I am impressed with DXO - I look at lens corrections in Capture One vs DXO and the difference is significant - leaning to DXO as the better correction profile - hands down. I do slight corrections and export back to Capture One, where the masking is far superior - a little longer on the work load, but worth it.
Re the photos being “overcooked”… What specifically are you referring to? I.e. what elements of the photo are 5:14 overcooked in your opinion? I ask, because I love the look and don’t feel that they are particularly over processed. Is it the dark/moody/contrast image or is it something else that you feel is “overcooked“? Love the channel and appreciate the sharing of your thoughts and opinions! Thank you.
It’s a little of the effect and retouching together. I don’t think the photos are bad at all, just a bit more processing than I’m use to. But my client loved them and that’s definitely the bottom line.
Great video, as always! Regarding DxO, if you bought the OM Systems gear that you used for a few videos a couple months back, you will love the DxO product with it. The software's camera profiles handle OMS .orf files better than any of the other RAW editors on the market at this time (other than the Olympus software, of course, but that package is a bit clunky). You just need to remember to choose your Camera profile midway down the color tab. I was on the beta team for PL7 and I really like how far DxO has come. Once they add Layers, I'll be able to fully switch over to them. Question on your work with the model. I don't recall from your other videos, but it stood out to me that she never got up on the balls of her feet while you were shooting with her. I've always been told that the best, most flattering look comes from the posture change with the model on her toes. Is that incorrect?
DXO has the best noise reduction hands down. DXO can even restore loss color due to high ISO. Only thing I don't like about DXO you have to use all their lens profiles. Sometimes I might want to use the profile that is built into the lens.
Great, that you so open minded to test other raw converter. Because of the tenthousand lens camera combinations in the lab database of Dxo, it has the image of one of the best raw converter out there, better than Lightroom, if one prefer the most accurate sharpness out of the lens camera combination and the best colour out of a raw. But with the new AI masks in Lightroom, I I think Lightroom is again a step more advanced, and also as an image database, it is better with his catalogue workflow. I use both parallel, and its very convenient.
@kaskoPhoto I like the sliders of Lightroom more. More granular. In Dxo every milimetre of the slider you get huge difference. But Dxo strength is to automate some things. Almost every segment has an automatic button and you could also store your prefered looks into presets. Unfortunately it exist fewer tips and tricks videos on RUclips for Dxo than for Lightroom, but there are a couple. Most workflows videos from older versions of Dxo photolabs or Optics Pro (the older name) are still valuable.
I tried photo lab 7 because people swear by the noise reduction but I didn't find it impressive at all. Maybe I was doing something wrong somehow but my images in affinity photo look less noisy, edges look more distinct instead of kinda muddy, and it's easier to remove chroma noise and leave the grain. Or I'm an idiot lol. I think my top ISO was like 2000 and the images just looked better in affinity. But I do like photo lab's interface and tools in general. Affinity is more of a "one image at a time" kind of program and DXO is better for handling lots at once. I guess I'll give PL8 a try.
I haven’t tried the noise reduction and I use it so rarely that I’m not sure I will ever see a difference. But for me, I started this because of the rock conversion and that I do like.
In almost every review Dxo together with topaz noise reduction are described as the leader in noise reduction. Till Adobe came with his AI Noise reduction, now the race are more narrow. Maybe you see the astonishing noise reduction capabilities only in more noisy photos? Or an user error?
@@chiftele08 Maybe I did something wrong but I wasn't impressed. The noise reduction just looks smudgy and fake to me. I think grain is better than having a smudgy picture.
@@bananaman-zd4lq I prefered Dxo photolabs over Dxo pureraw app (that's only the denoise function) cause in photolabs I have more control over the the AI method, the strength, more sliders to play with. Also, in photolabs I could add more artificial grain, as I want. Or use presets with old film simulations. Back to daguerreotype in the 19. Century.
Wow.! Beautiful model beautiful lighting! Just beautiful! As usual- you have my dream job!
I am impressed with DXO - I look at lens corrections in Capture One vs DXO and the difference is significant - leaning to DXO as the better correction profile - hands down. I do slight corrections and export back to Capture One, where the masking is far superior - a little longer on the work load, but worth it.
Re the photos being “overcooked”…
What specifically are you referring to? I.e. what elements of the photo are 5:14 overcooked in your opinion?
I ask, because I love the look and don’t feel that they are particularly over processed. Is it the dark/moody/contrast image or is it something else that you feel is “overcooked“?
Love the channel and appreciate the sharing of your thoughts and opinions! Thank you.
It’s a little of the effect and retouching together. I don’t think the photos are bad at all, just a bit more processing than I’m use to. But my client loved them and that’s definitely the bottom line.
Great video, as always! Regarding DxO, if you bought the OM Systems gear that you used for a few videos a couple months back, you will love the DxO product with it. The software's camera profiles handle OMS .orf files better than any of the other RAW editors on the market at this time (other than the Olympus software, of course, but that package is a bit clunky). You just need to remember to choose your Camera profile midway down the color tab. I was on the beta team for PL7 and I really like how far DxO has come. Once they add Layers, I'll be able to fully switch over to them.
Question on your work with the model. I don't recall from your other videos, but it stood out to me that she never got up on the balls of her feet while you were shooting with her. I've always been told that the best, most flattering look comes from the posture change with the model on her toes. Is that incorrect?
Great content John...thanks for sharing...3 speed lights can do so much, in the studio..something I tend to forget :)
We all forget sometimes. Well, I forget because I’m at the age where it’s expected 😂
I use dxo photo lab 8 and lightroom and more and more preferring the dxo raw conversions.
I’m impressed with it for sure. I just need more time with it to understand it more. It looks like the raw conversion is pretty impressive for sure.
I have to agree with you that C1 on an iPad is not ready for prime time. I look forward to your review of the M11 and DXO.
DXO has the best noise reduction hands down. DXO can even restore loss color due to high ISO. Only thing I don't like about DXO you have to use all their lens profiles. Sometimes I might want to use the profile that is built into the lens.
I really have to dive in a lot more. This was a very quick first time.
You shooting with a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8?
Yes. I love the 28-75 and the 70-180 for events and sometimes studio.
Great, that you so open minded to test other raw converter. Because of the tenthousand lens camera combinations in the lab database of Dxo, it has the image of one of the best raw converter out there, better than Lightroom, if one prefer the most accurate sharpness out of the lens camera combination and the best colour out of a raw. But with the new AI masks in Lightroom, I I think Lightroom is again a step more advanced, and also as an image database, it is better with his catalogue workflow. I use both parallel, and its very convenient.
I’m thinking the same way with the use of both. I need more work with DXO to better understand all it has to offer
@kaskoPhoto I like the sliders of Lightroom more. More granular. In Dxo every milimetre of the slider you get huge difference. But Dxo strength is to automate some things. Almost every segment has an automatic button and you could also store your prefered looks into presets. Unfortunately it exist fewer tips and tricks videos on RUclips for Dxo than for Lightroom, but there are a couple. Most workflows videos from older versions of Dxo photolabs or Optics Pro (the older name) are still valuable.
I tried photo lab 7 because people swear by the noise reduction but I didn't find it impressive at all. Maybe I was doing something wrong somehow but my images in affinity photo look less noisy, edges look more distinct instead of kinda muddy, and it's easier to remove chroma noise and leave the grain. Or I'm an idiot lol. I think my top ISO was like 2000 and the images just looked better in affinity. But I do like photo lab's interface and tools in general. Affinity is more of a "one image at a time" kind of program and DXO is better for handling lots at once. I guess I'll give PL8 a try.
I haven’t tried the noise reduction and I use it so rarely that I’m not sure I will ever see a difference. But for me, I started this because of the rock conversion and that I do like.
In almost every review Dxo together with topaz noise reduction are described as the leader in noise reduction. Till Adobe came with his AI Noise reduction, now the race are more narrow. Maybe you see the astonishing noise reduction capabilities only in more noisy photos? Or an user error?
@@chiftele08 Maybe I did something wrong but I wasn't impressed. The noise reduction just looks smudgy and fake to me. I think grain is better than having a smudgy picture.
@@bananaman-zd4lq I prefered Dxo photolabs over Dxo pureraw app (that's only the denoise function) cause in photolabs I have more control over the the AI method, the strength, more sliders to play with. Also, in photolabs I could add more artificial grain, as I want. Or use presets with old film simulations. Back to daguerreotype in the 19. Century.
Nice shots, I like drama. :-)
It’s fun to push the limits but I get a little queasy over processing this much 😂