This series of images displays the great aspect of this DxO V6. Noise removal, which any company can do, combined with a retention of detail and dynamic range. It’s the retention of detail and dynamic range that separates the good and not-so-good. DxO XD, while it’s not an “OH MY GOD!” improvement, still advances the technology.
One thing I HAVE to ask; I’m seeing JPGs being used here; you’re not starting with JPGs are you? Because if you are, I’m now banging my head on the desk. This is a RAW converter. Only process RAW images. Then show me your comparisons. These test shots have been excellent, but all are JPGs. I see lots of tutorials on-line with people using JPGs to demonstrate noise reduction. Excuse my paranoia…
In the case of my images they are JPGs that are being compared because I am comparing the exports from PL6 after a RAW has been processed with the noise reduction technologies on offer for RAW images, i.e. the originals are RAW because you can only apply Prime and DeepPrime and DeepPrime XD to RAW images.
RAW is the starting point for all cases with Prime or DP or DPXD with DxPL and only HQ is available for JPG images, sorry if I have misunderstood your comment!?
@jch2103, the original RAW images will never be available from me because of the “lamentable” upload speed of my broadband which makes its completely, totally, absolutely and utterly impossible, other than that everything is fine!
@PhilHawkins The image coming into DxPL is a RAW, in my case a Lumix RW2, and has various presets applied, one of which is the application of ‘DxO Denoising Technologies’ where ‘High Quality’ only can be selected for a JPG image but ‘High Quality’, 'Prime. ‘Deep Prime’ or ‘Deep Prime XD’ can be selected for a RAW (RW2) image.
The comparisons made were between JPG exports from PL6 between ‘DeepPRIME’ and ‘DeepPRIME XD’ because the overall impact of the methods can only be reviewed via such an export, which could be JPG, TIFF or DNG but a JPG @ Quality = 97 suits me.
So JPGs is what I then compared in my posts, albeit I compared them with the original RAW in FasRawViewer because it is able to render RAWs directly. Because I shoot JPG and RAW I could have compared the DxPL JPG exports which are adjusted and denoised RAWs with the JPGs rendered by the camera which might have been interesting.
But only the HQ option is available for JPG denoising with DxPL whereas other packages are offering advanced “AI” denoising to image types other than RAWs.
The reason you’re seeing JPGs is you can not display the raw file graphically, it must be converted via the raw converter (DXO PhotoLab 6) to a JPG file to display via the internet or saved as a .PNG. I suppose I could do a screen capture of the RAW display in PhotoLab. All these different JPGs are developed from a single DNG file Pic027.DNG. Here you go a screen capture of the RAW file saved as a .PNG. Now get over your paranoia
Yes, it is demonstrated on jpegs which are the most common export output when DeepPRIME and DeepPRIME XD has ben applied to raw files. You can also view it in DNG files and Tiff files, but when editing has concluded the creation of high resolution Jpegs is the normal output format. How would you view timages with DeepPRIME and DeepPRIME XD applied? I