That is what partial presets are for. They only update a user selected subset of adjustments and ignore all other settings.
Mark
Yes but this is still a poor work-a-round for the original issue/request.
1 Like
I agree, but still grateful to people trying to help while we wait for Dxo to maybe implementing the request 
I will say this again . Perhaps I did not get my message across clearly enough.
It will most likely never be implemented , ever!
It will most definitely not be implemented in PL 8.
You can stop waiting.
Mark
Why do you think so?
After all, DxO did made some UI changes in PL7.x, so I’d be interested in the reason for your sharp response. Do you have some insights, or specific rationale, other than experience with PL products?
To be honest, I’m not waiting, I just keep on going
1 Like
I do very definitely have “have some insights, or specific rationale, other than experience with PL products”, but I am unable to share some of those insights with you. I am also familiar with every feature update since PL 1. I have also posted on this site almost every day for the last seven years and have perused almost every post from every other member during those seven years. I posted my general reasons above and I am repeating them here.
"Historically, once DxO implements a new feature, like the copying and pasting of metadata or adjustments, they are done with it and don’t readdress it with further updates, even when there are lots of requests, unless there is a bug. I can give you a couple of dozen examples of that just off the top of my head.
Also keep in mind that DxO unfortunately only implements around a dozen new features and current feature updates for new annual upgrades. As a result they almost never spend their limited resources on relatively minor usability updates regardless of their importance to some users. And when they occasionally do, they have dozens of similarly minor requests to choose from. The requested update backlog is huge and growing every year."
All I posted above is true and accurate except that when I said , "they are done with it and don’t readdress it with further updates,", I should have said "they are done with it and very rarely readdress it with further updates, Here are a couple of examples of those rare updates. The Windows maximum zoom which was 400% was updated to 1600% a few years ago which finally matched the Mac version. And, of course, this year the Tone curve finally had a major overhaul after 20 years!
Even the recent major changes to Local adjustments are not as major as they may at first seem. None of the Local adjustments, except the HSL sliders which were replaced by the LA Color wheel, have changed from when they were on the equalizer, and work exactly the same way as they did before. They were just ported to a sliders in the LA palette so that all the LA adjustments are located in the same place.
In addition, DxO also rarely adds new or updated functionality in point updates to the current production version although it has happened several times with relatively minor updates since PL 1 was released in 2017. My experience only goes back to PL 1, so I can’t say what was done in the 11 versions of OpticsPro that preceded it.
I apologize for the long-winded response.
Mark
Thanks Mark for your response. I hope I read some of your fine print correctly. But as I said, “I’m not waiting, I just keep on going”.
Off topic:
It seems that DxO started as a “scientific spinoff”, good in image processing, initially with optical corrections only, and just good enough user ergonomy. The PRIME denoising suite was probably started with implementation of ‘Clinic Denoise’ and recent papers suggest that there are some deblurring, curve detection, and other topics to be implemented sooner or later. DxO is small, so they try to be on top with few key technological topics, while the rest is as designed years ago, with few exceptions. From my point of view, the key PL (PL+FP+VP to be exact) strong points are DP denoising, UI ergonomy, quite smooth (color) tonal transitions, preserving color perception with SelectiveTones, Lens softness correction, SmartLighting (somewhat unpredictable), ClearVision (with its all weak points), fine contrast sliders. Volume Deformation and some FilmPack renderings are an extra bonus. Creative Vigneting and Grain tools are a must for me anyway. I wish they were more towards photography and arts, but their ‘scientific face’ looks OK.
EDIT: Still I had good time looking at ToneCurves in some TimeMachine examples (e.g. Salgado, which surprised me).
I don’t know if it has been mentioned before, but what is asked is to distinguish between global and local corrections. And consider perspective and horizon corrections as no correction since it doesn’t alter the pixels.
George
I find the necessity of an option to lock user pasted parameter last choice in paste window self-evident (or a [EDIT : better] way to do the same thing).
And the necessity to be able to choose which local adustment to paste, and the option to add without deleting those already set too.
2 Likes
Yes, thank you, that would also work!
ClearView seems to add a lot of Microcontat that has the potential to ruin the skies for example, but don´t you think that Deep Prime Xd and the new XD2s counter that problem almost?
I view most of those similar tools (clearview, smart lighting, etc) as differing interfaces into the same ‘theory’ of microcontrast.
I rarely use more than one when adjusting an image. And it’s a matter of mood or ‘feel’ which one I choose for an image or an editing session.
I don’t think DP can cure microcontrast. On the contrary, I found DPXD (PL7) to add a bit of microcontrast sometimes on very noisy photos, seems to be “fixed” in DPXD2S.
ClearView can be unpredictable, like Spot Weighted SmartLighting. Sometimes it introduces large halos or amplifies existing halos too much, but sometimes it does not. Colors may get off and it may interact strongly with WB. But in most cases I just like the results, like many loved Velvia 50 for certain purposes. Question of taste. I use it mainly for landscapes (25-50), with smaller intensity for city life (10-25), almost never for people (5-10 may be used for groups of 50 people or so, to get the faces more readable or for very, very specific faces).
To counteract a kind of microcontrast in the clouds, which CVP may introduce, I try to balance that with microcontrast and fine contrast in highlights, but in some cases I may prefer more dramatic look. Sometimes I have to correct additionally greens/yellows using HSL.
Talking about microcontrast, I’ve read that DxO, uses smart lighting in ilace of dehaze, but how to add haze instead? With dehaze in other software we can insert negative values, but not with smart lighting!
Where did you read this?
Using Smart Lighting → Edit pictures with the Customize tab – PhotoLab you can adjust the brightness … and thus (also) make changes to the contrast.
.
To experiment and understand what “dehazing / defogging” does, choose a low contrast image that you think could be clearer and create a virtual copy.
Apply DxO ClearViewPlus to this VC by moving the slider back and forth while looking at the histogram. You can also use the shadow and highlight warning to point out clipping and read and compare the color values of specific points.
Watch what happens to the colors, what makes it to “stand out from the haze”.