Not sure what your comment was intended to address.
Indeed, and as you write, pixel editors donāt necessarily need to remember previous steps along the whole way. A parametric editor might be able to be as efficient as a pixel editor too, depending on how rendering is implementedā¦and I get the feeling that DxO could do something in this area to prevent lagging cursors and app crashes.
My only prior experience with non-destructive editors have been Appleās Aperture, which I absolutely loved and Canonās Digital Photo Professional 4, which I still use to import my photos.
Aperture, despite all its potential, progressively became slower and slower at rendering with each additional step while processing photos, Raw or otherwise, as its processing of JPEGs et al was also non-destructive. At the time, before Apple killed it, it seemed that eventually future faster processors could have brought its rendering speed into the realm of acceptable.
DPP4, on the other hand, has always been and will likely always be painful to use. Canon has no real incentive, given the current state of declining sales of all stand alone cameras (not hidden within the confines of a cell phone), to be bothered with the abysmal rendering performance of a program theyāre giving away for free.
I may have misunderstood what you wrote but I thought that you were saying that PL7 treats RAW files differently than rasterized files(non-destructive as opposed to destructive). PL 7 is non-destructive for all types of files.
What kind of video card and driver version are you running?
Iām using a late 2021 iMac, 3.8 GHz 8-Core Intel Core i7
1 TB internal SSD
RAM: 40 GB 2133 MHz DDR4
The video is AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT 8 GB
Actually, it was a more general comment, mostly intended to address why PL7 or, for that matter, any non destructive editor can not be expected to properly reapply existing local adjustments to an image whose geometry has been altered after local adjustments have been made. Once the geometry has been altered, the pixels that had been affected by the local adjustment no longer remain coherent to the intended adjustment. Their relationship to one another and, therefore, to the intended local adjustment are compromised.
Such is not the case with strictly raster based editors. With them, a local adjustment permanently alters the image. Once applied, the local adjustment, for all intents and purposes, ceases to exist independent of the image. Further changes to the image, geometric or otherwise, canāt produce the potential side effects that can occur when adjustments need to be regenerated to render the final image.
Not sure it is fully related, but you have to do all the geometry editing before applying any local adjustments or all of them will be off-set after any geometry modifications (perspective, reframeā¦)
1 Like
Yes, thatās what I was trying to say, apparently with way too many words 
And if you made the mistake (local adjustments before geometry), you can always change geometry on the JPG using the standalone VP.
What is VP?
View Point.
Usual suspects: PL = Photo Lab; FP = Film Pack; VP = View Point
Got it. Iām pretty new to PhotoLab. Not familiar with ViewPoint and Film Pack. Got enough on my plate coming up to speed with PL.
I am so happy to own DxO PhotoLab 7.
Whenever I compare, it confirms that none of what I edit in Darktable, combined with PureRAW 4, can be done better in PL7.