I don’t want to make too big a deal of it, but I’m a happy user of PL 8.5.1. For the past 3 weeks, I’ve been testing the trial version of PL 9 to see if it the new tools were worth pursuing. To be honest, I’m impressed by the AI masks, though I was previously happy with the U-point masks and control lines, which I found to be easy and intuitive. The AI masks do however run a bit slowly, perhaps because my 2024 MacBook Air has only 16 Gb RAM (and DxO recommends 24 GB for PL 9), but it runs flawlessly otherwise. Not convinced that the upgrade was for me, I decided to revert to PL 8.5.
Though it should come as no surprise, the new dop files do not appear to be compatible, which means basically starting over with the photos that I processed using the trial edition. I had naively hoped that features that were available in the earlier edition (e.g. cropping, white balance, etc) would still be applied, leaving me to reproduce only the unique PL 9 procedures. This is on me, as I should probably have checked before tackling all 4000 images from a recent birding road trip And while it’s no big deal to process them again, it is a bit tedious. So I thought I should share my experience before others followed me down this road.
PS: I am generally impressed by PL9 and a number of its new features, and I may well decide to upgrade to avoid re-processing RAW files from our road trip.
A good rule, that . Fortunately, I suspect it will only be a handful of images that I will ever re-visit. By the way, thank-you for all your good advice, which is much appreciated.
Okay, I have to ask. Why would that be a “Golden Rule”? If I work on a RAW file & then go back to an earlier version of DxO where the changes I made are null & void, what harm is there to the RAW file? If I create a copy & work on it, & then decide to go back to an earlier version of DxO, I end up with a useless copy of my RAW file that I have to delete. What is the benefit of that? Am I harming the RAW file by not making a copy? Corrupting the dop file maybe?
The RAW file is never touched. PhotoLab is a non-destructive app. The only changes are recorded in the DOP sidecar file and/or the database.
I am talking about creating copies of the original RAW files, which are never changed. PhotoLab DOP files are version sensitive and, once edited by a later version, cannot be read by previous versions of PhotoLab, due to unrecognised tools and settings from the later version.
DPL8 and 9 can run side by side and have their own database.
If DPL8 is set to NOT automatically import sidecars, the fallback is easy: Open the modified folder(s) and manually export sidecars.
If DPL8 was set to auto-import sidecars (that’s the default) and the modified folder(s) was/were touched, you hopefully have a backup of the PL8 database from shortly before starting the trial.
If you have no backup … you’ll have to re-edit. (4 letter word) happens.
Best practice: Disable sidecar and xmp automatisms while testing.
I have both 9.02 and 8.8 installed and have come to the opposite conclusion. As long as I dont use the predefined AI masks 9.02 works just fine and I’m ready to remove 8.8
I wouldn’t retire PL8 either. DeepPRIME preview, a key new feature for me, and everything else which was already present in PL8 works for me flawlessly so far. But PL8–>PL9 switch does not seem yet as safe, as it was with PL7–>PL8. Too many new features, which require careful coding and interoperability with NVIDIA and Microsoft. We might see fixes which bring other serious problems. Cleaning this up may take few months, I’m afraid.
Keep PL8 and save old dop files (say, in DOP8 subdirectories) before using them in PL9.
However, I’m not sure about XMP files, since I don’t use them. Upgrade PL8 → PL9 migrates your databases, presets, tone curve presets, watermarks, UI customizations (like Workspaces, Export templates, Preferences) but leaves the PL8 unchanged. Cache is not migrated, as it could take very long. PL9 can read/interpret PL8 DOP files but not vice versa. So PL “upgrade” is in fact migrating your previous customizations plus installation of new files in separate directories. You can use PL8 and PL9 to a certain degree independently (even at the same time, provided you have enough hardware resources and work in separate directories). AFAIK, the only common thing they could change are DOP and XMP files, and of course exports. Everything else is kept in disjoint directories.
In theory you could write a script adapting PL9 dop files to PL8 but it could be tricky. You would have to remove some items and remap Lens Sharpness Optimization Intensity settings. Maybe DxO could provide such a tool. If you don’t have too many files to migrate back to PL8, it might be quicker to do it by hand, than make an extensive dop research.
I use photoLab version 7, 8 and 9 almost to taste and set all of them to not automatically export sidecars and sync metadata. This allows for easy switching. Occasionally, I want to use customising from e.g. PL9 in PL8. I then export sidecars manually with PL9 , change the version numbers in the dop files, open in PL8 and manually import sidecars. In most cases, this transports the settings that PL8 can understand and ignores what it can’t.
Whatever LSO is, manually managing the sidecars worked in (again) most cases so far. Occasionally, there are changes of ranges or values between major (and minor) versions.
Backwards transport is something to do with smaller amount of images. And it includes a review of the results. Often enough, values are adapted because of floating point algorithms used in PL. And occasionally, the image needs to be adjusted with the tools that have changed. (Release notes don’t usually list such changes, so one has to look or get someone/something to look.
As the DB is the one place that tells it all, it’s good to do occasional backups…but I start repeating myself.
Sorry, I meant LSO = Lens Sharpness Optimization. In PL8 LSO Intensity has values in the [-3,3] range, while in PL9 it’s [0,200]. The corresponding parameter in DOP files for both PL versions is called ‘BlurIntensity’ (sic!).
See also Lens Sharpness Optimization V2 question - #3 by Wlodek for the mapping.
Personally, that would be too risky for me.
After I switched from PL7 to PL8, luckily I never had to go back, except to test some forum cases. I don’t like switching between versions now and then because of “muscle memory” Didn’t switch to PL9 yet, still on trial, waiting to stabilize, although DeepPRIME previews make a real change for me (mostly high ISO shooter).
In future make sure to backup all the *.dop files in the folder you are planning to test the new version with. That way you can just restore the original *.dop files to go back to where you were.
Better still set up a NAS with automatic backup of your image folders, then you can just restore the files from your backup system.
Thanks, Duncan: That would also have avoided the problem. Unfortunately, I tested the new version on new photos, thinking that there would be backwards compatibility for shared features, like cropping, white balance, exposure, etc. Not so bright on my part :). It’s not a big deal, as I can’t imagine I will ever want to re-process many of these photos - having processed them to my satisfaction once.
And while it’s no big deal to process them again, it is a bit tedious. So I thought I should share my experience before others followed me down this road.
. Fortunately, I suspect it will only be a handful of images that I will ever re-visit. By the way, thank-you for all your good advice, which is much appreciated.