A straight answer to what exactly? The camera is now supported in PL 5.3 and will be supported in PureRAW in a few more weeks. Are you referring to something else?
Mark
No the straight answer to the straight question would be the date or at least the week in which it would be updated, you appear to be discarding all the previous indefinite replies which were woolly at best varying from spring to before summer or sometime in June. I am concerned that whenever the question is asked a clear definitive answer is not provided. How long is a few more weeks given that we are now in the third week of June - sounds to me as though the June deadline is not going to be met. So when? It will be between date… and date… or quite simply you do not know - that would be a clear answer.
2 Likes
They can’t and won’t give you greater specificity if they are not 100% certain about it. To do that would create an expectation they may fail to meet. It is coming soon. I know it is a bit frustrating, but you will have to try to be patient.
Mark
Great, let’s just wait and see and hope it doesn’t take much longer. Topaz is only a temporary solution for me, I would much rather finally get started with PureRaw.
I am in same boat, my fault for not reading that the OM1 was not supported but I thought it would not be long so paid for the update, now too long for me to wait. I am having to use other software now which it turns out is OK so although I may use my DXO PureRaw once it has the OM1 update I very much doubt I will purchase further DXO products. As they say last to the party can mean the first to leave!
Just in from Marie:
Hello,
support of OM-1 in PureRAW 2 will be available at the end of July.
Regards,
Marie
1 Like
That’s great. Any idea when you will also be supporting the OM-1 with 150-400 f4.5 and (external) 1.4x extender?
I hope you can throw light on this missing element of ITPC/EXIF reading.
On all my cameras I enter Copyright Name and Creator Name.
PL5 recognises those entries for the E-M1 mk2 and the E-M1X but the same camera information entries are not showing in PL5 for my OM-1 body.
TIA for your updating the way PL5 ‘reads’ the file data to match the way the older bodies are handled 
Hi Laurence - They’re appearing in MetaData panel (in PhotoLibrary mode) for my OM-1 … PLv5.3.1
John M
WTF? This is a joke…
2 Likes
Hi John
Thanks for your reply & insight
I am using v5.3.0 and did not note any mention (unless I missed it 
) of this in the 5.3.1 fixes I will update now and see what happens 
Edit ~ I have now updated to v5.3.1 ands the Metadata/IPTC data is still not showing the entries I made ‘in camera’…compared to my older models mentioned.
None too sure what to make of that???
PS On a side note about such Copyright info…back when I was using LightRoom I had in the Import settings the info including a Copyright Statement and I note that PL sees that and displays that.
Now, I know there is some debate about the Photo Library DAM function with the keywords but is there a setting in PL (cannot recall seeing one) where PL upon ‘seeing’ the files and applying its initial (import?) preset add such Copyright metadata…that is then viewable by all other DAM programs?
Edit ~ Hmmmm! I have looked at some M1X and OM-1 raws in FastRawViewer and that shows the same behaviour and RFV global settings are to display Copyright & Author fields. So doubly odd in that you say PL5 shows these fields for you?
Can I ask, have you updated your OM-1 firmware to v1.1 and did you have reset the date & time or not? As you may be aware that there are two camps, those who did not need to reset the date & time and those that did. I was one of those who had to reset it!
Edit2 ~ John
I have done some empirical testing and have found that the trigger event that allows or disallows for the embedding of the Copyright & Artist in the Metadata is due to the camera settings!
In S-AF (with single shot, Silent multi shot & SH2) the data is there
However, in C-AF (ditto on the above shooting) the data is omitted
I am going to report this to OMDS Support as well as another contact that I have there.
Please do test the same criteria I mention and see if you get the same outcome…if so do let me know and by all means also report it as appropriate
I’m not finding that, Laurence … I’m seeing Copyright Name and Artist Name (as entered via Copyright Settings) in the MetaData panel (in PhotoLibrary mode) for my OM-1 … regardless of Focus Mode.
I’ve not yet seen a case where the info is not showing.
John M
BoxBrownie
Is the different results under different custom setteings?
I thought I saw the same as you, but one of my customs settings
had Copyright Info off
Morten
Hi
On another forum someone mentioned the same about Custom Sets and indeed like you in the Custom sets Copyright was ‘off’.
However, the empirical testing I did was in Shutter Priority mode and thagt has Copyright ‘on’.
Therefore, yes what I initially have observed was due to the Custom settings but coincidently my testing bypassed that and proved(?) there is an issue…at this stage more down to the camera than DxO PL5
The free OM Workspace is free and does a god job with the RAW files, but of course you will only be able to use the jpg or tiff files in DPL.
Yes but it is slow, clunky and not so good as PureRaw , so we sit and wait.
1 Like
I’ve just been evaluating exports (to JPG) comparing OM Workspace & PhotoLab … both with basic settings - - and I don’t agree that OM-WS “does a good job” … at least, certainly not when compared to output from PL.
John M
3 Likes
It’s not on the same level as PL on high ISO images, but about the same as what you get in camera. ANd of course, no local adjustment…
I processed about 300 images from my OM-1 thru both OM-WS and PLv531 - in both cases, with just the default correction settings - and the difference was very obvious, and clearly to the advantage of PL.
John M
2 Likes