, because you don’t really stop using Lightroom, you just add a workflow at the beginning before importing your image into Lightroom. But I sure am gonna give it a try. Thank you for sharing.
Ya gotta sensationalize the title to get those views :-)
@@GlennBartley Hahaha. SHAME.
In your opinion Glenn, is it better Dxo or Topaz Ai? thanks
I feel like they are kind of different animals. I think if I was to have just one it would be Topaz. But with the newer Canon cameras (e.g. the R5) it is really worth having Dxo for anything shot over ISO 1600.
As a side comment, Topaz has the advantage of denoising Jpegs as well. The DXO product works on raw files only.
I bought a new PC with a Nvidia 3080, 10 seconds for one deep prime process and batch processing very quick. I trialled Topaz and DXO Pure Raw is in a different league
Nice! Ya I need a new computer so badly. But it will have to wait a bit I'm afraid...
Are updates included in the purchase price?
You'll have to ask the company. I don't know.
Glenn, so I have say 1000 images on a camera card. How do you get them from the card to DXO? Do you use this on all images or do you cull first?
Also, my old images have already been converted by Adobe Lightroom. Can I use DXO on RAW files already converted and get the same results?
Finally, wonder if DXO can covert C-RAW images?
Yes you would ABSOLUTELY want to do some serious culling first. I delete 98-99% of what I shoot.
You can certainly go back and re-process old RAW files. In fact you will be surprised how good it does on them. I processed a few old ones myself.
Yes CRAW works as well.
I don’t know if this will help you but in my workflow I get all my raw files into Capture One (LR in your case) and do a culling first. When I want to process a keeper I just open the raw file (no adjustments made) in DXO and start the process there. Then I export a DNG file from DXO into the same catalog structure, next to the original raw file, so that I’m able to see it in Capture One next to the original. Now I can start doing my normal raw editing with colours and tonalities as I please. By the way, I’m using DXO PhotoLab instead of this new automatic software, but I believe they are based on the same technology. The key factor here is the DeepPRIME algorithm and the fact that we are able to export the result into a DNG file for further editing in other programs, if we like.
@@freetibet1000 I do not understand how to get the RAW file out of LR to DXO. LR allows import of Raw files but will not export a RAW file.
@@djack4125 since I’m not using Lightroom I cannot be completely sure how it would work for you but the way I do it is to locate the raw file on the hard drive manually and open it in DXO. (In my Capture One catalog I just right-click on the image thumbnail and chose “Show in Finder” and it takes me straight to the actual raw file.) When DXO have done its magic I export the DNG from DXO back into the same folder on the hard drive, next to the original raw file. I just add a _dxo in the file name to clearly detect it in my catalog. That way the original raw file and the DNG file from DXO should appear next to each other in the catalog structure.
@@freetibet1000 Thank you!
Hi there Glenn! Does it only work with high ISO images or any ISO
Works on any raw file 😎
@@GlennBartley so dxo pureraw give me the right profile for my canon R5? Loght profikes are not good for R6 and R5 cameras… or should I go with captureone? Thanks again
The thing about software is that today, more than ever, you really have to regard them as a part of your photographic kit. A piece of software can in effect "upgrade" the function of your camera. If you happily spend 3500$ on a camerabody alone, it makes no sense at all to get cheap on the software. For me, Capture One Pro and Topaz Denoise Ai supplement my camera-system very well. For you it´s DxO Pure Raw. With most software comapnies you get a 30 day free trial as well, you don´t have much to loose when trying a piece of software.
Interesting video!
I could not agree more with everything you just said :-)
This hits on the exact point someone else was making (elsewhere). Thousands of photographers are tossing $90 at superfluous hardware accessories because, well, it's only $90 and might make my pics better. But $90 for something I can download in 5 minutes and be using it even for every pic I took before I bought it? Something fishy and over priced about that. LOL.
Hi Glenn, I have used DXO Photolab 3 and now 4 to process my best shots after culling in LR for a while now. Fantastic results as you say, but in Photolab you can adjust the amount of sharpening or NR as you wish. In this software it seems to be fixed and my files seem to be over sharp using it. I think I will stick to Photolab, same tech, different workflow
Yes I think that is a great alternative!
Totally agree Andrew...very good but over sharpened with some haloing. A pity!
@@nickshepherd8377 Hi Nick, yes a pity. But Photolab solves it. Do you use it?
@@mondujar279 Not at the moment, but I think I may give it a try as hopefully it will provide the benefits I am looking for with the control I need. Thank you for your interest and helpful comments.
@@nickshepherd8377 Your welcome. I am keeping photolab as secret from my friends, so I have a way of perfecting images more than they can!it’s that good
Love my DXO!!!
It is magic!
Just passed on the sale of this because of uncontrollable sharpening. Hope they fix it sometime but for now it's a deal breaker.
Did you try it with the modules turned off? Works great that way.
Not working for Fuji X
Shoot. That's too bad. Hopefully they will keep adding more cameras.
This seems like a painful process. Is DxO only required with Cannon files?
Its not painful at all. Drag and drop. Will help with any high ISO files. Its amazing!
I heard from Walks on the Wildside that proprietary camera software is superior to any third party software for processing RAW files, because the camera manufacturers understand the structures of native RAW files vs something like Photoshop or DxO which have to reverse engineer how they read raw files or something like that. I've tried it with my Panasonic camera software and it does reduce noise better than Lightroom and Photoshop, but I don't like how it adds some sort of sharpening and artifacts so I don't know how true this claim is.
Maybe this is something you'd like to make a video on
Wow. Thanks for this video. I'll have to check it out.
Ya its really amazing software!
Hi
I have tried about 6 raw processing softwares. In my hands Capture One works best. May be I dont know to use the rest but I am going to stick to Cap1. At the end of the day its not what is good or bad but only what works ( or does not work ) for you.
Sorry to be nit picking but the audio and picture clarity leave a lot to be desired.
Stay safe take care.
Chidu
I totally agree. It's all about trying options and finding a workflow that works for you. 100% correct!
And yes...I need a mic! :-)
So I'm going to try pure raw. I'm just curious that you use topaz 1st step afterwards, but it looks to me like pure raw is doing AI type noise reduction when it does the initial processing. I reckon topaz is extremely over rated so I'm hoping what pure raw does will be enough. A side effect of how topaz works is that it blatantly reduces resolution in areas of fine feather detail. Everything renders looking like a repetitive brickwork sort of pattern because it clumps groups of pixels together. And then there's all the other random artefacts it produces. So I'm hoping dxo will do enough on its own. Thanks for the vid, was very helpful.
DXO definitely does a great job.
And I still think Topaz has its uses as well.
@@GlennBartley just/still curious though, how does topaz still come into play here? I mean is there an added benefit of using it still next to DxO? I have a hard time finding out why it would if DxO also does noise reduction. Or does topaz let you tweak the actual noise reduction more precisely? Thanks for answering (I should have gotten DxO last week during BF!)
Really difficult to get a feel for how good it works when the video quality is bad.
I guess you'll just have to take my word for it then...
Thanks for this Glenn! Testing it now...it's remarkable!
Very welcome. It is pretty amazing eh?
@@GlennBartley Indeed it is. I've been amazed on what it did to some of my old 7D files...and a few 7D Mk II ones where I had to go higher than I would have liked with ISO. Remarkable. And with my R6 it is sublime.
Running the free trail, it does a very nice job reducing the noise but that over sharpening though ..
Try not using their lens modules....I find it helps a lot
@@GlennBartley I will try that, thank you Glenn!
Gleen
A request for clarification and a couple of additional points
1 Am a right in thinking that you are applying topaz denoise after importing a DXO converted file intoo Camera Raw? If s,o is this necessary and are there any benefits from sequentially putting the file through 2 different denoise routines?
2 I use DXO photolab 4 elite rather than DXO pure raw. My understanding is that the use of lens profiles and Deeep prime noise reduction is the same, but the advantage for me is that I can do all of my raw adjustments in DXO, bypass adobe raw completely and export a 16 bit tiff directly into my existing copy of Photoshop CS5. Hence I avoid needing to use DNG converter or taking out an adobe subscription in order to process my files from newer cameras not supported by CS5
3 As a bird photographer you appear to be mainly using long lenses (certainly in the examples you show) these do not fully demonstrate the advantages of the lens correction profiles DXO use which give excellent correction of lens distortions which would be more apparent in images taken with wider angle lenses.
1 - Yes - DxO - ACR conversion - Photoshop where I use Topaz.
2 - I believe you are correct. I'm not a fan of the interface and prefer to use Pure Raw and then back to Adobe.
3 - I agree.
I see what you're saying and I can see the results, but having to use 3 different programs for each image would be a pain. If DXO allowed some basic features such as brightness, sharpening and colour adjustment then I'd be sold.
dxo photolab is what you wanted
Just a thought Glenn - it maybe worthwhile to first check the RAW file processing of Capture One (a trial?) before committing to DXO? Then you have exhausted just about all available options. in the meantime, DXO does appear to lead the pack over all others tested.
Yes I might do that. But I sure like this Dxo. Thanks for the thought!
Good advice. I’m very glad I tried the Capture One trial before making a big mistake by buying it.
Be sure to check if your camera is supported. After downloading the trial version, I was saddened to find out my cameras were not supported. These are multiple months old, so I was very surprised. BTW, Topaz DeNoiseAi supports their raw files. Just bed sure before spending your hard earned money.
Yes always good to check!
I was actually stunned to find my Canon Powershot SX50 HS is recognized. That's an old bridge camera so I wasn't expecting it to be included. I've yet to install the trial but if PureRaw can salvage some CR2's I have put aside just because I like the compositions but not the IQ, bonus.