DXO Pure Raw, ACDSee, and m43s (long)

Started 4 weeks ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Glen Barrington
Glen Barrington Forum Pro • Posts: 21,519
DXO Pure Raw, ACDSee, and m43s (long)
8

I just downloaded the DXO Pure Raw trial on the advice of a Peter Fosgard review on YouTube. DXO claims this software will work with any 3rd party software that can read a linear DNG file.

At last, a compelling reason to use DNG! AND, I suspect this level of AI technology will render sensor size arguments fairly moot, except for special situations.

Clearly, the software is designed with Lightroom and Photoshop in mind since the workflow seems optimized for batch conversion and application of Deep Prime features to DNG for Lr, but it works fairly well with ACDSee, even in batch mode. It's not quite as smooth as I suspect it is with Lr, but it works quite well in single photo mode and was reasonably fast and responsive when processing a batch of 2 photos on my modestly equipped Lenovo Desktop 12 GB Ram, i7-6700 CPR clocked at 3.4 Ghz, Nvidia GForce 730 with 2 GB onboard ram. It took about 2.5 minutes to process two 12 GB 4/3s E-30 DSLR photos in batch.

I have set up ACDSee to work with OneDrive to allow OneDrive to act as my primary storage for photos. DXO Pure Raw didn't like that and gave me errors when trying to write directly to OneDrive. (Not sure why, as far as Windows is concerned a write to OneDrive IS a local HD save.) However moving and subsequent saving to the true local HD caused no problems at all. Export To ACDSee and Affinity Photo was not problematic at all.

On the photo below, I was not impressed at first, the DXO enhanced photo appeared to be processed too aggressively the DXO display diagonal lines were kind of jagged. But after export to ACDSee, the IQ was quite good compared to the original, and showed nothing I didn't want to see! So don't automatically judge DXO Pure Raw by what it shows you, wait until you have returned it to your normal workflow before judging. I wonder if it is related to the fact that it is an E-30 image? I don't know.

I hope you can see the difference, but it is substantial.

Pure Raw would not process my E-500 DSLR photos which is no surprise since the trial of Photolab 4 didn't either.

Below, is a comparison sample of an Olympus E-M5III m43s image shot at ISO 25,600. This is pretty darned good in my opinion and supports my speculation that the new AI technology is beginning to render sensor size arguments irrelevant except for special situations.

Again, an extremely noticeable difference. This single 20mp image took a little over a minute to process in DXO Pure Raw.

I am pleased enough with DXO Pure Raw to buy it before the introductory sale expires, I think. I like that I don't have to give up my existing workflow to get the advantages of DXOs Deep Prime. Plus, it is more cost effective even at full price than Topaz's separate modules. But then again, I can use the Topaz products on ALL my images.

I also suspect that this will cause other software publishers ( Esp, ACDSee and CaptureOne, Lr's main competitors), to re-evaluate their feature sets, and maybe, their pricing structures.

 Glen Barrington's gear list:Glen Barrington's gear list
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Olympus E-M5 III Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm 1:4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G Vario 7-14mm F4 ASPH Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 40-150mm 1:4.0-5.6 +11 more
Olympus E-30 Olympus E-M5 III
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow