I ran into an image where PR5 (and PR4) made an obvious error in darkening dark feathers wrongly in one specific area. Glad I noticed it. The LR denoise did not of course make this error. Here is a comparison at 100% view with arrows pointing to the problem area.
In your opinion, which did a better overall job of processing the file?
Mea Culpa. Turns out there was a subject mask in the image I sent to PR4 and PR5. Since Pure Raw does its own lens corrections which are different from LR the subject mask is no longer correct. This isn’t the first time I have been bitten by this.
Moral of the story, if you are going to use PR4 or 5, invoke it BEFORE adding any masks.
I would say that in this instance Pure Raw 4 or 5 did better than LR although difference was not huge.
1 Like
in other words, PureRAW was designed to be the first tool in a RAW workflow. It only works on RAW files. Any file that has been processed in LR does not qualify, even if it is something like a DNG.
1 Like
PureRAW should be able to deal with DNGs made by Lightroom…but most things done in LR will be ignored by DPR, but edits might be added back to the exported file via the recipe stored in Lightroom’s .xmp files…at least in theory. Some edits don’t make sense to exported files and best practices are, as you write