Hello all,
In my opinion the biggest flaw of photolab is that the changes in geometry ( rotation etc. ) are not projected to the local adjustments … please, change this awful issue for all of us.
1 Like
That’s one of the biggest challenges in image editing with Photolab …
1 Like
Is it?
It seems easily mitigated by finishing your crop/rotation/geometry work before applying local adjustments.
That’s true, but the combination of masking and geometry is the challenge.
1 Like
Well I won’t lie, it would be nice if masks did track geometry changes and apply appropriately. Depending on the type of mask, I could see it becoming quite complex though!
1 Like
As always, it depends on the specific use case 
Hi,
For me that is no proper solution, because mostly i ending my postprocess with few more versions of crops or transformations.
As previously mentioned, always perform any perspective correction (including the so-called ReShape function) first. And the same thing for the ReTouch.
→ PhotoLab is primarily a RAW editor, not a pixel editor.
1 Like
Hi,
That is probably possible way, but i have to call it really dumb and inconvenient, when two offered functions of Photolab are not able to cooperate as they could and should ( CameRaw, Zoner Studio etc. ) to keep the pace with competitors and offer more enjoyable experience to most of users.
I hope, that is not just my oppinion.
Here’s the original feature request, from 2018, which has 23 votes so far. I strongly suggest adding to this one and not a newer duplicate request:
Masks that change with geometric adjustments - DxO PhotoLab / Feature requests - DxO Forum
Another duplicate request with only one vote:
1 Like
Unfortunately, this limitation has existed since Local Adjustments were first added to PhotoLab. Those of us who are long term users understand this and for us the workaround has become part of our normal work flow. While DxO is well aware of this limitation and may eventually address it, there is no reason to expect a resolution anytime soon.
Mark
Hi,
This is such a shame and a waste of potential for gaining position on the market ( it could easily discourage people from buying ). 
Thank you for a notice.
I certainly understand your concern. This is an issue that has been discussed here many times over the years.
While I cannot speak for others, this has always been a minor inconvenience for me since I always apply edits that modify image geometry, such as those to horizon / image rotation, lens distortion and volume deformation, and perspective, before applying other edits.
Please note this issue affects any mask that is applied to an image before geometry edits have been completed. That not only includes local adjustment masks, but repair and clone masks, and any other masks I may have missed,.
Mark
1 Like
Hi,
I understand that geometric transformations must be reflected in other layers as well, as happens when using the ReTouch tool, which works as it should → fully cooperates with transformations.
I believe that this fundamental weakness will be eliminated soon and using an otherwise excellent program will become fun without frustration for many other users, whose workflow does not correspond to the only recommended one.
I ask everyone to vote to correct this error, even though it has been part of the program since the beginning. It is a time to take a step forward.
Unless you’ve gotten some specific feedback that I am not aware of, I doubt that this issue will be resolved anytime soon.
Mark
I agree. MOST of the time. But sometimes I find I have gone deep into the editing and only then, when looking at some detail of a photograph, do I realise that my horizon correction wasn’t quite right.
Not a problem with a water horizon or modern, tall, man-made structures, but sometimes it takes a lot more inspection before you see the bit that looks wrong.
One trick I have learned is with birds in (calm) water, you can line up a clear point on the bird with its reflection for a true vertical.
One trap that gets me often is my local airport. It has a significant slope at each end of the runway (it is lowest near the middle) and many of the “vertical” structures around it are not vertical at all. Old utility poles and fence posts can lead you quickly astray. The houses around are very trustworthy but offer little vertical distance to guage.
Add to all of this that shooting anything but perpendicular to a known horizontal line creates its own slope.
So yeah… do all your geometry adjustments first, but it’s no panacea!
PhotoLab already does all the necessary translations to move the image pixels around. It shouldn’t be a huge leap to apply the same to any masks.
1 Like
Hi,
Editing of our photographs should be creative and enjoyable process, not a source of frustration and looking for workarounds … Photolab is close to that.
It is real shame that we have many advanced features like the AI masking and we are not able to solve essential things like rotation of photographs propperly.
Every piece of software has its pros and cons, and PL is primarily a dedicated raw file developer/editor.
Note: I am not defending the way PL works. But if you aren’t happy with it, simply use whatever you feel comfortable with.
I am aware of that, but as i noted before, Photolab is close to perfection, so i am trying stay with it, although has its own weaknesses, which if fixed, could make this software more desirable.
Note: I am trying process my raw files with Zoner Studio, which has his own flaws as you mentioned, and now are they on par in my opinion ( definitely not in denoise, where PL excels ).