Why can Capture One do it then and not DXO?
I don´t understand that point at all.
1 Like
I think Capture One had a clear goal: the basic tool is the tethering function with matching workflows, and everything else is built around it piece by piece. That is the core expertise. DXO aimed for the best image quality from the start, and the rest was built around that. It is certainly possible to achieve both at the same level of quality—but it is expensive. Perhaps too expensive.
Like I said, if you are happy with Capture One, why don’t you simply support their product and quit griping about DxO PhotoLab, which you obviously don’t like using?
Or is it because you find that CO is lacking in other areas and you want the best of both worlds?
As I have previously said, I use Nikon’s camera control and PhotoLab, which is far better than CO for processing (IMNSHO) picks up the newly shot images automatically.
Basically, if you don’t like it, don’t use it, and realise that after around six years of posts that mention tethering, very few garnered votes and you would have been better served add your vote to an existing request.
3 Likes
Hi @Tembo,
Don’t worry too much about it! There are people on this forum (so-called pros) who apparently have nothing else to do all day and try to make things difficult for people who come up with good ideas. With wordplay and pointless discussions, you’ll end up thinking, “I’m never coming back to this forum again”.
It’s always the same people, day in, day out, who terrorise this forum with their “wisdom.”
Excellent idea by the way!
Good luck!
David
4 Likes
Even the great Adobe has spotty support for cameras of only three brands. If you own one of those cameras, great. DxO supports a lot more brands and models.
In the Pentax world, the only way to tether is using a very expensive first party application which is essentially impossible to buy. Hackers have managed to reverse engineer the process in the past but these have fallen by the wayside and were extremely limited when they worked
It may be critical in the studio world but there are lots of desirable features with much broader appeal that are almost certainly higher on the list.
Also, are you going to wait for DeepPRIME to render every shot as it arrives? If not, surely you are better off with LR or CO.
1 Like
Well, I’m certainly not a pro, so by your standards I should not use PL or any ther digital darkroom software? Seriously?
I hope @DXO will NOT include tethering in PL. If they would ever start to build that functionality, I really hope they will put it in a completely separate add-on so that the relatively limited percentage of users that do studio work can buy it if they want, but the large base of users that do not do studio work, will not be charged for it.
Many pro’s will not need it and most amateurs do not need it either.
4 Likes
+1
Lots of amateurs rise to the level of enthusiasts and DxO PhotoLab is perfect for them, too. It’s not just for the pros.
1 Like
Exactly. I don’t know where Tembo got that idea from
Not all manufacturers share specifications of their APIs. In many cases, specifications and the right to use can be obtained for $$ and it looks like DxO doesn’t have this even close to the top of their backlog.
As far as getting the files from your camera goes, use @Joanna 's hint and the manufacturer’s tool to load files to a target location which you then see in PhotoLab. No drama indeed.
Using an OEM tool makes sure that the proper protocols between software and camera are used, be it for download only or for remote control of camera settings.
As for your request: I hold my vote for now, I find more urgent fixes and additions that should have top priority.
4 Likes
The problem with your opinion of DXO aiming for the best image quality is just partly true. That is true for normal digitally born pictures taken in RAW. When repro- photographing old analog pictures EVEN IN RAW, Photolab is close to useless.
Either sharpening or denoising like Deep Prime works on that material in Photolab. The only tools that saves Photolab from being a total disaster is the contrast tools. Just by pushing Microcontrast all to the negative bottom may clear my blotchy skies in this material and only Fine Contrast can give these pictures some sort of sharpeness.
In Capture One there is no limitations like that. Here even sharpening works for these kind of JPEG-pictures too but in my opinion the best tool for the final touch of these repro-photographed analog RAW and JPEG-pictures is without any competition at all Topaz Photo AI. It makes wonders.
I also wonder if Joanna ever really have tried to postprocess repro-photographed old analog color slides with Photolab. At least in my world Photolab is totally indifferent to both Deep Prime and the sharpening tools. That is the whole reason I have moved on to other better tools for that kind of pictures.
Even I have had a belief that even DXO would be able to make some efforts to add both tethering and tools that could handle even repro-photograpghs. I don´t anymore. I just use Photolab because over 90% of my images are postprocessed with that tool and I have no idea to remake that job in another converter. Photolab is fine for simpler and less demanding jobs but it is a drag when I really need something more sofisticated.
I just feel it is a little sad that Photolab today has fallen so behind technically and lacks so many mainstream tools. It is also sad that it usually is pretty impossible to discuss these matters in these community because it use to led to that DXO deletes my posts instead of considering doingf something about these problems. … and DXO is just interested a month or too between september/october to december after the yearly update is released. After that the big dark silence.
Since I have worked in the cultural inheritance and museums world I know noone would even think of using Photolab and the reasons are twofold. First this world is mostly standardized on DNG and those files can not be trusted with Photolab. They all use the only reasonable choise - Lightroom - because nothing supports DNG better. The second is that digitizing old analog pictures means pictures with a texture Photolab can´t handle. So for all these houndreds of thousands of users worldwide Photolab is an immature toy lacking even mainstream basic tools and that disqualifies it for professional use.
… but of couse Photolab is fine for users that don´t need or want advanced layer tools and AI-supported markup or tethering for that matter and the very effectice workflows Capture One can offer wedding-, product- or studio protographers - or don’t bother about having access to all sofisticated tools there are i that software or Lightroom. … and if even a Photolab user starts to feel the pain the ineffectice Picture Library might cause, there is always a possibility to migrate to iMatch to get access to a real full fledged DAM.
The message below in Swedish says “Flagged post releted by the staff”
I have voted now more or less against my senses but as you know that is pretty meningless since no one use to care anyway at DXO.
I don´t participate all that often here anymore. I have spent most of my activities the last-three four months at OpenAI and Photools trying to get the most out of Open AI GPT-4.1 API:s with Autotagger in iMatch DAM, since that really is the game changer I have been waiting for for five years. That has been far more rewarding and has improved the efficiency in my workflows dramatically. It was a very long time since anything here did. The support at Photools is really fantastic and everything DXO Forums isn´t. Here the users have to help themselves - there the help from the main developer is instant which helps the users get the max out of a pretty complex product that really demands your knowledge to shine to it’s full extent.
Whilst I feel that native in-app support for tethering would be a positive addition to Photolab, sadly I can’t see it happening.
- A business case for adding it would be need to be put forward by an internal employee. It is unknown who would in charge of this happening.
- The existing tether apps have support for a huge range of cameras (some very old). DxO would need to decide which cameras were to be initially added, this would logically be the most popular cameras used by current users. Do DxO even have such user data? Over the several years I’ve used Photolab, I’ve never been sent a feedback/research questionnaire by DxO. Such a questionnaire could provide data to support point 1 above too.
- DxO deem to be totally oblivious to user requests/feedback and follow their own path anyway.
- Adding support would be time consuming, with some cameras having better supprt than others regarding adding tethering to an app (ie an SDK or API; sorry, I’m not totally familier which acronym is the correct one for this). From what I understand, Nikon is rather opaque regarding tether support - its own apps certainly have one feature that 3rd party ones don’t which is the ability to review images on the camera screen whilst the tether is active. This suggests to me that a certain part of the tether protocol is witheld by Nikon, or the 3rd party apps have had to reverse engineer everything and have been unable to crack the ‘image review on camera’ code.
- Time implementing this is money. Refer back to point 1 and the business case.
- There are other 3rd party apps that currently do a good job. These are either the camera manufacturer native apps (eg Nikon Camera Control and NX Tether, and Canon EOS Utility. Sony, Panasonic etc I’m sure have their own ones too), or independent apps such as DigiCamControl (free) and my personal favourite SmartShooter5 by Tether Tools (excellent camera control functions and rock solid reliability and transfer speeds). Photolab then just automatically shows the image once it has transferred in the image thumbnail view.
Speaking personally, the one function I most want DxO to add is a complete list of shortcut keys for all the editing functions in Photolab, for both Mac and Windows, that can be edited by the user (the current shortcut list is not exhaustive, and isn’t customisable). This would then allow Photolab to be much more easily used with devices such as Loupedeck, Tourbox, etc.
I did use tethering software once to take a lot of images for a timelaps. The camera couldn’t deal with that.
But tell me what is the difference between PL with build in tethering abilities and PL with external tehering abilities? It’s only ONE CLICK to open the image in PL. The tethering software takes the image and writes it to a directory which is oopened in PL. You only have to click on that image. Like @Joanna mentioned before.
The only result of adding tethering software in PL is a more expensive PL and still a lack of support for that specific tool 
PL is a raw converter with an overlap to an image editor. Not a camera control.
George
4 Likes
Off-topic:
The common problem is that many new users make unsubstantiated claims in their first posts, or put claims and opinions inside the questions. To put it simple – they just misbehave. While in certain cases, it’s an easily corrected one-time “user error”, mostly it’s done for deeper personal reasons, non-productive for the community. As such, they provoke harsh responses, which is natural.
I would agree with this one: before posting anything, ask yourself “what’s the point”. It’s not only about trolls 
Yes, hard to follow, I know it myself…
That’s what you want it to be. Don’t put words into DxO’s collective mouths that they haven’t actually spoken or written. DxO is promoting its file management that two versions ago, a number of people were saying they didn’t want in this photo editor.
1 Like
The problem with listing all of the reasons that tethering won’t or shouldn’t be implemented is simply that a free and open source software like darktable does offer tethering. Not all cameras, but then I got ragged on here when I mentioned disappointment that my old Nikon D1 NEF files weren’t recognized by PL. OK, so tethering could be implemented for the modern cameras being shipped now. I don’t need tethering, but the idea of jumping on @Tembo for his suggestion because it’s something he can use, and can demonstrate a use case for, is just nuts. You’re just sending more customers back to Adobe.
3 Likes
And OP is happy to see how the rats fight…
Who are you? The Forum Police?
People are free to ask what they want!
Don’t you see a contradiction?
I’m just a man in the street, passing by…
1 Like
Yes, Sony has Imaging Edge. It has a good support for tethering and is a surprisingly good RAW-converter too. The upside of IE is that it usually supports new Sony-cameras from day one. As I have written before I had to wait a full six months before Photolab supported my Sony A7 III and then I tried it for a while while I was waiting for DXO to fix a profile for my new camera body.
There is also another advantage of using IE for Sony users and like Canon and Nikons proprietary softwares it can take advantage of the Sony cameras Creative Looks and other proprietary metadata that Sony stores in EXIF directly e.t.c. Photolab does not do that - instead they build their own profiles and sort of reinvent this wheel.
So there is absolutely an alternative option for Sony photographers - both for people stuck waiting for DXO profiles AND people needing tethering and think Capture One is a too expensive option.