Compare photos

As a videographer using Davinci Resolve, I cannot understand why there is no proper compare feature in Photolab. It’s fine when you take individual shots but not for weddings, corporate functions etc. Often the white balance & exposure will shift and all that is needed when editing, is to have a Master photo and when you click on an image it will show up side by side with the Master. A simple adjustment can be made and you move to the next image to correct. Surely this cannot be that hard?? Come on guys - look at davinci resolve and put your heads together. Thanks… looking forward to ver 8.

1 Like

Given that this ‘compare images’ feature has been requested for years but it’s never been implemented implies that in the context of PL’s code base, it is hard, perhaps even ‘can’t be done’ hard.

Understandable, but surely it’s as easy as making an export of your “Master Image” then bringing it back into PL7. The sliding/compare feature is already there, the trick would just be making the “Master” sit below the image you click on.
In Davinci Resolve, you make a “still” of your image and then bring in clips to check your balance.

I’ve no idea but if you search the forum for this compare images feature you’ll find requests for just about forever, yet DxO ignore the request.

Perhaps DxO does not ignore this request at all. Perhaps they simply don’t have the capacity to implement such a simple but often requested improvement. Or they don’t have the knowledge of how to implement it. Or they are simply going down a path they don’t want to deviate from, come hell or high water. After such a long time, the argument of setting priorities no longer works. In any case, I no longer have any idea why DxO is not responding. I’m currently looking at Darktable. The user interface is more complex than in DxO, it requires a lot of user settings, but the functions I need are all there (as far as I’ve been able to test). I’m currently testing the output quality, especially for noise reduction.

At first glance, the implementation looks quite simple. At second glance, however, it becomes more complex from my point of view: I found the following synonyms for compare in the thesaurus: analyze, contrast, correlate, equal, match, measure and study. This does result in some challenges for optical tasks. I have also thought about this a few times and would imagine - as an idea - two complete user interfaces side by side. All settings can then be compared directly with each other. However, I become unsure of the functionality when I want to compare the same or similar scenes with the same camera but different lenses. The situation is different again if I use two different camera systems for the same scene and then want to compare them. If this works, I would like to have an intelligent function that transfers the image impression from photo 1 to photo 2 fairly quickly - without having to try things out :sunglasses:. It can mean a lot of development work …

Long time requested feature.
Looks like DxO do not understand why a series of photos should need to be harmonized.
Or why we should need to choose betwen several images inside photolab.
An other basic missing feature.

But with about ten other softwares added to it, photolab is the “best end to end raw processing software”.

I also requested the feature a long time ago but DXO prefers to focus on features no-one needs

1 Like

Or on adds on no one wants …

PS : I’ve got every DxO products so I know which one is usefull for me.

Could you give some examples of the features you believe no one needs?


The proper compare system is indeed missing in current versions of PhotoLab and there are some convoluted workarounds to make it work for some type of projects, and I hope we see updated proper implementation of it in PhotoLab 8. In the mean time, not ideal but there is a tool that can help. Its free and used for loading references in any app. If you have a main photo you want to match, here is a tool that can help… for now.

Indeed no one is too much, if only because you defend just about every tool, good or bad, from photolab.
But yes I shouldn’t OF COURSE have say no one.
But you get the idea.

If you’re referring to Viewpoint and FilmPack I want both. I use most of the features in both of them, some far more often than others. However I understand that many people are not particularly interested in them.

As you probably know those two packages are not actually add-ins. All the features are already built in to PhotoLab. A license for them just unhides those features.

What causes so much frustration and confusion for many current and potential users is that PhotoLab is available with too many options. Including Viewpoint, FilmPack, and an Essential and Elite version.

What I have suggested often in these pages is that DxO should sell only a single version of PhotoLab with all the features of Viewpoint and FilmPack unlocked.

Since most PhotoLab users probably do not need or want the standalone versions of Viewpoint and FilmPack, which may have greater value for non-users of PhotoLab, these standalone versions should be sold separately as a reduced price to those want them.

While the price of PhotoLab would have to be increased with the inclusion of the built-in Viewpoint and FilmPack features, hopefully it would be a much smaller increase If it did not also include a license for the standalone versions.

When it comes to marketing to a client base simple choices is almost always better.


I know you want everything. You tell that so often.

You play with words and DxO plays with patience of some users, putting in front of their nose features that either they don’t want, or feature those users have asked for photolab and not for plugins they are desperately trying to sell by force.

Is that they do things like I said above.
And that they waste their resources in niches and not modernize photolab’s internal architecture (not what the user sees) to make it a modern software capable of evolving and not stuck in a medieval interface when so many basic functions are missing.

Oh, I forgot :
Users are frustrated when they see photolab becoming a software which will steal their personal datas without choice and force them to accept it in general conditions (if user read them).
And users are frustrated when they see perpetual licence will become a farce now.

I think they play with fire.


Maybe my earlier post was not clear enough. One of the big issues people have with PhotoLab is the requirement to purchase a separate license for Viewpoint and FilmPack in order to get a few very important features that should have been included in the base version of PhotoLab Elite.

If there was just a single version of PhotoLab that contained everything, like most other post processing programs, at least that issue would be resolved. That would be simple to implement since all those features are already in PhotoLab. They just need to be unlocked.

Additionally, most people forced to purchase Viewpoint and Filmpack licenses to get access to those features in PhotoLab , myself included, have no need for the standalone versions.

If DxO would just change their marketing strategy to one that is simpler and less confusing it might go along way to improving user satisfaction. The big unknown, of course, is how they would price it, which is a concern. That is all I was trying to suggest.


Indeed but I can’t see them adopting your sensible suggestion since only the users would win.

Consider, if DxO priced ‘PL Complete’ as the sum of PL + FP + VP, less people would buy it because the visible / headline price would appear to be too expensive, meaning DxO would probably make less money than they do at the moment.

On the other hand, if DxO priced it at a PL + only a little bit more, the users would be happy but DxO would again probably make less money than they do at the moment, because at the moment with the full price being hidden, users (reluctantly) end up paying the ‘too expensive’ price to get ‘PL Complete’.


I agree, As I said the biggest unknown is how they would price it. There may be a sweet spot that would entice users and still provide an acceptable level of profit.


Nothing, absolutely nothing, I’ve ever seen about how DxO behaves in respect of their revenue streams makes me think they would ever countenance doing anything that would reduce their income.

Maybe what they are doing now will reduce it !