Oh yeah. I tried PL before it was called PL a few times. Optics something?
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
DxO Photolab 7 - InDepth Review - VS Lightroom VS Capture 1
- Thread starter Night Pixel
- Start date
Digital Nigel
Forum Pro
DxO Optics Pro
sybersitizen
Forum Pro
How is use by the greatest number of people different from popularity?
You're taking both sides of your argument. One of those is used by the greatest number of people. Simple question: Is that one the 'best' or not?
The analogy I like for this question is McDonald's. Statistics say people eat more of their hamburgers than those of any restaurant competitor. Are McDonald's hamburgers therefore the 'best'?
Last edited:
BobRocke
Forum Enthusiast
You're right; there is not perfect software. But I find that Lightroom Classic does everything from DAM, to local adjustments, to AI Masking, to denoise, and on to printing well enough to let me give it a pass on the things that are not best-in-class.
You’re right, caveat emptor and all that, but I read the descriptions of the products and they appeared to be different. For me, anyway, the products have a learning curve and it took a while for me to realize my mistake.No offense but you shouldn't blame DXO for your mistake.Yes, I bought the bundle from them. I looked it up. It wasn’t so much a bundle as a “buy two products and get 30% off,’ and I didn’t understand that the second product was a subset of the first.
--
Tom
I’m happy with my purchase, but at least agree that I should let others know not to buy both products.
Digital Nigel
Forum Pro
Yes, you're not the only PL user who wondered if they also needed PR. DxO should make clearer that PR is a lower priced subset of PL, aimed at people who don't have PL.You’re right, caveat emptor and all that, but I read the descriptions of the products and they appeared to be different. For me, anyway, the products have a learning curve and it took a while for me to realize my mistake.No offense but you shouldn't blame DXO for your mistake.Yes, I bought the bundle from them. I looked it up. It wasn’t so much a bundle as a “buy two products and get 30% off,’ and I didn’t understand that the second product was a subset of the first.
I’m happy with my purchase, but at least agree that I should let others know not to buy both products.
Another confusing thing is the role of NIK in the DxO product range. I already have FilmPack (which is built right into PL, unlike NIK, an acquired product). I don't think I'd get any worthwhile benefit from buying NIK, as there's so much overlap between the two, but DxO keeps promoting NIK while never explaining what it would add to my PL+FP+VP installation.
Last edited:
Box Brownie
Veteran Member
Personally I am waiting to see the Black Friday offer and whether it just might make sense to get PL7 and Film Pack for its Luminosity Masking function??? NB though I surmise they will include the LM in PL8.....but who knows???
Last edited:
I was on the DXO site the other day. There are offers for two apps at 30% off. PL7 and FP or VP which makes getting one of those side apps for free. There was also an offer for all 3.
--
You just need to keep the forests wet
Last edited:
All LrC is missing now a Sharpen AI module.
tbcass
Forum Pro
Apparently, you don't know what DXO did wrong.
tbcass
Forum Pro
It's interesting that you posted such a long response because nothing you are saying contradicts what I said. I never said one was better than the other, only that the possibility exists for some people to prefer one over the other but they will never know unless they use them all.
--
Tom
--
Tom
tbcass
Forum Pro
It's a completely different program now. What you tried was simply something to apply lens corrections.
tbcass
Forum Pro
It's not. They are the same thing.
It could be but the number of people using it does not prove it's the best.
Probably not and that is why I used that analogy. Mcdonald's is quick and convenient but I don't know any adult who thinks their hamburgers are the best, just good enough.
tbcass
Forum Pro
Of course, I agree.
sybersitizen
Forum Pro
Right. So I don't know why you commented that it's entirely possible that Photo Lab is the best for the greatest number of people. It wouldn't say anything important even if it were true.
That's the statement that matters.
Digital Nigel
Forum Pro
Not really — it's recognisably the same product, just with additional features added each year. You shouldn't make comments like that about products you never used.
Not so. It was a full, powerful raw editor, with advanced NR, but lacked local adjustments. It was the addition of the latter that triggered the name change, but PL7 is really just DOP18.
BobRocke
Forum Enthusiast
Yes. Its implementation of global sharpening goes a long way in closing the gap with others, but it's not best-in-class. I don't doubt we'll see Adobe's version - maybe even in 2024.
BobRocke
Forum Enthusiast
Yes, really.
For others who may be interested. Just to finish up over the years I've read statements of how Lightroom takes over, etc. It doesn't. I picked a file in Canon's DPP and underexposed it.All those files by year are on an external drive. I decided I wanted to edit some files from 2007. I found that folder in Canon's DPP and dragged it to my desktop. I could have used the OS as well. It does not matter whatever you because one mirrors the other. Same goes for LrC. If I move a folder that is in the LrC library that will mirror in the OS and DPP.You could do searches but at this point I'd have it is impossible to edit a file in LrC without importing it. If it is not imported it will not show up the LrC folder library thus you can't do anything with it.
Here is my LrC library.
Here is the OS and Canon DPP. I could open any other developer and see this same thing. The only reason years 2006 to 2010 are missing in the LrC library is because I didn't start using Lightroom until 2011.
If I wanted to edit files, folders or a particular year between 2006 and 2010 I'd have to import it.
That folder has been imported into LrC and I can now edit the files. Since I imported from the desktop and did not give it any location instructions it remained on the desktop. Using LrC I would normally drag that folder into one of existing years in LrC library or create a new folder called 2006. Again that change would be mirrored in the OS and DPP. LrC would have automatically moved that folder off the desktop and to the external drive.
Since I dragged that folder from the external drive it copied it (not moved it) so now there are two sets of that folder. What I did was not typical as it was just an example. To keep things tidy I'm going to delete it from the LrC library and it will still be there in OS Library.
The reason for importing files is so LrC's DAM can function correctly. It needs to read the metadata and most importantly it needs to know where the files are located, which can be anywhere.
In case anyone thinks this complex it is not. This was because of the examples. It is simple. After a shoot I plug my card in and pre-cull my files using Canon's DPP. When done I create a folder, drag those files into it and import into LrC.
After the previews are built I drag that folder into the appropriate year on the external drive. I do this using LrC, not the OS. Since LrC moved it, it knows where it is located and I don't have to worry about it. I could also instruct LrC to automate those moves if I wanted to.
A few times I used the OS to move folders but that that was for tens of thousands of files. Replacing an external drive for example. The OS is better at moving a mass amount of files. When that is complete you just have to let LrC know where you moved them.
I have been to this way since 2011. With all the version upgrades which included catalogue upgrades I've never had a single issue.
To be sure I rebooted LrC and opened that file. Since DPP is not a destructive editor it did not effect the LrC file. The benefit of LrC reading metadata at import. I'm not sure if a destructive editor would cause an issue as I've tried it to see what happens.
--
You just need to keep the forests wet
I agree. It will be a while. I kept Topaz Sharpen AI around for that when needed. Paid for and since it opens as a TIFF I'll get a lot of years out of it unless something else comes out.
Topaz still sells it which surprised me. I figured Photo AI would have been mature enough to pull it. That is Topaz's plan. They sell it with a year update support. Sharpen has not had an update since 2022
I'm pretty sure 14.0.1 is the latest.Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum