Hi @CHPhoto … In case you missed it, just referring you back to here;
This confirms your findings - but provides a tip for circumstance where you might find DP-XD to be useful.
John M
2 Likes
I don’t do things “logically”, a lot of what I do is based on my “gut feeling”. Within half an hour of seeing PL6 was available, I had purchased and installed it. I’m using it with no changes, selecting the. “advanced” workspace. For as long as I can remember, I always select the best noise reduction PhotoLab provides, and ever since I downloaded the new version, I have used DeepPRIME XD. I’ve been more than pleased with the results.
As a test, based on the fellows on the “Red Dot Forum Videos”, I took a photo of a cruise ship last night as the sky was darkening. I left the ISO at 5,000 (they said I can even get good results at 10,000). I was rather amazed the finished photo looked as good as it did.
L1004413 | 2022-10-13.dng (29.9 MB)
L1004413 | 2022-10-13.dng.dop (14.9 KB)
There is probably a lot more I can do to improve the image, but this was just a test to see if ISO 5000 was as useable as the fellows in the Leica Forum said it was. (It’s from a Leica M10, with a 135mm Tele Elmar, and a lot of cropping.)
I know the processing time is longer, but for my purposes, that doesn’t bother me - and if I’m ever in a hurry, I can use the previous DeepPRIME instead. In retrospect, I should have tried with my 300mm Nikon lens on my new D780; maybe I can do that tonight.
1 Like
One important thing to keep in mind re DeepPrimeXD: Performance is hugely affected by which GPU you have. In general, current high performance GPUs will have very quick processing times, whereas older cards will have substantially longer processing times.
Several years ago, I set up a shared spreadsheet for folks to record processing times for DeepPrime in PL4: DxO DeepPRIME Processing Times - Google Sheets
I see that people have started to upload results for PL6 DP XD, which should be useful for folks looking to improve their XD processing speeds or just to compare their current processing speeds.
2 Likes
Heavily cropped images showing the benefit of DP XD seems to be a trend.
From the pixel dimensions of the image you have a 2.6 megapixel image once cropped.
Thanks for sharing.
1 Like
I agree with most of those who say that in most images the differences between DP and DP XD are marginal and often not noticeable. I found that too, but I also found some very high ISO (6400 or 12800) images where it made more of a difference, especially when cropped. Birding often needs both heavy cropping and very high shutter speeds which can result in high ISO in poor light. As others have said, I am glad to have it available as an option even if I won’t use it very often.
2 Likes
Yes - that’s a confirmed reason to use/try DP-XD.
John M
1 Like
When you zoom in you see the lost detail more/better.
So cropping is digital zoom thus a detail enhancer like XD is benefits the most on that kind of images.
As you make a highres image of a small pebbles beach and you don’t zoomed in enough(captured close enough) to see every pebble as a “pebble” then it is just a sandy beach on your screen even the highres captured all the detail.
So close ups, higly cropped detailed images has the most advantage of enhancing details.
3 Likes
I see an obvious improvement in the smoothing of the bokeh, some improvement in the bird’s feathers and an unnatural over-acutance in the leaves of the tree compared with DP.
Yes because it think they use the same AI as Clearviewplus to detect edges.
bij tuning down Noise Model you can modify this effect a bit.
Aldoh DP has it’s own problems:
1 Like
From what I’m seeing in my own tests, it tends to exaggerate the microcontrast and give a more textured image that sometimes deviates too much from the original model. There are no such things as miracles!
When it goes too far we can always soften the effect, for example as you say with the Noise model, or go back to the old DP.
I am slowly getting closer to agreeing to pay for the upgrade…
1 Like
I wonder if NASA feels they could have saved some money now and just used DeepPrime XD on the Hubble image of The Pillars Of Creation instead of spending billions on the James Webb Telescope 
Definite joke btw folks, I think DeepPrime XD will find its place, and the James Webb is a marvel of (very expensive) engineering and science 
1 Like
yes, and you don’t know, if DeepPrime XD subtracts to much ‘noise’ (distant stars)
or adds ‘texture’ – being interpreted as new discoveries. 
I’ve tried Lab6 DeepPrime XD on one of my older photos. While on visit by friends had only D780 with Nikkor 50/1,8; with low light tried to shoot a portrait with ISO 25.600.
With Lab4 and DeepPrime it was amazing, how the noise was reduced.
With Lab6 and DeepPrime XD, the noise is even more reduced especially in the background, visible on 100% magnification. In foreground, 100% magnif., right eyeball is not as soft as with “normal” DeepPrime. Export in PL6 DeepPrime XD takes almost 8 minutes on Mac mini 2018 with i5.
whole picture (screenshot)
Thanks for the real world example.
DeepPrime XD looks oversharpened, like combination of DeepPrime and sharpening (i.e. a party magician’s simple sleight of hand trick). With those processing times and the artefacts other photographers are reporting, I’ll stick to DeepPrime for now.
1 Like
Yes, I think DP XD helps me with my astrophotography images. I just responded in another post with an example, see: Strange artefacts using DeepPrime/DeepPrimeXD in PL6 - #34 by rdy2snp.
Hmm, I don’t think I agree with you. To my eyes, the XD version looks to be over sharpened. I much prefer the regular DP version.
But if we all liked the same thing, the world would be very boring.
1 Like
@stuck It’s of course a matter of taste. What I actually ment was that DP XD delivers what DxO has promised - more details. The degree of sharpening is of course adjustable to taste so no worries here.
1 Like
Did a try to develop the same picture as above (portrait) with DP XD on a Macbook 14’’ with M1 Pro (8 core) and 16GB RAM and it was done in approx. 10 sec. 
much faster than expected
I recently took some photos of the Santa Claus parade, which was in the evening. I goofed and had my aperture not set wide enough, so had some very high ISO images. Both versions of Deep Prime did not work well on faces. Made them look very strange. The basic noise reduction in Photolab (and ACDSee) did not do the trick. This is because the images were very noisy and there was a lot of missing information. Believe it or not, the only noise reduction that made the photos reasonable was Nik Collection Dfine. The noise wasn’t gone, but was a lot more like film grain.
1 Like