Author Topic: Receivership  (Read 7673 times)

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: Receivership
« Reply #15 on: April 24, 2018, 10:20:44 am »
Reasonable assessment that, Assar. Does not look good to be honest. Even if DxO survives I wonder how development will be impacted.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2018, 10:26:30 am by ColinG »

MikeFromMesa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
Re: Receivership
« Reply #16 on: April 24, 2018, 12:51:40 pm »

For new customers this is surely true. For existing one like me, there is no good or cheap alternative:

- On1 (very glitchy, leaves much to be desired)
- Luminar (more of a show)
- C1 (good, but another 300€ to get in)
- Lightroom (bad results, subscription)

So would be happy about every release, which improves the tool.
+1

I have On1 and LR6 as well as PhotoLab, and feel that PL is heads above either tool. I do not find On1 very buggy (I must use it differently than you), but I feel it does not do a particularly good job on raw images. Better than before, but still lacking. And LR6 is not subscription, but I think it does not have the capabilities and range of PL.

I have used CaptureOne and it is a good alternative to PL, but it is both expensive and somewhat limited in its distortion correction functionality. In fact it does not automatically "de-fish" Olympus 8mm images at all, even though it has a distortion correction module for that lens.

I will continue to use PL as long as there are new updates coming, and do not plan to change unless my copy of PL stops working for me (if, for example, I bought a new supported camera or lens). Still, this is very disturbing news and it makes me wonder how much longer this website will continue to function.

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: Receivership
« Reply #17 on: April 24, 2018, 01:05:45 pm »
Quote
Still, this is very disturbing news and it makes me wonder how much longer this website will continue to function.

I think this is not that dramatic yet. I have read of three different sources already, who know the DxO interna, that we should not panic and that there is at least one scenario, that looks promissing. In the end it depends on whom you are asking, whether something  looks promissing. But the gates are not closed yet. :-)
« Last Edit: April 24, 2018, 01:07:45 pm by Asser »

MikeFromMesa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
Re: Receivership
« Reply #18 on: April 24, 2018, 01:10:40 pm »
According to the French experience, this procedure saves companies.
My feeling is that DxO will live despite a financially fragile situation.
Reorganized companies often survive, but I am not so sure they prosper, and I worry about what will happen to the development team and future products. I have been a Dxo customer (Optics Pro and PhotoLab) back to something like version 6 or 7 so I am concerned about what this means for the future - after, say, the next year - when new functionality might otherwise have been available. And if their business operations have been poor enough for them to fail in the current environment why would they succeed after the reorg?

Perhaps the best thing would be for some company with lots of money to buy them out as they seem to have bought out NIK. My one question is why this has happened.

There are only a limited number of high quality workflow tools available for modern day digital cameras - on the high end Lightroom, PhotoLab, CaptureOne, and lower on the ladder (at least in my opinion) Luminar, ACDSee. There are more - Gimp and PhotoNinja and perhaps more, but I do not think there are that many high quality players, at least on the Mac side. Why is a quality product like PhotoLab trailing everyone else so badly?

I did not include pixel editors like Photoshop or Affinity Photo because PhotoLab is not a pixel editor, only a workflow tool, and I do not feel that pixel editors are particularly good tools for editing a large number of photos. I use workflow tools for that and use pixel editors to do the work that workflow tools can not.


MikeFromMesa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
Re: Receivership
« Reply #19 on: April 24, 2018, 01:15:07 pm »

I think this is not that dramatic yet. I have read of three different sources already, who know the DxO interna, that we should not panic and that there is at least one scenario, that looks promissing. In the end it depends on whom you are asking, whether something  looks promissing. But the gates are not closed yet. :-)
Thank you for the information.

I would hate to lose what has always been a great tool for me, and especially as the best alternative (for me) would be CaptureOne which I feel is too expensive. Their last upgrade (upgrade, not initial purchase) was $120 for basically the same functionality as their previous release (which I did not buy). The initial buy-in is much more expensive.

Nick_

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 413
Re: Receivership
« Reply #20 on: April 24, 2018, 01:32:59 pm »
They had a really bad business plan so far. Every € spent on DxO ONE is lost money.
I wouldn’t say their business model it totally wrong but DxO ONE certainly is a mistake. It would make sense for Apple for example that has the financial might to develop, promote and market such a gimmick and that can afford a flop like the Apple Watch.
Would Apple acquire DxO ONE?

The only understandable plan for me would be to stop all hardware activities and concentrate on PhotoLab and NIK. PhotoLab should be extended by more DAM to be more on par with On1 and C1 in that field. NIK should be updated to support high DPI and not to crash with new Adobe products and sold in the range 50-100€ per seat.
+1

At the same time it won't go without an investor. The marketing activity is too small (number of follower on Facebook stagneting), the development velocity is too slow. The public relations is too old school (no voteable feature lists, no public betas, no sneak previews). All this needs money, which seems to be missing.
It’s typical of start-ups that are underfunded and try to make do with limited resources. At their point of development they can’t do without a massive input of cash to hire people, develop their product and aggressively market it. And, BTW, have a real relation with their customer base.

Nick

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: Receivership
« Reply #21 on: April 24, 2018, 01:37:30 pm »
Quote
I do not find On1 very buggy

It was not really buggy. It was more slow, had missing features, or did not follow best practices. Examples:

1) I work under windows and I expect that the mouse wheel is consistently supported for scrolling and zooming in all views that have scrollbars or zoomable content.
2) If there were some command shortcuts, they were against all of my expectations.
3) Switching into develop mode was slow
4) No support for hierarchical keywords was available. If they support keywords, why not the hierarchical ones? Cannot understand such decissions...
5) The photo export was not a background task. A blocking modal dialog was displayed. For what?
6) The output quality was by far inferior compared to the one of PL.

The usability engineering there was just bad.

RockvilleBob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 4
Re: Receivership
« Reply #22 on: April 24, 2018, 05:07:32 pm »
I have ON1 and it stopped working on Windows 10. ON1 support is very sketchy. After multiple emails and two sessions of remote computer access ON1 gave up. They offered a refund and indicated that a percentage of their Windows 10 users, they said roughly 5%,  cannot run ON1. So ON1 is very buggy and ON1 support to correct problems is limited.
I just bought the elite version of PL and hope that development continues along with further development of the NIK tools. I ent to ON1 because of the issue with NIK Software, I went to DXO PL because ON1 will not work on all Windows 10 systems and mine is one of those where it recently quit working. NOW AFTER JUST EVALUATING AND BUYING DXO PL ELITE THIS IS ANNOUNCED. My next step may be Capture One if DXO PL falters. If I do decide to get Capture One I will post a note here to warn those also considering Capture One - given my track record.
BUT WHAT I REALLY WANT TO HEAR IS THE DXO PL WILL MOVE FORWARD AND NIK TOOLS WILL BE INTRODUCED.

MikeFromMesa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 370
Re: Receivership
« Reply #23 on: April 24, 2018, 06:21:36 pm »
Quote
I do not find On1 very buggy

It was not really buggy. It was more slow, had missing features, or did not follow best practices. Examples:

1) I work under windows and I expect that the mouse wheel is consistently supported for scrolling and zooming in all views that have scrollbars or zoomable content.
2) If there were some command shortcuts, they were against all of my expectations.
3) Switching into develop mode was slow
4) No support for hierarchical keywords was available. If they support keywords, why not the hierarchical ones? Cannot understand such decissions...
5) The photo export was not a background task. A blocking modal dialog was displayed. For what?
6) The output quality was by far inferior compared to the one of PL.

The usability engineering there was just bad.

Yes, I agree.

In addition it makes it very difficult to call external pixel editors for specific editing jobs. I use Affinity Photo (and PhotoLine) for that, and it is too much trouble to use them from ON1. There is no auto distortion correction, even for recognized lenses, or at least none for the Olympus Fisheye, even though it is recognized.

There are some positives - the HDR functionality has improved, although it is still not as good as some of the HDR-specific products like Aurora HDR, their pano functionality has improved, although it is not nearly as good as some of the pano-specific products like Panorama Studio 2. They have added some adjustment filters that were badly needed, but the adjustments on raw images are just not up to what has become standard in products like PhotoLab and CaptureOne. They are trying, but they are still pretty much behind the current competitive curve.

Mostly I bought the product years ago for its masking ability and have mostly upgraded if the cost has been low enough to warrant doing so.

But PhotoLab is not without its own problems, with the most annoying for me being the inability to "round-trip" photos from PL to an external pixel editor and then save it back. Oh, I can do it, but most of the time the returned edited image does not show the changes, so further editing by PL is not possible. When I filed this as a defect (perhaps 2 years ago) the development staff basically responded "Don't to that". When I pointed out that they provided the link to do exactly that they told me that the intention was to provide the ability to send the image to a pixel editor, but not for the user to save it back to PL (well, OP at the time), but to some 3rd location. That is not reasonable to me and is one of the reasons I started playing around with CaptureOne (and how I ended up with a license, which I have not upgraded to the current version).
« Last Edit: April 24, 2018, 06:28:18 pm by MikeFromMesa »

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: Receivership
« Reply #24 on: April 24, 2018, 08:15:00 pm »
Have tried ON1 on three occasions and also found it lacking in raw editing in particular. Not sure I like the results from the filters in general though and I find the workflow awkward. Have also found the lens correction flaky and the browse module temperamental - pixelation of thumbnails has been experienced as has degradation/loss of detail when opening an image previously edited in ON1. Those bugs do clear eventually but they are there, are annoying and make me feel the software is not safe. I defaulted back to LR until a couple of months or so ago I found PL and just loved the "out of the box" results. DxO adding Nik to the mix sold it to me. Given the circumstances I should perhaps add 'regrettably' to the last sentence. Thankfully my Adobe subscription has not ended just yet so I have not cancelled, which was (but is no longer) my intention.

Must say that my short association with DxO as a piece of software has been great. As for my association with the company...well what association! I feel they just took my money and vanished. Even requests to support to get a training video on their site working received a dismissive we are working on it - it was still not working the last time I looked.

jdean

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 2
Re: Receivership
« Reply #25 on: April 25, 2018, 01:38:29 am »
I was originally using LR6 and didn't want to go with the subscription plan. Trialed several packages, bought Pictorial, bought On1 and also Luminar.  DXO was just too expensive for me  so I just signed up with Lightroom Classic CC and I am loving LR again. I cancelled my Zenfolio account so figuring that in it is not bad at all, using myportfolio replaces Zenfolio for me.  I still think LR is the best for me and I could have saved $ just upgrading with them.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2018, 02:32:03 pm by jdean »

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: Receivership
« Reply #26 on: April 25, 2018, 12:49:05 pm »
I was originally using LR6 and didn't want to go with the subscription plan. Trialed several packages, bought Pictorial, bought On1 and also Luminar.  DXO was just too expensive for me  so I just signed up with Lightroom Classic CC and I am loving LR again. I cancelled my Zenfolio account so figuring that in it is not bd at all, using myportfolio replaces Zenfolio for me.  I still ink LR is the best for me and I could have saved $ just upgrading with them.

I think many of us started to look elsewhere following the arrival of the subscription model at Adobe. It works well enough though and if, like me, you tend to keep abreast of the upgrades the sub is no more expensive that the likes of the ON1 annual upgrade. I did buy DxO though as the results are great and I do love Nik............. But, Adobe stay strong and DxO is struggling and being non-communicative.

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: Receivership
« Reply #27 on: April 25, 2018, 01:52:27 pm »
@Colin I think we should not compare the two companies. Just two facts:

Employees: >17.000 Adobe vs 113 DxO Labs
Turnover: 5.854.000.000 USD Adobe (2016) vs 14.000.000 EUR DxO Labs (2017)

It makes me wonder how much was arrived with only 113 employees. Take the CEO, the management and other administrative employees out of these 113 employees. These are the ones that develop, test, communicate. Now split these resources on NIK, PhotoLab, Dxo ONE. I think it is not possible to expect more, when at the same time there is no more money and the company direction is unclear.

I would like to see the numbers the other way round, but things are, how they are.

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: Receivership
« Reply #28 on: April 25, 2018, 02:44:27 pm »
Either way Assar, it has created a company that does not have customer focus and is now in financial difficulty. Given that it is still selling also bring ethics into question unless there is something we do not know - which brings customer focus back on stream.  I am not questioning the previous development rate, I have not been around long enough to do so, but I do question a company that cannot support what it does have (back to that video) and that is detached from its customer base. That is unforgivable and the software does not come cheap.

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: Receivership
« Reply #29 on: April 25, 2018, 03:35:23 pm »
Why should they stop selling? If they would do that, then the company would be dead in no time, what is not the case right now. The buyer gets what he pays for. There never has been a next version garanty. And putting a "WARNING" into their shop would not help either (looking from the company's perspective).

The non existing customer binding is annoying, that is true. Such things often depend on the attitude and trust of the CEO and the management team towards their customers. If this is not on the company's "mission charter", then it cannot be realized.


 

photography
photography