Thanks Joanna, yes it is the work around to achieve the result. It it just not as efficient as having all in one sw feature. And still need to rely on 3rd party SW. 
Has the section is feature request I described what I’m interested in to see in DXO.
Hi Egregius, sorry just registered to this forum and not yet use to all tools attached to it.
Thanks KeithRJ.
I’ not into internal SW and the way it process the stitching, but more to have that feature in DXO to be all in one and reduce operation and go a back actions. Agreed with Joanna work around, My suggestion was to have all in one SW to optimize process time and needed SW.
1 Like
It is often “horses for courses”. Photolab’s lens correction is the best ob the market and I find it essential to do lens correction before stitching. If you have very noisy images (unlikely for panoramas) then Photolab Elite’s DeepPrime noise reduction is also the best on the market. These two options make Photolab ideal as a starting point for stitching panoramas.
My workflow is:
- Lens correction and simple adjustments if the image is not the best to start with.
- Copy ALL these adjustments to ALL the images using the copy and paste functionality.
- Export to Application where I setup my stitching app as the target. The output is either DNG or 16-bit tiff. Make sure you use the best quality output to send to the stitching app.
- Stitch the panorama and export back to the same directory as the originals. Do not crop to remove black borders.
- Photolab will see the new file and you can perform any other editing you wish in Photolab.
I sometimes use Affinity Photo to fill in corners where the stitching leaves black borders. I also use Affinity Photo’s excellent Mesh Warp function to straighten horizons etc.
Hope this helps.
So, that’s like wanting PhotoLab to be able to write the invoices for your customers, play background music whilst you are working, etc.
In the kitchen, I have a multitude of tools, because my frying pan can’t cut food up and my food mixer can’t boil vegetables, etc.
@KeithRJ describes the best workflow. Because, for DxO to re-invent the stitching wheel would mean devoting a team to so doing, and would take some time and effort, especially since most apps out there have several years head start and are using AI already.
Indeed. Affinity Photo has so much more added functionality to support stitching that it would take even longer for DxO to implement all that.
As has already been noted, this is an old chestnut. As well as the many specific feature requests there is a recent rebuttal of the idea within this topic:
Affinity Photo is a great way to stitch panoramas. It is one of the easier things to do in Affinity. I have used it on CR3 Raw files, corrected and exported from DXO in Tiff and other formats. Affinity is not expensive. DXO need not duplicate this function. There are many other things that need attention.
3 Likes
This is a function that, whether people like it or not, is becoming a standard feature of a raw converter/image editor.
As others have pointed out you don’t actually stitch raw images, most software is using dng, but you are staying within the raw editor which is very convenient.
Pano stitching within Photolab would benefit from the superior lens corrections and, if you have Viewpoint, then the new Mesh tool helps correct distortion, stretch skies into non image corners, etc. and actually becomes very useful. Along these lines the improved repair tool will also be valuable.
I think it would be a win for DXO to implement this feature and help remain competitive in the market.
In the same vein adding HDR support would be another win. One of the problems with HDR is noise and DeepPrime is most valuable. Given DXO know have the Wide Gamut colour space and already have the computer code for HDR from NIK-HDR, this should be relatively easy?
2 Likes
Which is why stitching panos are always going to be ‘hard’ for PL. PL is first and foremost a RAW converter, it is not a pixel based editor.
1 Like
You have to keep up with the competition and the way the world is going.
C1 is one of the most Pro raw converters on the market, well the price is certainly Pro 
, and C1 does both pano and HDR as does LR, ON1 etc.
One of DXO’s newest capabilities is the mesh warp tool which is firmly in pixel editor territory. So, pano and HDR are no longer such a stretch?
1 Like
We can still use pigeons for messaging instead of smartphone … no comment Joanna.
I agree with you lanS.
1 Like
Thanks KeithRJ. Yes
Agree IanS.
DXO engineers has proven how good they can be with the Raw development.
I can understand resources and priority management like any company but today most of the RaW Sw offer this function.
It is product positioning versus new comer like Afinity, On1 which remained in the same range of price but offering slightly more feature.
DXO has the best RaW converter, the best noise cancelled, time to move to other domains like stitching, HDR, AI mask and so on
1 Like
The Lack of STitching and HDR is one of the reasons I am stuck with C1…I am finding PL6 great for somethings, but clunky for others…Yes there is a “workaround” but that involves $$ and simplicity is the key
Interesting to find threads like this and others while searching for answers to my own issue.
I’ve been following the suggestion to make changes to each individual RAW file in Photolab for my drone panoramas, then exporting to stitch in Lightroom or Microsoft ICE. I noticed that quite a few sets of Photolab processed file, be it in 3’s for vertical or 21’s for horizontal pano’s, were failing to stitch in either software option successfully - leaving frames out of the final result.
Out of interest, I decided to try some of the original RAW files (non - Photolab) and they all stitched perfectly. I can obviously use the resulting pano’s from that to then apply edits in Photolab and export as Tiff, but something in the Photolab processing stage doesn’t agree with either Lightroom or ICE, under my work flow at least.
Has anyone else experienced this?
I don’t know what you exactly mean with “to each individual”. Do you mean selecting all of them and then doing the changes or doing the changes one by one? In general I don’t think it’s wise to change the individual files.
What do you mean with original raw files?
Off topic. Yesterday I saw a due to the whether postponed firework show with over 200 drones. What amazing!! Just a google seacrh vuurwerk a'dam toren - Recherche Google
And the drone organisation Drone Stories - About our drone show company - Drone Stories
George
Sorry - what I mean is, following the advice of other forums, is that I create a preset in Photolab, apply the same preset to all 3 / 21 images of the panorama, then export them. This creates DXO labelled DNG files, and leaves the original DNG’s in place.
When I then try to merge the DXO labelled DNG’s into a panorama, they rarely work correctly, whereas the original do. I’ve started creating the pano’s using the originals and applying the Photolab preset to that pano file, exporting as TIFF. This is giving me a decent result, but I was just wondering if anyone else notice the DXO files failing to stitch correctly.
I live in the UK and watched the fireworks in London, which also included an impressive drone display
I’m no expert on pano’s. But what is the idea of using DNG and not TIFF?
George
Just did a set of 5 for a pano.
All same adjustments in DxO and export them as Tiff
Stitch them in Microsoft ICE (which I learned about on here) and export as Tiff
Finish off in Affinity and export as jpg
Have also stitched previously in ON1 and Affinity
Not had a problem with any stitching (expect where my shots were crap… but that isn’t anyones fault except mine!