Well, sounds like the answer for you is clear. You should probably be using other software instead of PhotoLab. I just wonder why there are several regular posters on this site who clearly are so unhappy with the product and yet continue to use it and post here. It seems like a bloody waste of time.
I also have licenses for ON1 Photo Raw 2023 and Affinity Photo 2. They obviously both have value, and for many people significant value. However, I am dissatisfied with both of these software titles for a variety of reasons based on workflow, usability, and quality issues. I donât spend endless hours on their user forums complaining about the various significant issues that personally affect me. I merely stopped using them and uninstalled them from my computer.
Keep complaining about PhotoLab If doing so is important to you. I am quite aware of PhotoLabâs advantages and limitations and have often participated in dialogues discussing both. But personally I have far better ways to spend my time than endlessly reposting my frustration with those feature limitations. When It no longer meets my requirements, I will simply stop using PhotoLab and stop posting here. Simple as that.
Maybe your kind of humor doesnât get the entertaining values of this forum? Thereâs a +1.500 k posts thread started by a person who wanted to learn using PL. One day it will either appear as a book or as a Netflix series. Who needs comedy? Hope youâre not too envy on the thread starter? I mean, itâs quite an effort to keep the show running.
And btw.
who tells you Iâm still using PL? I used to use it, had some hopes it could develop over time. It could have happened, but given the lack of interest of DxO staff, Iâm just curious how long it will take them to sink the boat.
So, if youâre bothered by my posts or any of
then feel invited to discover the benefits of an ignore list. You donât have to bother, and I donât have to care about what you call waste of time. As far as I know, itâs my time.
So if youâre actually no longer using the software as your note seems to suggest, then, with respect, what is your purpose in continuing to post here? Are you doing it for entertainment value? Are you doing it to cause dissension?
I certainly am not suggesting you do not have a right to post, But, if your sole purpose posting here as a former user is merely to disrupt then some would define you as a troll which I hope is incorrect. In any case, since you are no longer a user by your own admission, then I find it odd, perhaps even a little sad, that you donât have better things to do with your time than to continue to complain about PhotoLab. But, hey, perhaps you enjoy focusing on all the negatives for the fun of it.
This is exactly how I feel. Among my requirements are that the software operates as it was presented prior to my purchase. I understand that there can, and always will be isolated instances of problems with the product since it is a product of man and therefore canât be expected to be perfect.
But, I do expect that when the product does not work as presented before my purchase that an honest effort be given to resolve the problems. I have had tickets about a problem closed by DXO and marked as âSolvedâ without any solution and without any engagement with me. Just closed and marked as solved. When asked about this, customer service said that they canât do anything about it now, but it will be solved in the futureâŚand that was 6 months ago.
Now, there is a second problem that is verifiably a DXO problem which has existed for over 3 weeks now. This problem blocks me from using one of the most important features of PL that enables it to produce the wonderful results it is capable of, the correct optical module. Based on the first problem, which after 6 months is still unresolved, why should I expect for this problem to be corrected?
If past update cycles continue, then we are about half-way finished with the life of PL6 and I have not had all of the functionality which I paid for. And a functioning and helpful customer service is definitely part of what I paid for as well.
Potential purchasers of DXO products deserve to have available the negatives as well as the positives before investing their money.
There is an additional cost in having to deal with customer service over and over without any result. There is a cost in that time was spent, energy wasted etc.
If PL6 works 100% with a given camera/lens combination, then it offers what I think is the best image quality in terms of detail. But, it doesnât work 100% for me, and the part that is missing is a major piece upon which the fantastic image quality and detail relies. Therefore, for me, after owning PL4 and PL5, PL6 has been almost as big of a disappointment/failure as DXO customer service.
You can always get the best image qualityâŚIf you edit the module database.
I am well aware that itâs not customer duty to find ways around features that have been working for years, but if we have no fitting screwdriver, a hammer will do to get things done.
Yes, but often when we use a hammer instead of a screwdriver, we do more damage than good. And maybe people fixing DXOâs problems for DXO instead of DXO fixing their own problems as they were paid to do is part of why DXO continues to ignore customer feedback and complaints.
If I had editing databases as a hobby, and knew how to do it, then I might try use my time to work around DXOâs mess-up. But, I would not be any happier with DXO and their performance with PL6.
It could have happened, but given the lack of interest of DxO staff, Iâm just curious how long it will take them to sink the boat.
Although I prefer a dash of dynamite 
