What are the most important improvements for v5?

Hi Barb, For the Win version there are a couple of icons on the top of the Image Browser … image … The one on the right allows for filtering of the images listed in the Image Browser - and the one on the left allows for sorting the order of images listed in the Image Browser: one of the options is by Virtual copy number … this will group all your VCs together.

Hope that helps - John

Ah thank you John. It seems we don’t have that option on a Mac. It would definitely be a bonus if we did. Here is what I get as options…

Screenshot 2021-02-01 at 11.01.20

1 Like

Panoramas: If you are on Windows, the free Microsoft Research ICE application integrates well with PL4, as easy as Nik Collection.

For HDR, Nik has a good module.

I agree the current equaliser palette was an obvious UI to begin with local adjustments given the NIK origin.

The question is do you need a dedicated local adjustments panel at all?

Capture One has the best Local Adjustment implementation and with that the engineers simply made every existing tool that is logically useful/possible works locally. If a tool can manipulate a full screen of pixels why can’t it work on a selection? Some tools make no sense locally. In C1 the Black&White tool or the crop tool for example obviously make no sense locally.

Capture One do provide a dedicated tab for local adjustments but this isn’t turned on by default. They have in the past also added a brush symbol to the tools to indicate that they can be used locally.

If DXO want to show which tools act locally they could just change the colour of the Tool Name bar.

Capture One’s approach keeps the UI clean and doesn’t add any extra tool tabs unless the user for some reason wants to add the local tool tab. I have never seen anyone do this or say that they do this. It’s simply intuitive you just use the tools as normal except you are on a layer even the white balance picker. Useful for quickly balancing outside and indoor light by applying the relevant mask.


I’ve been saying this for too long : « my top ONE missing feature is : an elliptical mask among the local adjustment tools, rather than circular-only… »


I would like to have a list which of the long time discussed features/wishlist will be implemented in EA v5 step 2. At the moment it seems that a lot of the features with a lot of voices have been forgotten.
It may sound a little impatient, but I don’t have that much time to look for old topics and bring them back into the conversation. When I applied for the beta test, I thought of a new version with a lot of implemented wishes to test and find errors.
I was also thinking of standardising the user interfaces in DXO and Nik, all the suggestions for comfort with local adjustment …
This is just my personal view and I am still a fan of DXO 4.
I will now wait for Step 2 and then test again
best regards


1 Like

I agree, although I mean a radial mask version of the gradient tool. These are very popular tools in Light Room and Capture One. Not having them in DXO is a significant negative for users coming from other software as they are regarded as a “basic” masking tool. DXO wants new users :slight_smile:

To be clear are you asking for the same thing or are you asking for a variable area selection for U-Points?

Ian, I confess that I don’t quite understand the precise difference you make between these two definitions/descriptions :thinking:

Sorry I will try to clarify.

A Radial Mask is effectively a “painted” mask like the brush and gradient masks. The shape of the radial mask and the feathering is adjusted by selecting and moving the indicator lines. You have a choice of having the mask “inside” or “outside” the radial mask giving you two masking options in one. I hope the following two images demonstrate what I mean:

Apologies for the mask colour it is user definable :slight_smile:

U-Points are Auto selection masks rather than “painted” masks and make their selection based on the colour/tone of the pixels under the Control Point centre spot. Currently the selection “area” is broadly restricted to a user defined circle. An improvement would be to be for the user to be able to vary the shape of the selection area.

There is a fundamental difference between a Control Point and a mask in that the Control Point is selecting pixels within an area, based on colour and tone, whereas the mask is simply a defined area in which all pixels are impacted equally (except for the feathered area) by any adjustments. With a Control Point only the selected pixels within the area are impacted by any adjustments. The image below shows a Control Point and the selection area circle which limits the area of pixels the Control Point looks at.

I hope I have clarified my post. Radial masks are now available in most mainstream image editors and the lack of radial masks in DXO is a barrier to new users switching as they have become “standard” masking tools.

When DXO introduced Clear View it was soon copied by Adobe (Dehaze) and this tool has now become a “Standard” editing tool that is found in all mainstream image editors.


well Clearview and Dehaze (in silkypix) isn’t the same.
clarity and dehaze together is as Clearview.


100% negative clarity

100% clarity

100% dehaze

100% clearview plus. (that’s a combination of clarity and dehaze together.

the shocking microcontrast 100% and clearview 100%

dragging out the microcontrast by slider.
video comparison

The clearview plus is smarter but more limited in fine tuning.
it is adding more microcontrast in a smart way wile you turning the slider up for more “Dehaze” aka blacklevel.
result can be over sharpend. and because it difficult to see before exporting (70% rule and no primedenosing in preview (denosing and sharpening are bound) using clearview in massive amounts is dangerous.
That’s why i like the toolbox in Silkypix for this kind of image’s.
Clearview plus is a automated system wile the other is more manual which is better in extreme images.

i assume dragging the outer oval means more feathering?
My main concern in this kind of tools is a overload of possibilities can cause choosingblock.
Upoint and this isn’t comparible. two different type’s of selection and coverage.

If they add this i think they should drag the "afbeelding
out of this and create a “quick button” next to “repair”
and so we can choose “classic radial filter” as we have now and this oval/round one.
like we can in repair:

So the Brushes and controlpoint can be left in locals. (maybe a HSL control inthere? :thinking: :heart_eyes:)

I do see purpose of this oval/round radial mask. :slight_smile:

Thanks for clarification! In this case, my idea would rather correspond to your second proposition: a variable shape for U-Points.

I’m curious, fellas - Why would you like to see this “improvement” ?

Note: This is being discussed here too.


Obvious: when the area I need to correct is egg-shaped / long-shaped / narrow / rectangular / etc, I don’t want to have to “tile” circles:
1° that’s a chore
2° that’s imprecise
I don’t like to draw with a brush either: that of PL is coarse, and it’s again a slow process.

As a very recent Fuji convert (after 15 years of Pentax), X-Trans support is the most important for me. I can’t continue using DxO otherwise. :cry:

Besides that, the only new feature I really missed is a better highlight reconstruction (like RawTherapee’s Color Propagation).


So, how many different Control-Point shapes do you reckon you’ll need ?

1 Like

An elliptical tool (like the “radial filter” in Lr) deals with 80 % of the cases, quickly and simply. (A “quadrangular” mask would be the icing on the cake.) — After all, geometrically speaking, the circle is never more than an impoverished ellipse :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

I do not quite understand your insistence on countering this very natural proposal. As we say in French : « N’en dégoûtez pas les autres ! »…

1 Like

Especially long elliptical shapes I use very often in my reportage work. To reproduce such in dxo is a chore. For one that I did yesterday I need about 7 or 8 circles and still the results was not 100% right to me.

Such mask would also be ideal to do vignetting in a creative way using exposure controls. That is turn means the mask needs to be able to be applied to outside the picture frame.

That’s a fair point; but I’m not simply being negative … I do have an “ulterior motive”; I’ve seen so many posts on this forum where it’s obvious that the poster does not quite understand how Control-Points are actually applied (tho, I’m NOT putting you in that category, Scribe) - - - So, here I’m gently “pushing back” (while not intending to be “dégoûter”) with the hope that other readers may ask rhetorically “What is he on about ?!!” - and thereby question their understanding before they vote for this suggestion in the mistaken belief that it will determine the shape of the selection.

PS. I actually agree that an elliptical U-point would be a handy shape … but I can already imagine all the new misunderstandings that it would generate !

Regards, John M

1 Like

There are two things that stand out to me that would be major improvements and should be at the top of the list of features to add:

  1. The ability to use the HSL tool as a local adjustment. The HSL tool is great but not being able to use it as a local adjustment is a major limitation.

  2. Radial mask. Just minutes ago finished watching an episode of Hands On Photography with Steve Brazill as the guest that focused largely on using radial masks in place of vignettes because of the additional control a radial mask gives you. Not the only use for a radial mask by any means but a good example of how it can be used.

There are other improvements I would like to see but those two stand out as things that would most improve my editing of photos in PhotoLab. I know I’m not the first to mention them but I figured I would add my thoughts anyway.

1 Like

The ability to Folder create, rename, move, copy and delete inside PL on a Mac

You are talking about Source Browser in Library view? Additionally there should be functions to sort folders (like in Finder, by date created/modified, size, tags…). Also, there should be a tag to show if folder contents are indexed and/or adjusted/developed, maybe also if contents have been changed after last editing session.