I’m not going to try to convince you to change a workflow that’s meeting your requirements, I just wanted to add that if you upgraded from PhotoLab 2, especially if you had the Essential version, to PhotoLab 8 Elite, the difference in functionality is profound with probably five to six dozen or more new and upgraded features.
EDIT: If you are using the PhotoLab 8 Essential version instead of the Elite version you are using a hobbled version missing a number of major features. Additionally, when you say you use PL Standard are you referring to the DxO Standard Workspace palettes? If that is what you selected for a workspace and they are the only palettes you are using in PhotoLab 8, that subset of PL8’s functionally may add to your belief that there is not a lot of difference between PL2 and PL8.
I’m not sure why this conversation has turned into a sales pitch for PL Elite.
I went from PL Elite v2 and trialled v8. Because I have NIK and PR, I couldn’t see what I was getting, so I oped for Essential + Filmpack. If I felt that I would use the viewpoint controls then I would just buy that.
The tonal contrast that you get in PL+FP is not as good as the tonal contrast in NIK. It introduces hard lines and doesn’t have the fine, balanced, high pass etc options. It has ruined clouds for me before whereas I have not had that problem in NIK. For example, this is NIK:
My workflow is to denoise in PR first (which doesn’t require me to watch and wait), then adjust the white balance in PL, followed by choosing a Filmpack preset and then using the tone curve to create the tonal range and depth that I want in the image. Then into NIK mostly to use masks with tonal contrast, soft contrast and then the Vivenza controls, plus whatever else I need (HSL for skin, detail sharpening for eyes etc). Back into PL for 10 on the fine contrast as the final step.
My photography editing is good enough that people can’t suggest improvements, even though I feel it could be better. I feel that I need to learn about adding contrast to hue masks and that might just get me that little improvement that I feel that I need.
I must say that I find DXO’s products frustrating. I can buy the hue mask upgrade in NIK, but I won’t get that in PL. I have PR, but I’m not allowed to use denoising in PL, I bought FP, and and i’m allowed to use the tonal contrast plugin (but not when I buy NIK, which has those controls and is more expensive). It feels like DXO make my life complicated on purpose and I can make it easier, by simply buying one extra product for a feature that I already have, but they make me switch application simply so I can use it.
Blockquote Pish! Tosh! Read the reviews. I use it on every image, regardless of ISO because it also brings out shadow detail. And, yes, I have compared it with Topaz and found DeepPRIME to be far superior, as it works at the demosaïcing stage. <
You literally take half of my sentence and try to argue that DeepPrime is better. Read it again, I did not ask the question that you answered.
Do you work for DXO? A lot of what you are saying is bending the truth or just plain incorrect.
I agree wholeheartedly with your last paragraph. There are a lot of purchase options, but I’ve not seen a really clear “roadmap”, for want of a better word, of how they fit together and where they overlap.
Best, most comprehensive, standalone, option is the PL Elite + FilmPack plugin + ViewPoint plugin. You don’t need any other DxO products.
PureRAW is a standalone deRAWetiser that can be used as the first step with other editors, like PS, Lr, etc working on the TIFF files that PureRAW produces.
Once you have TIFF files, you can use FilmPack and/or ViewPoint standalone, or you can use the Nik collection. But there is a lot of duplication of functionality and the need to create intermediate files.
