Use of Microsoft Windows network shared folders and files therein

Indeed, this would seem to be the best approach since PL, amongst other products, doesn’t seem to have the same problems.

I just took a look at a review of Luminar Neo and, as a result, wouldn’t even give it disk space. And, if they are having trouble coping with such a basic task as shared folders, I wouldn’t put any trust in them to process my images. Despite all its alleged shortcomings, PL has served me well since PL1 and continues to be the best and easiest RAW editor I have used.


@wildlifephoto (@Joanna @platypus) I believe that any concerns about DxO changing DxPL in the way that you are obviously worried about is extremely remote, changing other features may be less remote but sadly I have used numerous products in my lifetime where the one feature of a product I really valued has been deprecated (abandoned).

With respect to your Luminar problem which has caused you to you worry in the first place (that DxO might land you in “trouble” one day) then that is a problem for Skylum to help resolve, as others have suggested, but you have found one scenario that it is difficult for me to test because all my PCs are gigabit LAN connected and none have wireless connection.

Albeit my Android tablet (and phone etc.) can see and browse files on my NAS and on my PCs without any issues, i.e. a LAN is a LAN!

My reason for running some quick tests was to see if the problem is “baked into” Luminar or a problem with your installation and all my tests so far show Luminar as reliable as DxPL for basic access over a wired LAN.

So I set up my Laptop on WiFi, attached an SSD via USB (set sharing etc) and navigated using both DxPL(Win) and Luminar AI and have

and opening NO NR in Luminar AI gives

The most useless of export options, default to the last location or put all images in the “Pictures” folder rather than one of the reasons I started with DxO 11 (after free copies of DxO 8, and DxO 9) namely, the intelligent ‘Export’ options!

@wildlifephoto Either I have been “lucky” with Luminar or failed to replicate your environment sufficiently accurately or you have a problem with your Luminar configuration or a combination of all three!

PS:- If you use my post id @BHAYT in your post then I will get an email informing me that someone has used my post id in a post. If the topic is mine then I will always be alerted (I believe) whenever a new post is added, as you should be for every post made here.

Joanna, I agree with you concerning the review/s of Luminar Neo (LN). However, I tried LN with a full refund “guarantee” before the reviews for three reasons: it was claimed to be “fast” for processing (on my machine, that turns out to be true – it takes about the same time for current Nikon Z9 lossless compressed NEF files as does PL Prime, much less than DeepPRIME XD although I do understand that DPXD typically does a “better” job; LN was claimed to have various features that PL “lacks”; Skylum offers interactive ZOOM discussions on a regular no-fee basis, similar to those offered much less frequently by Nikon USA NPS except that these are available for later viewing unlike Nikon USA NPS that are restricted to realtime. At this point in the exercise, I have given up upon LN and probably will never see a refund. Had the reviews been out there, I probably would not have invested my time into LN. The other reason is that I attempt to make recommendations to student clients, (mostly) based upon my own experience (typically, my camera and now limited video gear, bags and straps, and workflow software in a non-MacOS environment).

Your comment is my concern, as I have become somewhat dependent upon PL for (almost all of) my workflow. The only reason I brought this matter up on DxO is for a point of contrast; and although Marie appears no longer to participate/monitor these fora, hopefully to bring this point to the attention of DxO software engineers and/or testers so as not to have the issues with Skylum. Do note that I tested an obsolete Skylum workflow product when I was looking for a replacement for the Adobe suite and that one did work for my shared folders configuration – PL of that epoch was superior to the then Skylum offering and I did not look further. Neither Luminar Neo nor PL6EL complete offers a proper replacement for Adobe LR but PL6EL complete is a good replacement for Adobe PS (despite, as Joanna has pointed out, having a complete different internal architecture, not dealing with “layers” as I understand it, unlike PS, Luminar, etc). I suspect many workflow applications were developed for Apple MacOS environments, as this seems to be the preferred platform by many photographers and videographers I have met due to perceived “user friendliness” (ie, “automagic” if the Apple developers idea of “user friendly” is the same as that of the user). I personally dislike the MacOS interface and the fact that Apple hardware is considerably more expensive for the same level of raw performance compared to Intel/AMD X86-64 systems.

@wildlifephoto you should not be concerned because I see no reason for DxO to abandon the current way of working with remote directories as you stated in a number of your posts, this is standard Windows behaviour!

With respect to other capabilities we recently had a change with the arrival of ‘Wide Gamut’ and such changes are inevitable and the changes and/or or the fallout will almost certainly upset some users and may disrupt the working of allied commands and work flows built around them.

One important thing is never to replace one version with another immediately, i.e. leave DxPL(W) 6 alive and well while you test DxPL(W) 7 when it becomes available and move over only if/when it suits you and your work flow.

Be prepared to continue with the old version until you are convinced about the benefits of the new version and its suitability for your work flow,

The tests I conducted were with Luminar AI rather than Luminar Neo and it behaved itself impeccably.

You can always submit a support request specifically describing the DxPL behaviour that you have “baked into” your workflow and requesting that wherever possible it won’t suddenly change or vanish and you could “push your luck” and include @Marie in your posts to “spread the word”, as I just did!

PS:- I will stay out of the Mac versus Win UI, Mac has never been a potential candidate for me because I build my own systems and always have done excluding an Amstrad PC way back.

Unfortunately, given the lack of backporting camera, raw formats, and lens support to no-longer-supported versions of PL, the above is not an option as I work with raw files, not JPEGs. When Nikon introduces a new body, the NEF (sometimes in multiple versions, as lossless compressed along with the TICO high efficiency formats) image typically is not supported in the no-longer-current version of PL. My guess is that internally, DxO does not test every possible lens for a body with that body, but rather uses something akin to a (mathematical) convolution between two functions, one describing the body, the other the lens. Because PL internally does not do the convolution nor does DxO allow PL to request the DxO internal compute servers to perform the convolution, PL only supports certain lenses for certain bodies, particularly non-marque lenses. Thus, as I am increasingly using Sigma lenses for my work, and thus Nikon F mount plus the FTZII, I had to request (Marie, Svetlana) for PL to support the Sigma 60-600 Sport, perhaps with the Sigma TC-1401 1.4x TC, for the Nikon Z9. Otherwise, some of the “magic” corrections will not be done, reducing one of the advantages of PL (excellent lens/body corrections). All of these considerations essentially force one to use the current production versions of PL. (Although I have subscribed to several beta testing regimens, I typically do not beta test because I am too busy to have to repeat workflow. I do read the tester reports in so far as these are communicated so as to be prepared for possible issues.) You also stated: I will stay out of the Mac versus Win UI, Mac has never been a potential candidate for me because I build my own systems and always have done excluding an Amstrad PC way back. End quote. I agree. A working photographer whom I know and who exclusively uses Apple hardware got a new machine with less memory/storage than he/she wanted, knowing from past experience that she/he could use aftermarket components at much less cost than what Apple wanted for the same configuration. To his/her chagrin, he discovered that the components in question were no longer field replaceable and thus has a machine that runs the current ARM MacOS but does not meet her/his needs. However, as much of my work is in the field (I do use a mobile cellular network hotspot that works “everywhere” in the USA for IEEE 802.11 to Internet/web service and thus somewhat less dependent upon what service might be present wherever I happen to be), I have to choose mobile workstations (“laptops”) that are field upgradeable. Thus, the machine upon which I am corresponding now has the maximum (aftermarket) RAM it will allow, plus a 4 Tbyte Crucial SSD, the latter not even available as a manufacturer configuration. Unlike a tower, I cannot change either the motherboard/cpu nor the daughterboard GPU, but at least I have a much more responsive “hard drive” with sufficient capacity for images as I download from CFex cards (only later transferred to my archives).

@wildlifephoto I understand that might be an issue if the latest version contains lens support absent from the previous version but the advice stands, just in case! So backup the previous release, if you can then consider backing up DOPs, at least for some of the current folders before starting to use the latest release and discovering … whatever the new release might hold both good and not so good!

It arguably makes the new machine more reliable and resilient to bumps etc. It also means that Apple can sell you the memory at its own inflated price point, but that would be me being cynical.


While I take my photos in the open, and if on holiday transfer and backup using an old laptop but in the comfort of the holiday home etc… with no attempt to edit whatsoever until I get back home, although the laptop does have a copy of DxO Optics 11 loaded but no real GPU power at all.

With respect to systems I now have 3, 2 x i7 4790K, one was mine and the other built from parts bought from my oldest son when he upgraded. I then added a GTX 1050Ti after the GPU market started to “collapse” and prices went up and availability went down and then a second hand GTX1050 2GB. One of the GPUs was upgraded to an RTX 3060 and I then moved that and the power supply from one of the i7’s to a new build with a Ryzen 5600G and the laptop is an ancient i7 3632QM with no special GPU and not really easily transported!