However, in the marketing and advertising DXO say “DNG Support” the caveats are not exactly obvious. You keep making excuses.
I looked on the product pages on the main site and shop and did not find any mention of DNG. I did a web search and found the page that @mwsilvers had already shared.
And there is DNG support. It is just not universal. It has always been the responsibility of end users to determine whether any software title will fit their requirements by using free trial periods before purchasing.
You say they’re being disingenuous. Do you think every competitor to DXO highlights the limitations of each of the features mentioned in their marketing documentation? I suppose you would also call DxO disingenuous for not explicitly mentioning on their marketing page that DeepPRIME and DeepPRIME XD NR not work on Jpeg and Tiff files
Maybe they’ve recently change this as they’ve just change that luminosity mask was new feature of PL essential and PL elite on PL sale page, with the price of PL only just close by !!! and the button to buy it !!! They let this en 2023 and beginning 2024.
I still have a screen grab of this page.
While online documentation regarding DNG support has been available from DxO since PhotoLab support for them began, I can’t say for sure how long the specific link I posted has been available.
Mark
According to google, that page has been there since 5th Oct 2022.
As information on DxO (and other websites) gets moved to new pages, they can also appear newer, so it is possible the actual content was already available before that date.
So you have a screenshot of information someone copy/pasted into a wrong box and published online. As it’s no longer there, it means the error was noticed and corrected.
Do you really think DxO would intentionally say the LM was part of PL? To do what? Sell a few extra copies and run away with the money?
Not sure where you live but as they’re based in France and operate under French and EU rules, the idea of malicious intent becomes ridiculous.
We had long talk about this. And the fact to put a greyed luminance mask button not usable inside PL in front of the nose of those who don’t buy filmpack when this has been a long time requested feature for photolab, not filmpack.
I won’t do this conversation again.
This way of doing things is why I did not upgrade for the first time.
Are you saying DxO intentionally let users believe the LM was part of PL?
I did published it and I did not copy it from a wrong “box”, “place” or what you want but from the purchase page of DxO and lot of people on this forum saw it on their site and talked about it. Just do some search.
The page is not the problem. The greyed button is.
This is my last word about all this.
I very much doubt you published anything on DxO’s website. But the person whose job it was at the time did, and the aparently made a mistake, which has since been corrected.
my english lacks. Indeed I didn’t.
The topics on this forum that discusses this matter of Luminosity Masking appearing to be part of PL are this one:
and this one:
In my first reply to the latter topic I said:
I got a fairly quick response from the UK ASA explaining that they couldn’t deal with the matter because DxO are a French company but that they would pass it on to their French counterparts, the Jury de Déontologie Publicitaire (JDP).
I then got a response from JDP dismissing my complaint, because they couldn’t find the relevant webpage.
I could still find page so I complained again to JDP, giving detailed, step-by-step instructions as to how to see the relevant wording that implied LM was available in PL, without the need for FilmPack.
This time they took notice and in their reply to me dated 29 Dec 2023, JDP said they were contacting DxO about the matter and would let me know the outcome. I’ve not heard from JDP since then but either DxO fixed the page themselves or they were required to fix it by JDP since as noted in this topic, the wording on the relevant page no longer mention LM as a feature of PL.
Did you contact DxO to inform them about the error and if yes how long did you wait before getting a reply before reporting it to the authorities and what was the response from DxO?
No, I didn’t contact DxO. The misleading information had been there for a long time. Authorities like the UK ASA and the French JDP are there to protect consumers from stuff like this so I went direct to them.
Did any of the people who noticed it had been there for a long time contact DxO about it?
We are told they do moniter this fourm so if so they would have seen this. Or as
I suspect they totally ignore it.
Ther are a few members of the fourm who make the error of thinking they do moniter it. I have never thought so after they created this new one and before that took active support away from it original feedback forum. There have been a lot of long threads on problems that have been totally ignored or in my view not ignored but just not seen. DXO has always been a bit distant from users now they look to me to be separate which I fear could be disastrous.
1 Like
No idea, all I know, and what prompted me to contact the UK ASA, is what is given in the two topics I linked to above.
