Alas, unfortunately, DxO is not able to help me out. No biggie. I’ll keep it and get VP 4 when it goes on sale or something.
Tom
Rhooo …
There are good points in PL8 :
Curve tool implementation seems to show DxO can make complete tools when they want !
And contradicts the fact that they don’t listen to users or don’t read this forum.
If only they hadn’t amputated PL from the luminosity mask.
This is where we differ. I strongly believe that FilmPack in an integral part of the PhotoLab experience and every one should own a copy.
However, I have always been in favor of a single copy of PhotoLab with the embedded features from FilmPack and Viewpoint included and visible without the need of a separate license and without the standalone versions. It would have to be more expensive then PhotoLab Elite without the embedded features, but with no standalone software it could be priced more reasonably.
Affinity Photo is …
I was using Affinity to stitch panoramas - until I found Microsoft ICE (Image Composite Editor), which is a MUCH better tool for this purpose … tho, for PC only (and, be aware that it’s no longer supported by MS).
1 Like
I agree Joanna XD2 is definitely an improvement.
The image quality it can produce is absolutely stunning
I have already seen a substantial improvement over old XD.
I have reprocessed a few folders and it looks very good.
Just a shame that we didn´t get it a long time ago because it has been ready to ship a long time.
The first is exported with old XD.
Picture taken in Rindö Harbor Vaxholm Sweden (former old naval- and coastal artillery base) from my balcony when the super moon was to see.
(Look especially at the sky which is clearly mor blotchy than the one below
The second with the new XD2
Below is made the snippet tool from the view of the RAW before export
Hi Stenis;
Would you be able to share an example of where you’re seeing this substantial improvement (it’s not readily obvious in tests I’ve attempted).
John M
Edit:
Ah, you just did ! … Our posts overlapped.
Edit:
Could you post some enlarged crops - to make it easier for us to see the difference (?)
Zoom - double clic.
Yes, but … that enables us to view only one version followed by another … Not side by side.
I’m struggling to perceive any significant difference in the two versions (that would justify the longer export time - versus “good old” DeepPRIME) … But I’d be happy to be convinced otherwise.
1 Like
My experience of DeepPRIME XD2s means that it will replace DeepPRIME in my default presets.
I originally tested out XD on some of my night shots from Singapore and it was prone to inventing textures in smooth areas. The Force Details slider could be backed off to eventually eliminate them, but I was never happy with the result.
In testing XD2s, I found simply clicking that button and changing nothing else produced near perfect results on all the same images. At ISO 25600 or below (my normal range) the default XD2s was all I needed. In some cases I was stunned by the detail it pulled from the file. I even sent a couple to DxO who concurred they were also impressed how it did.
I don’t see any difference either. I opened the link in 2 different tabs, zoomed in and switched between them. I just can’t see any difference.
George
I downloaded all 3 images and put them in a separate folder to then view them at 100 and 300% with my default viewer (FastPictureViewer → screen and viewer set here to sRGB).
The third one set aside, where I see grain, flat colors and most probably no sharpening …
the first pic has the best colors, contrast, sharpness and shows the smoothest sky as well the least artifacts on the road sign with the yellow background,
whereas in the second image the deep shadows are lighter and therefore the overall contrast and sharpness appear lower, I also see (well at 300%) blotches in the sky and on the yellow road sign.
That said, all three pics are JPEGs and they come with some compression.
Does anyone of you use ptgui for stitching ?
Used to use it about 20 years ago.
I would like to know how it evolved if some of you use it.
1 Like
Thanx.
I’m not blind. Have to download the demo to see how it performs on small details like feathers and furs.
The first two are exported in 100% as I always do. So not much compression there but as always 8 bits.
My test image was taken at only ISO 400
Here are some screenshots of exported tiffs taken from macOS Preview
PL7…
PL8…
And here are two screenshots from PL8 with the loupe
PL7…
PL8…
Note that I had to reduce contrast on the PL7 shot so that it didn’t produce halos around contrast borders.
Interestingly, the loupe shows a slight halo that is not as obvious by the time it has been exported.
cracking update I think - loupe tool is so useful and the luma curve I am using all the time. preview filmpack etc on picture is such a help as well. keep up the good work DXO
1 Like
These features are must have :
- fine contrasts and sub options highlight/midtones/shadows
- luminosity mask
These are just gadgets (I would even say 3 first one are fully useless) :
- light leak
- texture
- blur
- frame (not enough configurable for basic frames)
And these are maybe in between or gadgets :
- creative vigneting
- filter (maybe color temperature filters make it a little bit more than gadget for some use ? not sure about it.)
- grain (maybe grain can help when banding could occur - like dithering does - but not sure about it neither).
@mwsilvers What do you think of it ? (and did I forget some ?)
1 Like
Nice list. For me, I’d file the functions like this:
These features are must have (imo) in a modern image editor such as PL, and should certainly be included as standard (again, imo) in PL Elite:
- fine contrasts and sub options highlight/midtones/shadows
- luminosity mask
- creative vignetting
These are just gadgets and I never use them in PL.
- light leak
- texture
- blur
- frame
- filter
- grain
4 Likes
