What control is missing from a DNG export?
Hi Bob,
from the knowlegdebase:(in my pc)
Vigneting is corrected first (optical correction CA, Denoising Prime, WB before demosiacing)(as it depends on calibrated data), then exposure, smart lighting, selective tones, contrast, clearview, microcontrast and then custom tone curve.
And:
applying white balance before demosaicing makes sense as a good demosaicing should have in mind to avoid wrong color creation, hence it’s good to define what is grey before ; noise is structured by demosaicing, so it’s more efficient to remove noise before demosaicing and that’s what PRIME does ; removing chromatic aberration before demosaicing also makes perfectly sense because trying to interpolate a color channel based on information from others color channels that are shifted because of chromatic aberration is a mess ; etc. Light changes are mostly (ClearView excluded) done in linear RAW sensor color space (before color rendering) to be at the closest of how picture would have looked if you would just have increased or decreased light in the scene.
To go back to your DNG question: it 's a “tiff based” file with all WB possibilities still in there.
the camera colorspace is present so to speak. But the demosiacing and CA correction is done same for the denosing part in deepprime.
If you change WB considerably CA correction is gona be also recalculated.:
example:
colorcasted high iso night shot:
6400 iso m43 so about 70% deepprime (xd)
create VC(virtual copy so DP and DPXD)
second choice legacy (Argb) or Wide Gamut working colorspace:
i choose WG because i have as much DATArecovery as i can in my DNG.
right time to export:
(notice you can’t apply a ICC profile because WB isn’t set yet so no colors same as resolution no change possible because only full resolution.
few moments of time to waste…
check now we have 4 images:note XD take’s a lot ( on my old i7) more time to develop. more then 5 (6:22)min…
-raw deepprime set
-raw VC deepprimeXD set
-DNG
-DNGVC ( _1)
next step:
change WB of the yellow overcast to get greenisch grass…
Looks much better yes?
next common change “brightness”
bit of DR enhancing: dxo smart lightness mode slight. and +1 EC which is within rawfiles noisefloor.
be aware i didn’t do any local things.
So some HSL to get even more green. (yes i know i ruin the image completely .
)
ok
lets over cook some more:
global lenssharpness 1.06
details 73.
now i export 4 images:
i suspect that in more high dynamic brances scene’s it’s more visible.
see in my edit where i restrain my self from over correcting it’s much less visible.
Best to test it yourself with some images you would be DNGén to speed up the process of development.
just beware about colorshifts when you alter WB too much in a DNG because CA is already done and set.
birds in trees i think would suffer from this.
regards peter ( zip is exported jpegs full size)
_1080262.RW2 (18,9 MB)
test.zip (28,9 MB)
edit : testing about DNG and there possible fixed settings can be done in other aplications.
but this is the working case for dxopl/
Are you no longer using PhotoLab due to sharpening issues?
So, in the end, the concern is that any changes to the white balance in the DNG file may mess up the chromatic aberration corrections already made?
YES.
everything which is engined by the “optical module” is corrected and burned in the DNG. and of caorse Denosing deep prime actions.
This is the delaytime of editing in PL the reacting of the optical module on changes in the image.
Hi Bob, I’m using PL 6 and … see the post header.
But you said
I don’t have PhotoLab, so I’m asking questions I can’t research for myself. I had a PhotoLab 6 trial a few months back, but did not get to spend much time with it before the 30 days expired and I can’t get a new trial from DxO.
… So you can no longer check for yourself what Peter and others wrote to you (in detail) - at least that’s what I understood.
You can find more external information at → Home - TuTo DxO
regards, Wolfgang
1 Like
Caches could avoid time needed for those 2 last steps too (no need to develop again and again when no change in settings occur).
1 Like
Since that posting, I decided to just jump in head first and have purchased PhotoLab 6. So their helpful information has immediate application.
2 Likes
Full development in deepprimexd costed on my test about 5min…
I7 of 2011…
In order to have full image view with DP denoise done that is the case for my pc.
5 min delay and rather slow occupied pc.
A bigger newer graphiccard and faster cpu would reduce this to say 1-2minutes?
Normal DeepPrime is much faster.
@bobrocke i looked at your gear m43 oly…
You wil be astonished by the extra sharpnes of the lens module in combination of DeepPrime.
My old g80 can have nice images at 3200iso and acceptable image at 6400iso.
My advise is to grab some known rawfiles of troublesome kind.
High iso, high dynamic. High detail and tare those appart with the tools.
Overshoot until you see what breaks up in pieces.
Overcook in color, in denoise, in exposure correction.contrast.
Some tools are not what you will expect so don’t be afraid to ask why you can’t get result. Lots of people can send dopfiles over or explain how to get more out of a tool.
Enjoy DxOPL. Did you got Filmpack elite also?
1 Like
No, not yet. I’m thinking about adding that and ViewPoint later this year when they might go on sale.
1 Like
Now, if you have PhotoLab 6 Elite, you should really dig into its features, capabilities and shortcomings before you test FilmPack and ViewPoint. Customize your workspace, create full and partial presets and see how you get along.
1 Like
I do have the Elite version and so far I’m getting along pretty well re-editing some photos I’d processed in Lightroom.
My main ‘gripe’ at this point is the lack of metadata presets.
It is worth noting here that you can still use Lightroom for your metadata needs. That’s what I do. And though I do currently pay for a Lightroom/Photoshop subscription, I used it for a couple of years without paying a cent. The Library module of Lightroom Classic is fully functional without an active subscription plan (though you do still need your Adobe account).
For me, nothing else has come close to Lightroom’s keyword handling, so that is why I still use it. It does create a little bit of extra work, but with a little care (and a little automation if you’re game) it can be quite usable.
2 Likes
I fully agree with this statement, and I still use my LR 6.14 local at Win11.
Unfortunately, the version no longer works on my MB Air M1, but I can get over that, since WIN 11 is my productive system.
I wonder if I will ever switch to another DAM like iMatch…?
best regards
1 Like
That’s possible, of course. But, I may be in the minority of wanting a single solution. The advantages of a common interface, full integration, and single point of responsibility are important to me.
I’m even happy with PhotoLab’s keywording interface. But I would like to filter for keywords from the keyword pane instead of the search box.
Most things come with a price tag…and search is the one you pay for the monoservice approach. PhotoLab search is fairly restrictive and in combination with the occasional false positives, annoying. But if you a) keep all sidecars (.dop and .xmp) and trash the database every now and then, DPL gets usable somehow.
1 Like
I suspect that the keywords wrote in a XMP made by PL much less surprices delivers.
My grip is more the user interface of the tagging.
It’s too rudimentair imho.
(nice for one or two changes but not for tagging a folder containing 100 plus images.)
Or it’s just me.
1 Like
I completely understand, because I used to be that way, too. Certainly, if I could use a single tool I would, but today I regularly use three tools, each for their strengths. Is it more annoying than just using one? Sure. But for the annoyance, I get better results in the areas I care about. Not everyone is willing to make that trade-off.
1 Like