Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
91
Feature suggestions (all products) / Re: Tutorials for PhotoLab 1
« Last post by John7 on November 12, 2017, 11:02:33 am »
A manual would be very useful when off line!
92
DxO OpticsPro (Windows) / Re: Number of CPU Core Utilization for DxO Optics Pro 11
« Last post by GSB2 on November 11, 2017, 11:35:38 pm »
Thanks for taking the time to test and share this. The above tests are with or without Prime NR please?
93
DxO PhotoLab (Mac) / PhotoLab on Mac
« Last post by Bjoran on November 11, 2017, 11:15:57 pm »
I have now edited a lot of images with PhotoLab and must say that this piece of software is really excellent, 100 % stable with OSX High Sierra in my iMac. I have used Optics Pro for a long time and now that I have got local corrections in PhotoLab I can go back to old images and edit them and achieve much greater results. PhotoLab is not perfect yet but I am sure it soon will be, when reported bugs are corrected.
94
DxO PhotoLab (Windows) / File naming on export
« Last post by Asser on November 11, 2017, 10:54:18 pm »
Hi,

I have created a ticket for this but would like to know, what other users think about this. I have the following problem:

If I develop a raw called <filename>.cr2 and disable all extensions in the export dialog, the file is exported as <filename>.jpeg

Now assume that this JPEG is assigned by name to the raw file in a DAM tool after export.

If the user now enters PhotoLab after some time and adapts the develop settings and reexports the JPEG, it is exported under the same name and the connection in the DAM tool is kept alive.

Now the user desides to create an additional virtual copy from the raw in PhotoLab, adjusts the develop settings on the second version only and reexports the two developed versions. The first version is now exported as <filename>_1.jpeg, the second one as <filename>_2.jpeg

Instead of having two versions on disc, we now have <filename>.jpeg, <filename>_1.jpeg and <filename>_2.jpeg, where the first two are clones. The user must at least start the manual deletion of <filename>.jpeg, because the version is represented by <filename>_1.jpeg now.

It would help much if the first version name would be kept stable as <filename>.jpeg independently of the virtual copy count. So like that:

<filename>.jpeg
<filename>_2.jpeg
<filename>_3.jpeg

instead of:

<filename>_1.jpeg
<filename>_2.jpeg
<filename>_3.jpeg

What do you think about it? This is what an operating system would do on naming collisions and there is a good reason for it.
95
DxO PhotoLab (Windows) / DxO Lab and Lightroom integration
« Last post by haleakala2 on November 11, 2017, 09:17:14 pm »
Hello,
I've used DxO Optics Pro for years, and I have now bought DxO Photo Lab.
So far, I haved used DxO in combination with Lightroom, using mostly DxO for the automatic correction and Lightroom for the individual correction as well as all the catalog/publishing functions.
With the new functions, and the integration of certain functions of the Nik Collections, I'm thinking about adjusting my way of working and using DxO for the individual corrections.
However before switching, I would like to understand a bit better the integration between DxO Photo Lab and Lightroom: assuming I have a picture loaded in Lightroom, I first make the corrections in DxO, and then I use the catalog/publishing funtions of Lightroom (such as key words, putting the picture in one/several collections, ...). What happened if I want to make further changes in DxO on this picture? Are all catalog/publishing elements of Lightroom lost after the changes in DxO?

I thank you for your feedback!

BR,

Haleakala
96
DxO OpticsPro (Windows) / Re: Number of CPU Core Utilization for DxO Optics Pro 11
« Last post by wyliec2 on November 11, 2017, 07:41:43 pm »
Thanks both.

My images generally not high ISO, but I shoot with a 1" sensor so I suppose I am using Prime NR to compensate for that light performance compromise (even though I shoot in good light typically). Testing with a low noise image is fine for my purposes.

I have two build options priced up, the 8 core just a few hundred pounds more than the 6.

Bencsi's test is steering me toward the 8 core, and I have a feeling the X299 series better for future proofing.

wyliec2 if you can share your test results that would be appreciated.

Thanks for prompting an interesting question - this was a benchmarking exercise I hadn't pursued - disabling cores and/or hyperthreading to evaluate performance impact.

Baseline info:
- 24 MP RAW images (file size 24,608 KB)
- 3 copies of the same image - ISO 200 with moderate customization in DxO
- 5960X CPU @ 4.2 GHz clock; 32 Gb 2666Mhz RAM; normal configuration 8 cores/16 threads
- total of 44 timing tests at different combinations of active cores/threads
- JPEG 100%
- HIGH NR

NOTE: The first export after launching DxO has a delay that subsequent images do not have.  I presume there is some overhead in getting code into memory and preparing the threads for processing – this overhead adds 80%-100% additional time to the first image.  GSB2 asked specifically about exporting single images – if the use case involves starting DxO, exporting one image and closing DxO each time, the 1st image time will always apply.  If the use case is to open DxO and keep it open, editing and exporting images singly, the second and all subsequent images will process much faster.

8 cores/16 threads
-   12.2 sec First Image
-   6.0 sec Subsequent Images
-   50% Processor Usage

8 cores/8 threads
-   11.8 sec First Image
-   5.9 sec Subsequent Images
-   80% Processor Usage

6 cores/12 threads
-   12.4 sec First Image
-   6.4 sec Subsequent Images
-   70% Processor Usage

6 cores/6 threads
-   12.0 sec First Image
-   6.4 sec Subsequent Images
-   100% Processor Usage

4 cores/8 threads
-   14.0 sec First Image
-   6.9 sec Subsequent Images
-   90% Processor Usage

4 cores/4 threads
-   13.7 sec First Image
-   8.0 sec Subsequent Images
-   100% Processor Usage

3 cores/6 threads
-   15.3 sec First Image
-   8.1 sec Subsequent Images
-   100% Processor Usage

Given how hyperthreading works, DxO sees the following combinations as equal:
-   8 cores/8 threads (hyperthreading disabled; 4 cores/8 threads (hyperthreading enabled)
-   6 cores/6 threads (hyperthreading disabled; 3 cores/6 threads (hyperthreading enabled)
DxO assigns work to threads, however, even though the above combinations appear equal to DxO, in actuality, 8 threads on 8 cores is more powerful than 8 threads on 4 cores.

Looking at the test results, I infer that DxO is most efficient using 6-8 threads per image (concurrent image testing I have done suggests this as well).  In past testing, DxO seems to ‘pick’ threads and stick with them – I’m not sure what happens when DxO use 8 threads on an 8 core machine with 16 threads – if it were to randomly assign it might assign 2 threads to a single core when it would be more efficient to use one thread on each of the 8 cores.  This might explain the slight advantage of 8C/8T over 8C/16T – the difference was slight but it was consistent.

If the use case was edit/export 1 image at a time, arguably one could choose an I5-8600K 6C/6T CPU at 3.6 GHz and not lose much in comparison to higher core/thread CPUs.  I would presume that someone editing in this manner is not doing much multitasking.  I often export in batches of 20-50 images and will navigate to websites, Word, Excel, etc. while the export is running – in this case, hyperthreading and more cores are useful.
97
DxO PhotoLab (Windows) / PSDs wont open in DXO
« Last post by podex45 on November 11, 2017, 05:53:19 pm »
New user saying hello, i was wondering if anyone can please answer a question,
I save a lot of photographs from Photoshop as PSD's, i have a folder with several jpeg and PSD files in it, when i open it in DXO only the jpeg files are showing, i presume DXO cannot read PSD  files, am i correct, and is there a solution.
Many thanks... :-\
98
DxO PhotoLab (Windows) / Legacy Smart Lighting controls -please bring it back !
« Last post by DavidSweden on November 11, 2017, 12:54:42 pm »
Yes, I'm missing Version 7 in particular - was much better than more recent versions for some purposes.

I also miss the Version 7 option in Smart Lighting a lot, so much I´ll need to stick with DxO Optics Pro 11.

I can understand they want to keep the user interface as simple as possible. Maybe a good solution would be to have a "Show Legacy Options" switch in the preferenses, which toggles between showing or hiding legacy stuff.

Also being backwards compatible when it comes to the sidecar files is very important.

David
99
DxO PhotoLab (Windows) / Re: NIK HDR Efx in PhotoLab?
« Last post by Asser on November 10, 2017, 03:34:50 pm »
@Bencsi
Yes, you are right. But the question is, how much of the NIK algorithms/skills can be integrated into the non destructive process of PhotoLab. If the NIK algorithms will be kept separate and destructive, there is no advantage over tools like Aurora HDR or Affinity Photo.

It is like with the Film Pack. The main reasons I bought it were, that I could use all the additional constrast settings (fine constrast, shadow contrast, ...) and the black and white channel mixer in the raw development process, so I do not need to generate big TIFFs and work with a pixel tool to develop basic BW-versions.

An inplace HDR feature has the big advantage of a much better data base, so that the highlight/shadow recovery could work much better. But you are right, HDR is also not at the top of my whish list. Much more than that, I would like to replace LR6 as my DAM. It does only need fast subtree browsing, collection/album trees and keywording. But there is a big opposition to this, what I really do not understand.
100
DxO PhotoLab (Windows) / Re: NIK HDR Efx in PhotoLab?
« Last post by Bencsi on November 10, 2017, 02:07:25 pm »
I'm afraid, the HDR merge is a far more complicated job. If you make such task in PS, you will see how much parameter needed to consider. Just some
- output file resolution 8-32 bit
- input files ghost suppression
- input files exposure difference handling
- small differences ( e.g. cloud movement, human moves, tree leaves move, etc.) handling

It is a different algorithm from RAW conversion. I do not think it would elevate DxO reputation too much. There are a  lot of HDR standalone app, which are able to use as input the JPG or TIFF files generated by DxO.

Endre
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10]
photography
photography