cho, cho, cho, cho…………………
You are, unfortunately, incredibly naive when it comes to PhotoLab’s historical approach to development. That ignorance is not entirely your fault because you’ve had no involvement in that development and have not actively participated in any of the many hundreds of threads discussing it. Many of the members of this forum were more intimately involved with the development of this software over the years.
At most DxO addresses a combination of around a dozen new or updated features and fixes to performance issues and long outstanding bugs in any new version of PhotoLab. Each year it falls farther behind their competition with regard to the addition of desirable new features which are becoming common in their main competitors’ software. PhotoLab is still my preferred software by a wide margin, but I fear that it may not survive if it can’t compete better.
Based on my experience, I feel confident in saying that very few of the multitude of issues including performance issues, bugs, a significant number of unfinished features, and missing important new features needed to compete, will not be addressed in PL 8.
There has also been a number of much-needed enhancements promised by the DxO team over the years but never delivered. This includes the implementation of a new main viewer which is critically needed to address a number of serious issues with the current one.
You are not aware of these things from your own experience primarily because you are a very unsophisticated user of PhotoLab and take advantage of very little of what PhotoLab has to offer
Mark
1 Like
In other words, among other things, “ignorance is bliss”.
You are correct - I stay away from those discussions, and just use PhotoLab to edit my images.
If I “stick my hand in the fire”, my hand “will get burned”.
Can I ask you one question - of all the commands and tools and procedures in PhotoLab, roughly what percentage of them are defective?
Regarding “a storm in a teacup”, most sailors try to go around storms, not through them. Or, maybe I should ask you to speculate on what percentage of PhotoLab users are directly affected and bothered by these issues?
Let’s say there are 100 issues, just to make up a number. Has anyone here contacted DxO with a list of the most important issues that need correcting? Does such a list even exist? If not, how would a mythical Mr. DxO know where to start, in addressing these issues?
I would also ask you how many of these issues are “critical/very-important”, that should be at the very top of the bug-list?
Since I’m still oblivious to any and all of this, someone who is involved might want to create a list like this, emphasizing which are VIP items to correct, and which are simple “bugs”.
Sorry for writing so much - I didn’t intend to reply with more than a sentence or two. I’m ignorant of all this stuff. Again, “ignorance is bliss”! 
@platypus Sadly you are right but revenue comes from two streams, new users and old, sorry, existing users. The former would be put off by the fix list but the latter would see the world moving in a better direction, even if their pet gripe wasn’t fixed.
No new user will applaud DxO for providing an opportunity to avoid “unwarranted”, sorry “unwanted” Virtual Copies, but some existing users definitely would but only some, others just throw the database away as a matter of principle! By the way I don’t believe there has been any such change.
My slip with “unwarranted” was deliberate and points to the results that come from inadequate design reviews and then just letting things drift for year after year after decade after …
I love the product (mostly) but as for the developer!?
@mikemyers keep being your naïve “lovable” self but please do not attempt to insist that all is well in the PhotoLab world. It never has been as far as I can see but I only got deeply involved with PL5 beta testing and and then trying to help with the post release fall-out.
@mwsilvers The biggest single problem with DxO development is the bug fix release notes, sorry the absence of the bug fix release notes!
There never is any detailed summary of what has been fixed, or, rather what DxO believes has been fixed. If DxO don’t know what should be on that list what hope is there for users!
With PL7 DxO destroyed the asynchronous indexing feature and replaced it with a synchronous indexing feature. Was the feature changed because there was a bug in the previous method, who knows!?
For the actual PL7 release DxO changed the way a particular feature worked so I “clashed” with another user over what was working and why our results were not the same?
It turns out that DxO changed the feature just before release, I was using the official release but that was different from the last Beta release.!
DxO simply see “mere” users as just that, co-incidental to their development effort, or rather that is the way that it often appears to me at least.
Pride in a product and the users shows in strict numbering regimes for every single release not one name for every release of PL6 or PL7.
That should be coupled with a complete list of every bug that has been fixed in a given release, arguably it should contain the reference number of the submission report so users can identify that a bug reported by them has been fixed and included in release PL7.8.x released on 2024/mm/dd.
@mikemyers Bugs are not inevitable if that becomes part of the mindset of a developer then “we are doomed”. If bugs are spotted late in development then be honest with the users and explain the situation!
My career covered a wide spectrum of responsibilities but as I worked in customer support I was both a customer of the development plant(s) where the operating system etc. software was developed or the development group(s) who developed the application we delivered to the customer and a developer in my own right, designing and/or developing the application software and/or the customisations to an application, i.e. solutions management.
I tested my own software and the plants software and the application development houses software, before delivery, during the test acceptance phase by(/with) the customer and then during live running. Ultimately I carried the can for any failures to deliver a working system.
@mikemyers You mean from the lists that DxO publish? We don’t see a list of bug reports from any other user but we do see the fallout from some of the issues in the forum. In the “WYSIWYG … not” topic there were at least two users who had noticed colour artefacts being introduced below 75% zoom.
Then I started playing with my own images of bare trees taken early in the year which suffer from CA. I learned that below 24% zoom images appeared O.K. but above that up to 75% there was strong CA in the on screen images but above 75% that started to clear up!
The problem was that I had not applied any corrections to the image so the CA was either PL7 adding it to the image or greatly exaggerating what was there already.
Without a list I don’t know what bugs I might have missed and how many users have discovered the fault I finally discovered.
I will, of course get to know about those bugs that have been fixed in a new release from the release notes, or rather I won’t.
Ignorance in not bliss it is something waiting to byte(!) you in the b…!
and don’t get me started on the ridiculous voting system which DxO ignore completely.
2 Likes
You question is much too simplistic and can’t be answered easily. It would involved a detailed discussion for it to have any meaning.
Except for newly discovered issues we have been discussing almost all of the others, as well as missing or unfinished features, with DxO for years.
Again, that is far too complex a question to be answered in a short response. A simple list without a lot of context would be meaningless.
Many lists have been created by a number of people over the years based on all the discussions. Many of us who are long term heavy PhotoLab users, and posters to this forum, have our own prioritized short lists of the most egregious issues that may differ from each other to some degree. DxO is well aware of all the issues and our concerns about them.
I appreciate your attempt to help with suggestions, but everything you mentioned so far has been obvious to the rest of us for years.
Mark
Well, everything certainly is well in MY Photolab world.
Any issues are from ME, not from the software.
Perhaps you and others could create a list of the most important things that need to be corrected as soon as possible. If DxO can’t do it, perhaps you (with help from others) could do so.
When I open PhotoLab on my Mac computer, are any of those tools broken or non-functional?
Again, Mike, that is a simplistic request based on your lack of understanding of the issues and all the concerns we have had over the years. They have been presented to DxO and discussed with them both publicly and privately for years .
That is true for you because you are a light and unsophisticated user. I am happy that you are enjoying using it. I also enjoy using it despite the many serious flaws. I would enjoy it much more if some of the most egregious issues were finally ameliorated.
Mark
…they seem to be working on your Macs, but some of the tools give different results under different conditions like e.g. zoom level as we can read above.
Issues are mostly in the higher layers of using the software. A recent fix has addressed a memory issue that had been introduced by the release that came before the fix.
PhotoLab is easy to use, but the current low contrast UI is beyond anything that I’d call ergonomic.
One of the biggest issues for me (e.g for replacing Lightroom) is PL’s inability to provide a reliable catalog. Verifying the catalog against what is on the drive is something that just needs to work, but it has to be implemented first.
All in all, DxO’s developers do a decent job, but it looks like they have to do it blindfolded with their hands tied behind their backs, probably due to goals set by the management or due to the urge to survive in an ever consolidating market.
I think you are forgetting that Mike has no understanding of any of the many issues, and are also assuming that his definition of ‘broken’ tools is the same as yours. There are many dozens of issues and user concerns that plague both versions of PhotoLab with regard to the UI, the main editing window, inconstancy between the platforms, outright bugs, performance issues, unfinished features and badly needed new features that have been available in the competitions software for some time.
Mark
I’m just trying to provide a few samples of what could be done to make PhotoLab better suited for what I expect from PhotoLab. Other’s mileages may vary and that is okay.
If we don’t expect too much, we can all be happy and if we expect too much, we’ll never be. The question remains: Where is the threshold? (we’ll know when we stumble)
Maybe, rather than discussing past history, it would be good to start a brand new forum discussion about issues in PhotoLab 8 once it is released. Rather than rehashing the past, the discussions can be about PL8 as soon as it becomes available.
Presumably, some/many previous issues are likely to be fixed.
Presumably, some may not.
Presumably, there may be brand new issues in PL8.
Regardless, I suspect DxO would be more interested in identifying and correcting errors in their latest versions of their software.
I hope one of you (certainly NOT me!!!) can start this at the appropriate time.
Unless PhotoLab 8 adds something really important to me, I’ll likely continue to muddle along using PL6. I’ll wait for the announcements, and then decide what I may, or may not, do. I never used to be so concerned about the costs involved.
Just a thought - something to consider for the future.
@mikemyers Hopefully DxO will have listened to those participating in the PL8 test phase and removed as many bugs as possible before the release. But that pre-supposes that the bugs have been found in the first place.
Not as far as I can remember from previous Beta tests has that been a priority.
Indeed I am not sure it has ever been drawn to the testers attention that a specific feature bug has been “fixed” and should, therefore, be tested except for bugs found in the new features of course.
DxPL’s new releases seem to be mostly about “headline grabbing” new features to entice new users.
“Presumably …,” - your naivety is touching!
My comment above would suggest that a new release is all about new features and the last “Presumably, …” will almost certainly be true, to a greater or lesser extent, but whether those features will actually appeal to new users, or make existing users part with their cash only time will tell.
In addition, only time will tell with respect to how many new bugs will be added to the list of bugs already in existence but users have never seen that list anyway!
I have traditionally undertaken large numbers of tests, and written posts that are mostly too long, both of which I am trying to reduce, to as close to 0 as possible.
But you can take a trial copy and test and post reports for 30 days and then stay with PL6 or move to PL8 as you choose, but please remember that any edits done in PL8 won’t work on PL6, PL7 etc.
DOPs are forwards compatible but not backwards compatible so back up old edits (DOPs) before starting to “play” with the new release, so that you can re-instate them if you go back to the old release.
The same applies to presets so keep a record of any new generic presets that don’t use the new features so that you can recreate them on the old release, if necessary.
Whether or not I buy a copy of PL8 has nothing to do with the bugs reports, only with what new features may be included that I don’t yet have, and want.
I haven’t knowingly experienced any bugs with PhotoLab; for me, it just works.
I’m just being realistic - I’m not yet aware of any bugs that cause me problems.
My point was, the old lists are probably ancient history, once PL8 comes out, and we, the users, should create a brand new list of problems with PL8 if we expect someone at DxO to take it seriously.
Unless you want to write your comments in French, I suggest you keep the reports short and right to the point. Just add you can provide more information upon request.
If I spend the $$$ for PL8, I won’t be going back. Never had, but I’ve never had these issues (knowingly).
Unless PL8 adds something new and exciting that people in the forum feel is necessary, I may just stick with PL6 and save the $$$.
I’m not really trying to discuss all these things, only to suggest that we start up a new PL8 bug list for issues in PL8, regardless of whether they existed before in a previous release. If you all think that’s silly, so be it. I hope I don’t post anything else in this discussion. If I could click on a FORGET button, I would do so.
Everything has bugs in my opinion my cameras, my car, everything I own. Nothing is ever perfect, so every year a new model comes out. That’s been my life for as long as I can remember. But I just need something that is “good enough”, regardless of whether or not it is “perfect”.
Mike, all that’s going to happen when PL 8 comes out is that a lot of people are going to be upset that so many things on the large and constantly growing list of backlogged features and bug fixes have been completely ignored once again. I know you’re trying to be helpful, but we’re really talking about many issues that go back years., and the list is continuing to grow as each new version of PhotoLab is released. You’re trying to simplify something that can’t be simplified.
One example of the things that DXO has promised to do on a number of occasions is to create parity between the Windows and Mac versions. Instead, With each new version of PhotoLab the differences between the Mac and Windows versions continus to grow. There are things I can do on the PC version that you can’t do on your Mac, and vice versa. And, we’re not talking about one or two differences, we’re talking about a dozen or two dfferenses.
Mark
This makes me wonder, how far you investigating Darktable has come, Mike?
The software is free and fabulous, nobody makes money of it - except us users. How ideal is that?
Well enough to edit my images, but not well enough to get the results I get with PhotoLab.
I think when I get to India, I will need to teach it to others.
If you can’t get at least as good a result with Darktable as with PhotoLab, I suggest you postpone the teaching. People from India are bright and critical.
As I am stuck with PhotoLab 7 I utilize it with stubborn images by testing my results in Darktable against PL7. Believe me, I would not hesitate to admit, if the PL7 result ever turned out to be the better.
So far I have reached a more satisfying result in Darktable, undoubtedly due to the number of excellent tools.
Because those tools look different from tools in most commercial raw editors, people give up on them too early. But I believe that you, Mike, dug into the core, eager to harvest the hidden treasures, before you decided for PL7. Of course, you could be a complete wizard with PhotoLab and I do thee wrong. ;O/
Well, yes, but they can’t spend $$$$ the way we do in the USA, and DarkTable is open source = “free”.
I need to do more work in DarkTable, but I doubt if DxO wants those photos posted in this, the DxO Forum.
I quite using Adobe because it went subscription, but it is so inexpensive now, that’s no longer a big deal. I used to buy PhotoShop or LightRoom every few years.
I’m still using PL6, will not buy PL7, and maybe I’ll wait for “Black Friday Sale” pricing and buy PL8.
Do you have an image that you edited in both programs, so we can compare them?
If you posted images edited in Darktable here as a challenge, I am sure many would find it interesting to demonstrate the virtues of PhotoLab.
I quit Adobe because of their politics, not because of the price, which IS affordable, but the general Adobe attitude and the subscription concept annoys me. ACR and Photoshop are still in the top, especially Photoshop, but not irreplaceable. Affinity Photo 2 is low in price and of high quality. While ACR now has AI masking that part has become faster, but Darktable is a better tool for a dedicated craftsman.
No, I don’t save the edits from PhotoLab 7, and I have to be extraordinary challenged in Darktable before I begin to include PhotoLab. It also happens more rarely now because the outcome always is the same.
I posted one last night. See:
Florida Everglades visit with a Nikon D2h - #2 by mikemyers
I do have my own gripe about DxO software - there are perhaps 20 or 30 images in my folder with photos from my Nikon D2h from almost 20 years ago, and PhotoLab opened the first half of them with no problem, but for the other half I got this:
The images from my old Nikons, and my Leica M8.2 are not from a “supported camera”, so PhotoLab won’t open them unless I cheat an change the EXIF data. In this case, it is even more strange, as it apparently took PhotoLab some time to realize that these were illegal photos, and ban them.
Why not just post a notice that the images are from a non-supported camera, and open them anyway?
But I was remembering what you wrote, and opened them in DarkTable with no problems, and edited several of them. My favorite is now posted in my other discussion thread about my visit to the Florida Everglades.
In the next month or so, I want to start capturing infrared images again, which means using my Leica M8.2, which means I’ll need to use DarkTable.