DXO Optics Pro and E-M1

Started 2 months ago | Discussions
Gregm61
Forum ProPosts: 13,819Gear list
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to markymark101, 2 months ago

markymark101 wrote:

Gregm61 wrote:

Just the simple act of opening the program and going into a folder with many images and DXO has to re-load the profiles to each and every image file and you sit there and watch it count down from whatever the number of files is until it's finally loaded them all, and if you try and open one in the view panel before they are all loaded it starts twitching and hesitating until all the profiles from that folder are loaded.

That is a valid criticism. I'm testing DxO out now on trial and working on a folder with 600 RAW files. 600 is not a huge number, but you do have to wait until the all the thumbnails are built. It's not hugely frustrating with 600 images, but if it were a few thousand, yep, I could see it as a real pain. The other frustrating part is if I close the program and then go back to it later, it doesn't start where I left off; it takes me back to pic1. So I've got to wait for it to load all the pics, then hopefully remember the one I was last working on, and then go find it. Maybe that import into LR isn't such a bad thing after all

Yep, if you load those same 600 images into Lightroom or Photoshop, it also has to go through the process of applying the defaults, which does not take all that long, and once it's done, it's done, never having to be re-done again. If you leave the program and go back later, you do not have to wait yet again for the program to re-do what it did the first time like DXO does, over and over again. Kind-of like the movie "Ground Hog Day", except it never gets easier/faster like it did for Bill Murray.

-- hide signature --

"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights

 Gregm61's gear list:Gregm61's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 70-300mm 1:4.0-5.6 +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mrollins
Forum MemberPosts: 96Gear list
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to Gregm61, 2 months ago

Gregm61 wrote:

mrollins wrote:

There are probably other things I should be considering. I am curious as to what other photographers might be doing to preserve their files for future use, perhaps without the use of Adobe products.

$10 a month for access to Photoshop and Lightroom is one hamburger, fries and chocolate shake. The day I cannot afford that, I'm going to have a whole lot of other problems much worse than not having access to Photoshop.

I don't disagree with that. In fact, $50 isn't so much for the all the applications I deal with now. Adobe makes some awesome products, but they can be a pain to deal with sometimes. I expect the price will creep up over time. I'm well past any so-called retirement age, so I know at some point I'm probably going to have to start watching expenses more closely. For now, my consulting business allows me to keep my photography gear and software up to date. I'm just trying to think ahead a bit. I'm mostly concerned about maintaining flexibility so that I have options as I go down the road rather than being locked into any one software vendor.

Did you shoot film for a period of time before moving to the digital side? If so, how well organized are your negatives/slides?

I've been an avid photographer since the mid-60's, so yes, I've shot lots of film. In my early years of photography, there wasn't much extra money for photography, so I used to buy 100 ft rolls of Tri-X and load my own film cartridges. Also developed all my own film. I guess I remember that well enough so I wonder what it would be like again to be on a limited budget. Later years, until digital came along, it was mostly color reversal. Most everything is cataloged and saved in archival storage containers. A lot of it is scanned. I had a Nikon scanner before I finally bought a digital camera.

I have bunches and bunches of prints from my film shooting days, but negatives? Very, very few.

I'm pretty much just the opposite. Lots of negatives and chromes, but few prints left from those early years. I enthusiastically jumped into printing when I went digital because I never had the opportunity to do my own color prints. My darkroom was just B&W. My printing has since slowed down a bit, but I do enjoy crafting a good looking print.

I have multiple external hard drives. I'm about to fill up a 1TB drive that contains images back to 2009 and have three others stored in a file cabinet with older files. How many times have I reconnected those to my computer to get at a raw or even jpeg file I wanted to redo years later? Zero.

I'm backing up to multiple hard drives, but I don't have anything off site, and that bothers me. I'm going to need to remedy that. I tried some offsite storage (before "cloud" storage was around), but it was way too slow for the volume of files that I had.

I keep my Smugmug account paid every year and upload the jpeg of any image I want to never lose and trust the Smugmug is going to be around, which seems sensible enough at this point. I should print more than I do, but I don't and some day I might regret it, but one could have a second hobby just archiving digital images and developing redundant backup processes.

I guess I'm not as comfortable that Smugmug, Flickr,  or whatever is a good long term answer, although they are fine for file sharing. I've branched into video recently, which is a whole new storage issue.

Regards,
Mike

 mrollins's gear list:mrollins's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH4
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Tullis
Forum ProPosts: 26,554Gear list
Like?
Work-Arounds-R-Us?
In reply to Gregm61, 2 months ago

Gregm61 wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

I agree about loading DXO from a RAW in LR, but the latest update to v.9 doesn't do that to me now (so it's usable again as an external converter when it's called for from time to time).

I rarely use the Lightroom portion of my Adobe subscription. I'm no fan of the filing system. I just want to load my images where i want them and go, so I'm either processing in ACR with Photoshop CC or times when it's been long enough since I was last frustrated by DXO to open and try it again.

Just the simple act of opening the program and going into a folder with many images and DXO has to re-load the profiles to each and every image file and you sit there and watch it count down from whatever the number of files is until it's finally loaded them all, and if you try and open one in the view panel before they are all loaded it starts twitching and hesitating until all the profiles from that folder are loaded.

Hmmm.  Would this suit your workflow?:

Copy the RAW file to a special directory, and only let DXO access that directory.   Save the finished TIFF, JPG, etc. to the directory where the original RAW file resides, then periodically delete the contents of the special working directory.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm F0.95 Aspherical Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +18 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Gregm61
Forum ProPosts: 13,819Gear list
Like?
Re: Work-Arounds-R-Us?
In reply to Bob Tullis, 2 months ago

Bob Tullis wrote:

Gregm61 wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

I agree about loading DXO from a RAW in LR, but the latest update to v.9 doesn't do that to me now (so it's usable again as an external converter when it's called for from time to time).

I rarely use the Lightroom portion of my Adobe subscription. I'm no fan of the filing system. I just want to load my images where i want them and go, so I'm either processing in ACR with Photoshop CC or times when it's been long enough since I was last frustrated by DXO to open and try it again.

Just the simple act of opening the program and going into a folder with many images and DXO has to re-load the profiles to each and every image file and you sit there and watch it count down from whatever the number of files is until it's finally loaded them all, and if you try and open one in the view panel before they are all loaded it starts twitching and hesitating until all the profiles from that folder are loaded.

Hmmm. Would this suit your workflow?:

Copy the RAW file to a special directory, and only let DXO access that directory. Save the finished TIFF, JPG, etc. to the directory where the original RAW file resides, then periodically delete the contents of the special working directory.

To be honest, DXO is not so good that I feel compelled to create a workaround for their system shortfalls. They just need to get the working speed of their program up to a competitive level. It's to the point I only log in to the program when I'm in a particularly masochistic mood anyway.

-- hide signature --

"There's shadows in life, baby.." Jack Horner- Boogie Nights

 Gregm61's gear list:Gregm61's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M5 Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M1 Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 50mm 1:2.0 Macro Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 70-300mm 1:4.0-5.6 +10 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Tullis
Forum ProPosts: 26,554Gear list
Like?
Re: Work-Arounds-R-Us?
In reply to Gregm61, 2 months ago

Gregm61 wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

Gregm61 wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

I agree about loading DXO from a RAW in LR, but the latest update to v.9 doesn't do that to me now (so it's usable again as an external converter when it's called for from time to time).

I rarely use the Lightroom portion of my Adobe subscription. I'm no fan of the filing system. I just want to load my images where i want them and go, so I'm either processing in ACR with Photoshop CC or times when it's been long enough since I was last frustrated by DXO to open and try it again.

Just the simple act of opening the program and going into a folder with many images and DXO has to re-load the profiles to each and every image file and you sit there and watch it count down from whatever the number of files is until it's finally loaded them all, and if you try and open one in the view panel before they are all loaded it starts twitching and hesitating until all the profiles from that folder are loaded.

Hmmm. Would this suit your workflow?:

Copy the RAW file to a special directory, and only let DXO access that directory. Save the finished TIFF, JPG, etc. to the directory where the original RAW file resides, then periodically delete the contents of the special working directory.

To be honest, DXO is not so good that I feel compelled to create a workaround for their system shortfalls. They just need to get the working speed of their program up to a competitive level. It's to the point I only log in to the program when I'm in a particularly masochistic mood anyway.

It doesn't compel me to do that, though it's been considered more than once.   But I do understand completely (different strokes).

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm F0.95 Aspherical Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +18 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Corpy2
Senior MemberPosts: 1,006
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to Dave Thompson, 2 months ago

Dave Thompson wrote:

Is anyone out there using DXO Optics Pro on E-M1 files. To me it seems to really bring out the detail when compared to Lightroom. I'm on a trial at the moment....

Any comments would be really welcome.

Thanks

I don't know about Lightroom, since I don't use it, but I do use DXO, and I am quite ok with it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Corpy2
Senior MemberPosts: 1,006
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to Bob Tullis, 2 months ago

Bob Tullis wrote:

Photo Pete wrote:

Personally I find Lightroom every bit as good as DXO provided you take the time to set up the default conversion settings as you like them. The camera profile / clarity / sharpening and noise reduction relationships are critical to getting initial settings that you like.

I also find DXO painfully slow for conversions when using their 'PRIME' technology.

Everyone does - that's why DXO offers it as an option with that very precaution.

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

I really find DXO PRIME astonishing.

As long as I have taken care with my original shot, and have no blurriness, DXO wipes out noise like magic when I use prime.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Muzfox
Junior MemberPosts: 38
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to Corpy2, 2 months ago

I've only just added DXO to my workflow, my main reason was good things I've seen written about PRIME.

I must say, the results from prime are outstanding, the noise reduction and detail recovery, especially at high ISO's is phenomenal.

My current workflow is to import from my SD card into Lightroom as RAW (used to be DNG but doesn't work for DXO). I then sort my images, flag tag bin etc. From there I export straight over to DXO and let it apply the standard corrections. I then PRIME everything I just love the result.

After that, I export everything back to Lightroom as DNG and will tweak from there. Lightroom does much better with highlight/shadow recovery etc, I don't like the DXO results. Images that I want to go insane with may go onto Photoshop from there for even more work.

Basically, I'm using DXO for lens corrections and noise reduction, it does a brilliant job for that, much much better than anything I've ever been able to get in lightroom, and frankly, much better than any noise reduction I've used in Photoshop as well (Topaz, NIK etc). Lightroom is a lot faster and better for everything else imho.

Just to do something different, this image below was processed entirely in DXO, opening the RAW direct in the program and exporting to a final JPG. I had to pull the shadows up a lot and drop the highlights down as welll due to the huge dynamic range in this shot. I can't see a spec of noise, a much better result than anything I could have gotten in lightroom.

OMD-Em5 and the panasonic 20mm lens.

Breakfast on Sunday

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dave Thompson
Contributing MemberPosts: 722Gear list
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to Muzfox, 2 months ago

Many thanks for all the advice and comments, it has been really useful and made me seriously think DXO Optics Pro is maybe not the best route at that price. I certainly agree about the issues with speed and that is important to me when process a handful of images say from a wedding shoot. However, the images corrections when first imported are quite impressive but I guess if I work within LR I can obtain similar results.

If anyone knows of any good presets for the E-M1 that would be useful.

Thanks again.......

 Dave Thompson's gear list:Dave Thompson's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P7100 Nikon D800 Olympus E-M1 Nikon Df Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
KapuBach
Junior MemberPosts: 25
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to Dave Thompson, 2 months ago

Dave Thompson wrote:

..but I guess if I work within LR I can obtain similar results...

DXO has many shortcomings, most of which have been named in this thread. But no, you cannot achieve similiar results. When it comes to pure 'get the maximum out of your pictures', DXO has no peer, especially on pictures that were taken in less than ideal circumstances (basically whenever alot of denoising or sharpening is needed.

Sometimes it will just be that unspottable 1% difference, but often it would be much more.

YMMV of course, this is just my opinion.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Wigelii
New MemberPosts: 24
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to Dave Thompson, 2 months ago

I just tried it with my E-M1 raw files and I can't believe it.

I  am a long time Lightroom user (currently 5.5) and I also use Photo Ninja 1.2 and Capture one 7.1 but I never saw what DXO Optics Pro 9 (trial version) does with my ISO 3200 and ISO 6400 raw files.

I think I will buy it.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PurpleFringe
Regular MemberPosts: 399Gear list
Like?
The E-M1 requires the most expensive version?
In reply to Dave Thompson, 2 months ago

It looks like you need the 'Elite' version at twice the price for the E-M1 (but not for the E-M5 or GX-7). Apparently they are using the price of the camera to determine the price of the software. Interesting.

But - they have some for of Lightroom integration, which makes it possible for me to use without having to manage multiple formats and versions of the same photo. That's a plus.

 PurpleFringe's gear list:PurpleFringe's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100 Olympus PEN E-P1 Olympus E-M1 Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Panasonic Lumix G Vario 100-300mm F4-5.6 OIS +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Timur Born
Senior MemberPosts: 3,860
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to KapuBach, 2 months ago

KapuBach wrote:

Dave Thompson wrote:

..but I guess if I work within LR I can obtain similar results...

DXO has many shortcomings, most of which have been named in this thread. But no, you cannot achieve similiar results. When it comes to pure 'get the maximum out of your pictures', DXO has no peer, especially on pictures that were taken in less than ideal circumstances (basically whenever alot of denoising or sharpening is needed.

That could be settled by uploading a raw file and corresponding DXO treatment of your choice, then let others have a go with LR to compare to your DXO result.

-- hide signature --

Red flash eyes save lives and eye-sight!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retinoblastoma

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
arbuz
Senior MemberPosts: 1,160Gear list
Like?
Re: The E-M1 requires the most expensive version?
In reply to PurpleFringe, 2 months ago

PurpleFringe wrote:

It looks like you need the 'Elite' version at twice the price for the E-M1 (but not for the E-M5 or GX-7). Apparently they are using the price of the camera to determine the price of the software. Interesting.

It makes sense. Apparently E-1 users have enough money for a camera so they may have enough for the sofware.

But - they have some for of Lightroom integration, which makes it possible for me to use without having to manage multiple formats and versions of the same photo. That's a plus.

 arbuz's gear list:arbuz's gear list
Samsung EX2F Pentax *ist DS Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH1 Samsung NX20 Samsung NX300 +16 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Corpy2
Senior MemberPosts: 1,006
Like?
Re: The E-M1 requires the most expensive version?
In reply to PurpleFringe, 2 months ago

PurpleFringe wrote:

It looks like you need the 'Elite' version at twice the price for the E-M1 (but not for the E-M5 or GX-7). Apparently they are using the price of the camera to determine the price of the software. Interesting.

But - they have some for of Lightroom integration, which makes it possible for me to use without having to manage multiple formats and versions of the same photo. That's a plus.

It's a lot better than the pricing they used to do.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
David28
Senior MemberPosts: 2,774
Like?
Question for Muzfox
In reply to Muzfox, 2 months ago

Muzfox wrote:

I've only just added DXO to my workflow, my main reason was good things I've seen written about PRIME.

I must say, the results from prime are outstanding, the noise reduction and detail recovery, especially at high ISO's is phenomenal.

My current workflow is to import from my SD card into Lightroom as RAW (used to be DNG but doesn't work for DXO). I then sort my images, flag tag bin etc. From there I export straight over to DXO and let it apply the standard corrections. I then PRIME everything I just love the result.

After that, I export everything back to Lightroom as DNG and will tweak from there. Lightroom does much better with highlight/shadow recovery etc, I don't like the DXO results. Images that I want to go insane with may go onto Photoshop from there for even more work.

Basically, I'm using DXO for lens corrections and noise reduction, it does a brilliant job for that, much much better than anything I've ever been able to get in lightroom, and frankly, much better than any noise reduction I've used in Photoshop as well (Topaz, NIK etc). Lightroom is a lot faster and better for everything else imho.

Just to do something different, this image below was processed entirely in DXO, opening the RAW direct in the program and exporting to a final JPG. I had to pull the shadows up a lot and drop the highlights down as welll due to the huge dynamic range in this shot. I can't see a spec of noise, a much better result than anything I could have gotten in lightroom.

OMD-Em5 and the panasonic 20mm lens.

Breakfast on Sunday

Firstly, thank you to everyone for their input in the thread. I too am considering the Elite version to see what I can add to my LR5 workflow especially with deformation, distortion from UWA lenses and also with noise management from the EM1 .... I have never been happy with the ORF files I get from the Oly when it comes to noise, even at ISO 400 I sort of expect better (and I get them from other systems).

But the EM1 is sweet as for travel and general lugging about so a solution would be wonderful. I have a trial version of the Elite version presently and still trying to find my way.

Anyway, my questions relates to your image of the beach scene :

At first glance the image looks a tad soft on account of perhaps the denoising process. What was the ISO you used? And finally, the person in the hat looks a little "squashed" ..... have you tried to do anything with the program to remedy that?

I am very interested to hear your specific thoughts re my queries.

And as for the workflow, your process is pretty much what I had in mind. Shame about having to import the RAW as ORF. I have been doing DNGs for forever.

David

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Muzfox
Junior MemberPosts: 38
Like?
Re: Question for Muzfox
In reply to David28, 2 months ago

David28 wrote:

Muzfox wrote:

I've only just added DXO to my workflow, my main reason was good things I've seen written about PRIME.

I must say, the results from prime are outstanding, the noise reduction and detail recovery, especially at high ISO's is phenomenal.

My current workflow is to import from my SD card into Lightroom as RAW (used to be DNG but doesn't work for DXO). I then sort my images, flag tag bin etc. From there I export straight over to DXO and let it apply the standard corrections. I then PRIME everything I just love the result.

After that, I export everything back to Lightroom as DNG and will tweak from there. Lightroom does much better with highlight/shadow recovery etc, I don't like the DXO results. Images that I want to go insane with may go onto Photoshop from there for even more work.

Basically, I'm using DXO for lens corrections and noise reduction, it does a brilliant job for that, much much better than anything I've ever been able to get in lightroom, and frankly, much better than any noise reduction I've used in Photoshop as well (Topaz, NIK etc). Lightroom is a lot faster and better for everything else imho.

Just to do something different, this image below was processed entirely in DXO, opening the RAW direct in the program and exporting to a final JPG. I had to pull the shadows up a lot and drop the highlights down as welll due to the huge dynamic range in this shot. I can't see a spec of noise, a much better result than anything I could have gotten in lightroom.

OMD-Em5 and the panasonic 20mm lens.

Breakfast on Sunday

Firstly, thank you to everyone for their input in the thread. I too am considering the Elite version to see what I can add to my LR5 workflow especially with deformation, distortion from UWA lenses and also with noise management from the EM1 .... I have never been happy with the ORF files I get from the Oly when it comes to noise, even at ISO 400 I sort of expect better (and I get them from other systems).

But the EM1 is sweet as for travel and general lugging about so a solution would be wonderful. I have a trial version of the Elite version presently and still trying to find my way.

Anyway, my questions relates to your image of the beach scene :

At first glance the image looks a tad soft on account of perhaps the denoising process. What was the ISO you used? And finally, the person in the hat looks a little "squashed" ..... have you tried to do anything with the program to remedy that?

I am very interested to hear your specific thoughts re my queries.

And as for the workflow, your process is pretty much what I had in mind. Shame about having to import the RAW as ORF. I have been doing DNGs for forever.

David

Hi David, thanks for your questions. ISO was base 200, however I had the fstop pretty wide open at around 2.2 I think, Focus landed on the tree so a lot of other items in the shot were not pinpoint. I don't think it was the denoising for the softness, just focus. DxO does some pretty full on lens corrections. This is the Panasonic 20mm lens in use. However having said that, the person in the hat was a bit "squat" so I actually think that is a fair representation of the person. If I have a chance tonight, I'll spit the image straight out of lightroom for you so you can get an idea of what has been done here. I'll also find a similar image and give you a before, DXO after, and LR after where noise reduction makes a difference.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
WW Webster
Regular MemberPosts: 141Gear list
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to Bob Tullis, 2 months ago

Bob Tullis wrote:

Photo Pete wrote:

Personally I find Lightroom every bit as good as DXO provided you take the time to set up the default conversion settings as you like them. The camera profile / clarity / sharpening and noise reduction relationships are critical to getting initial settings that you like.

I also find DXO painfully slow for conversions when using their 'PRIME' technology.

Everyone does - that's why DXO offers it as an option with that very precaution.

Not me, so 'everybody' is a little wide of the mark, although I acknowledge I'm using it (in trial mode) on the latest MacPro with a 6-core processor.

The problem may very well exist on machines with more modest CPU power, but I don't hesitate to use PRIME on every image in my environment - it's a no-brainer for me.

-- hide signature --
 WW Webster's gear list:WW Webster's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 60mm 1:2.8 Macro Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm 1:1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bob Tullis
Forum ProPosts: 26,554Gear list
Like?
Re: DXO Optics Pro and E-M1
In reply to WW Webster, 2 months ago

WW Webster wrote:

Bob Tullis wrote:

Photo Pete wrote:

Personally I find Lightroom every bit as good as DXO provided you take the time to set up the default conversion settings as you like them. The camera profile / clarity / sharpening and noise reduction relationships are critical to getting initial settings that you like.

I also find DXO painfully slow for conversions when using their 'PRIME' technology.

Everyone does - that's why DXO offers it as an option with that very precaution.

Not me, so 'everybody' is a little wide of the mark, although I acknowledge I'm using it (in trial mode) on the latest MacPro with a 6-core processor.

The problem may very well exist on machines with more modest CPU power, but I don't hesitate to use PRIME on every image in my environment - it's a no-brainer for me.

That must be sweet to work on.  But mainly, thanks for clearing up that broad-stroke assumption [g].

-- hide signature --

...Bob, NYC
http://www.bobtullis.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobtullis/
.
"Well, sometimes the magic works. . . Sometimes, it doesn't." - Chief Dan George, Little Big Man
.

 Bob Tullis's gear list:Bob Tullis's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Rokinon 7.5mm 1:3.5 UMC Fisheye CS Voigtlander Nokton 17.5mm F0.95 Aspherical Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +18 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
David28
Senior MemberPosts: 2,774
Like?
Re: Question for Muzfox
In reply to Muzfox, 2 months ago

A true gentleman you are ... and a rare commodity, especially in cyberspace. Many thanks. I shall await your followup post.

Again, thank you.

David

Muzfox wrote:

David28 wrote:


Breakfast on Sunday

Firstly, thank you to everyone for their input in the thread. I too am considering the Elite version to see what I can add to my LR5 workflow especially with deformation, distortion from UWA lenses and also with noise management from the EM1 .... I have never been happy with the ORF files I get from the Oly when it comes to noise, even at ISO 400 I sort of expect better (and I get them from other systems).

But the EM1 is sweet as for travel and general lugging about so a solution would be wonderful. I have a trial version of the Elite version presently and still trying to find my way.

Anyway, my questions relates to your image of the beach scene :

At first glance the image looks a tad soft on account of perhaps the denoising process. What was the ISO you used? And finally, the person in the hat looks a little "squashed" ..... have you tried to do anything with the program to remedy that?

I am very interested to hear your specific thoughts re my queries.

And as for the workflow, your process is pretty much what I had in mind. Shame about having to import the RAW as ORF. I have been doing DNGs for forever.

David

Hi David, thanks for your questions. ISO was base 200, however I had the fstop pretty wide open at around 2.2 I think, Focus landed on the tree so a lot of other items in the shot were not pinpoint. I don't think it was the denoising for the softness, just focus. DxO does some pretty full on lens corrections. This is the Panasonic 20mm lens in use. However having said that, the person in the hat was a bit "squat" so I actually think that is a fair representation of the person. If I have a chance tonight, I'll spit the image straight out of lightroom for you so you can get an idea of what has been done here. I'll also find a similar image and give you a before, DXO after, and LR after where noise reduction makes a difference.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads