FIRST LOOK: PureRAW 4 - Is it BETTER Than PureRAW 3?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 мар 2024
- In this video, I demo how to use DxO's PureRAW 4 and compare it to PureRAW 3.
To get more info about DxO Software, go here:
tidd.ly/3MQ3uU7
Currently, I do not have a personal promo code to share.
I am a DxO affiliate and will earn a commission if you purchase anything using the DxO directly link above. Please read my Code of Ethics Statement:
onlinephotographytraining.com...
My Ultimate Lightroom Classic Course
Save $10 with Promo Code: TENOFF
www.anthonymorganti.com/ultim...
Please subscribe to my newsletter!
anthonymorganti.substack.com/...
Contact Info:
Anthony Morganti
P.O. Box 805
Buffalo, New York 14220
Check out one of my newer websites - The Best in Photography:
bestinphotography.com/
Here is the list of my recommended software, along with any discount codes I might have:
www.anthonymorganti.com/produ...
Could you help me help others learn photography? You can quickly offer your support here, where I receive 100% of your kind gift:
ko-fi.com/anthonymorganti
You can change the default amount to the amount you want to donate.
In this video, I demo how to use DxO's PureRAW 4 and compare it to PureRAW 3.
To get more info about DxO Software, go here:
tidd.ly/3MQ3uU7
Currently, I do not have a personal promo code to share.
I am a DxO affiliate and will earn a commission if you purchase anything using the DxO directly link above. Please read my Code of Ethics Statement:
onlinephotographytraining.com/code-of-ethics/
My Ultimate Lightroom Classic Course
Save $10 with Promo Code: TENOFF
www.anthonymorganti.com/ultimate-lightroom-classic-training
Please subscribe to my newsletter!
anthonymorganti.substack.com/subscribe
Contact Info:
Anthony Morganti
P.O. Box 805
Buffalo, New York 14220
Check out one of my newer websites - The Best in Photography:
bestinphotography.com/
Here is the list of my recommended software, along with any discount codes I might have:
www.anthonymorganti.com/productsiendorse
Could you help me help others learn photography? You can quickly offer your support here, where I receive 100% of your kind gift:
ko-fi.com/anthonymorganti
You can change the default amount to the amount you want to donate.
So would you say PureRAW 4 is better than Adobe's Denoise? Which one of them would you say is better for grainy portraits?
For me, Anthony, this bodes the question - with everyone touting their "denoising" or sharpening as being better than best - better than the other guys - it seems that we are being flooded - flooded with a cacaphony of competing but not necessarily significantly discernable advantage options.
To the point the entire discussion becomes a case of splitting hairs, pole vaulting over mouse manure - as my late, British mother-in-law used to say - when characterizing a situation that was not worth serious consideration.
The comparison I am interested in is between Adobe LR Enhance and DXO PureRAW 4. For me there generally were no differences between PureRAW 3 and the LR Enhance function. Since I already have LR, there was not much point in getting PureRAW 3. So the question for me is, does version 4 do a meaningfully better job than the LR Enhance function to justify the purchase. Thanks for your videos!
100%
I'm still using PR3 and there is a huge difference between DxO and LR. The latter is nowhere as good and it often creates artifacts and false colors. DXO cleans my ISO 51200 pretty well, LR -- not really. And on top of that LR is twice or more slower than DXO. I usually run a typical batch in DXO in under an hour, in Lightroom -- forget about it, it's just impractical.
@@USGrant21st My test between LR and DxO didn't show much difference at all. I upgraded my video card, and now even 42mp raw files at ISO 12,800 or 25,600 take about 10 seconds each in LR, and the results are very good at 33% (100% makes them way too weird!). The workflow element can't be overlooked, native is very handy, and the quality so far is definitely good enough for my work at this point (sports).
But how does it compare to just using Lightroom’s native correct/denoise/sharpen features?
pureraw 3 was marginally better than lightroom ai denoise, it is less brutal to fine details.
pureraw 4? dunno
LR is not even close, DXO does a much better job
I'm done with DXO. Just upgraded to Pureraw 3, three months ago. They won't upgrade me for free. The cost of the software is Turning out to be more than an Adobe subscription. I'll just use Adobe Denoise AI.
I can't wait to go home and download the demo and see if it really is faster than 3
Thanks for posting this. I have been extremely frustrated with some changes made in ON1 '24. I quit Elements, Light Room and PS and chose ON1 because it seemed simpler than them. Photography is a hobby with me, not 24/7. Always in the past you have explained in a manner and pace that I can follow. Some how in the past couple of years I lost contact with you. You
will be my first resource.
I knew you would come out with a good video on this! I’ve been using Topaz Ai for years on mybird in flight photos, but I bought this yesterday!
2 x questions please. 1. Should we use dxo4 before any other processing. 2. Does the new DNG file retain the flexibility of sony files to lift shadows. Thanks Barry
Another great video. Why did you max out the Luminance and Force Details sliders in PureRaw 4? The default settings work great and these sliders are only used in extremis. Given these sliders are not available in PureRaw 3 this will be an unfair comparison. By maxing out the Luminance slider you are considerably softening the image and maxing out the Force Details slider will introduce artifacts and reintroduce noise. Not sure why you did this other than to debunk PureRaw 4 in favour of 3. I am now using PureRaw 4 and to me it is the best yet.
So you can have version 3 and 4 installed at the same time? I love that. Most software only allows you to upgrade the old version.
I wish the processed image would appear right next to the original image in Lightroom.
Nice job. Pure Raw 4 is getting things to look like a base ISO image. Even at 12800 ISO.
It might be useful if you provided some details on your hardware system. These advanced NR/sharpening software options really seem to require much more GPU processing power than most photo apps have in the past. I love PR 3, but thought it was a bit slow, PR 4 just buries my machine which has a 2060 that cannot be swapped.
Good video, but as a recent purchaser of PR3 I'm dismayed by the "no upgrades" policy by DxO. I bought PR3 two months ago, and now they want another $80 to upgrade to PR4. I'm movin' on (ON1 is looking pretty good!).
Me too.. I bought version 3 23th of February.
If you are happy with pr3… no need to upgrade 😉
Hi, I just bought version 3 and do a free trial on 4. I see only denoising applied to the images even when I turn lens softness to hard, no sharpness is applied. Is that normal?
Using plug-in is such a slow process, I would never be able to finish processing one file at a time. I just run a batch conversion to DNG. Though my gaming computer is pretty fast, it still takes about 5 sec per image, so I can finish my lunch before all files are processed.
I'm still using PR3. Have they fixed the "Lens softness" settings in PR4? It's way too aggressive even at the lowest setting, I have to keep it off. I wonder if its finally usable in PR4.
Perhaps Pureraw will support the Fuji XT-5 one day 🧐
Thanks for the excellent video comparison. But… (there’s always a “but,” right?). One of the things that I find interesting and frustrating about reviews of DXO Pure Raw is that it is 100% always looked at as a “noise reduction tool” only. While if you watch DXO’s own materials on this (they had a very good seminar on it on RUclips), they equally tout the fact that this is a “demosaicing tool” that goes and grabs your underlying raw file and processes that, rather than “shipping whatever Adobe has done in that regard” to DXO to have noise removed. Why is this meaningful? Because in my evaluation (and DXO’s explanation) the detail extraction of their demosaicing is superior to Adobe’s. And it’s true. I’ll most often send files shot at base ISO to Pure Raw “because” it can pull more detail from the raw files. The excellent noise handling (for even base ISO shots) is just an added bonus. Some have suggested that using Adobe’s AI noise combined with careful sharpening is equivalent to DXO’s quality, but I’v’e tested this on fine detail in medium format digital files and DXO is superior to the same file using Adobe noise + very carful sharpening. Side by side, the DXO files are marginally better. As one who prints large, this is significant. I’d love to see more reviewers look at this aspect of DXO’s process and not just “noise handling.”
Any chance you could do a PureRAW 4 comparison with Topaz ? Great video by the way as always !
FWIW, I have PureRaw 3 and Topaz DeNoise AI. I have done testing and I think PureRaw 3 does a better job, especially with problem files. With fairly clean files it's more of a tossup.
@@dougmacmillan1712 presumably then 4 would be much better than Topaz de Noise. I have trialled PureRAW 4 but my computer spec isn't up to the job unfortunately
I wish the DXO file is on top of the created stack, when output is in the same folder.
Yes, Lightroom does that very nicely with its own denoise function
But you're comparing PR4 with all its sliders to the right against PR3 with no controls.
The advantage of Pure Raw is that it can be batch processed, meaning no intervention with sliders on a per photo basis. That should be how it is compared.
And how does it compare to Topaz Photo AI?
I've found both DxO PureRaw 3 and Adobe DeNoise AI both to be superior to Topaz Photo AI, so I expect DxO PureRaw 4 will be better too.
Hmmmm interesting! I do like Topaz so I’ll need to do a comparison!
@@lauriewahlig2819 yeah I loved Topaz DeNoise, but I feel they've really dropped the ball with photo ai sadly
I could've sworn that I just paid $80 to upgrade to 3. 😅 In any event, I don't think theres anything revolutionary here that would compel me to drop another $80. PR3 gets the job done well enough, and god knows I don't need more sliders to abuse.
I have had Pure Raw 2 and 3 using them because they just work and I don't need to faf about. I downloaded the Pure Raw 4 trial and found 2 things. (1) the output is almost identical to the Pure Raw 3 version unless I go to extreme pixel peeping. However, that in itself would be outweighed by the preview and integrations improvements....👍 Except that (2) on my computer (i7-8700K CPU @ 3.70GHz , windows 10, Nvidia GTX 1070, 1 TB NVMe system drive, 32 gb ram) PR4 takes almost 2x as long 90 seconds to process a single image as PR3 @ 45 seconds. 👎 So, until such time as I can buy a faster computer, or DxO makes this software faster I am keeping my money.
Strange that's the exact opposite of the video.
@cmacclel Anthony is using a Mac while I am using a Windows machine. There may be a difference between them.
I am still testing but at the present I can not see any benefit in getting the newer version. Yes, it does reduce more noise at the "standard" setting however it also removes fine detail and micro contrast.
I used the GTX 1050Ti with pureraw 3 and the Deep prime XD took 3 mins to process an image. Then I've upgraded to RTX 3060 and now it takes 8 seconds.
I'm also on Windows and had it crash repeatedly - contacted them about it and they said to uninstall and re download - I now have 2 days of trial left and it hasn't crashed today but some files it just refuses to process giving an error: file couldn't be processed. It also runs MUCH slower for me on my PC. I'll give it a miss looks like one of those rushed updates.
unstable as fuck, constantly crashes to desktop (DXO Pure RAW v2 works flawlessly on the very same laptop, with the very same problematic images) . Not all images cause the crash, it's random.
This version is buggy as hell - avoid at all costs.
No love for Fuji. Boo