DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

Started 11 months ago | Discussions
mikeng1 New Member • Posts: 24
DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

Anyone here experimenting/have experience with using Photolab as a replacement for LR?

I've largely enjoyed using LR6 for some light tweaking of RAWs and general photo management, but I'm getting a bit nervous about Adobe effectively putting standalone LR into end-of-life state. I don't mean to get into another LR rant but between the lack of support for new bodies + lens, and having a tougher than expected time smoothing out noise in medium ISO RAWs from my new D7500 (separate story), I've dabbled with Photolab Elite and am surprisingly happy. NR for RAW is miles ahead of LR, functions like SmartLighting and Clearview take care of 60-80% of light editing work.

The most glaring omission so far is lack of DAM. Design appears to be centered entirely around editing individual pictures rather than comprehensive workflow management (import, cataloging, managing said catalog etc).

Is there an easy way to integrate DxO into LR workflow (so I continue importing in LR, but the RAWs are routing automatically to DxO for NR + lens correction before being deposited back into LR as TIFF or another format for final editing?). If you leave LR entirely for Photolab, what would you use for managing said catalog? Just copy and paste files from your SDcard into your server?

 mikeng1's gear list:mikeng1's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Nikon D7500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +1 more
Nikon D7500
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
NAwlins Contrarian Senior Member • Posts: 2,490
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

As you probably know, PhotoLab lets you install a Lightroom plugin, to which you can pass any of the files in your open Lightroom catalog. The issue appears to be that Lightroom does not do so automatically--presumably you mean upon moving to the Develop module--and I'm not aware of any way to set one (which doesn't mean there isn't).

Also, for me, as a several-years user of both Lightroom (currently 6, like you) and PhotoLab / Optics Pro--but who has no use for Lightroom's DAM functions--DxO isn't a complete replacement, mainly because:

* Lightroom's print module is far superior to DxO's print functionality.

* DxO will not process the DNGs from my Canon compacts with the CHDK firmware.

All of that said, I process my images in DxO waaaaay more than I do in Lightroom.

 NAwlins Contrarian's gear list:NAwlins Contrarian's gear list
Nikon Coolpix S30 Canon PowerShot S110 Sony Alpha DSLR-A580 Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Tamron SP 70-300mm F/4-5.6 Di USD +5 more
myotisone Senior Member • Posts: 1,507
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

mikeng1 wrote:

Is there an easy way to integrate DxO into LR workflow (so I continue importing in LR, but the RAWs are routing automatically to DxO for NR + lens correction before being deposited back into LR as TIFF or another format for final editing?). If you leave LR entirely for Photolab, what would you use for managing said catalog? Just copy and paste files from your SDcard into your server?

http://www.dxo.com/us/photography/community/tutorials/optimizing-your-dxo-opticspro-10-and-lightroom-workflow

Not exactly as you suggest but works well

Cheers,

Graham

Dave Symington Forum Member • Posts: 63
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

mikeng1 wrote:

The most glaring omission so far is lack of DAM. Design appears to be centered entirely around editing individual pictures rather than comprehensive workflow management (import, cataloging, managing said catalog etc).

I now use iMatch as my DAM. I used it many years ago and then switched to LR as a DAM, raw processor and editor. Now I've transferred all my images to iMatch and from there I can edit them in LR (for the older ones that already have edits in LR), DXO or ACDSee (I pass Fuji X-Trans images through this before doing the main editing in DXO).

mujana Veteran Member • Posts: 5,583
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?
1

mikeng1 wrote:

Anyone here experimenting/have experience with using Photolab as a replacement for LR?

I've largely enjoyed using LR6 for some light tweaking of RAWs and general photo management, but I'm getting a bit nervous about Adobe effectively putting standalone LR into end-of-life state. I don't mean to get into another LR rant but between the lack of support for new bodies + lens, and having a tougher than expected time smoothing out noise in medium ISO RAWs from my new D7500 (separate story), I've dabbled with Photolab Elite and am surprisingly happy. NR for RAW is miles ahead of LR, functions like SmartLighting and Clearview take care of 60-80% of light editing work.

The most glaring omission so far is lack of DAM. Design appears to be centered entirely around editing individual pictures rather than comprehensive workflow management (import, cataloging, managing said catalog etc).

Is there an easy way to integrate DxO into LR workflow (so I continue importing in LR, but the RAWs are routing automatically to DxO for NR + lens correction before being deposited back into LR as TIFF or another format for final editing?). If you leave LR entirely for Photolab, what would you use for managing said catalog? Just copy and paste files from your SDcard into your server?

I bought DXO Photo Suite this afternoon, as a replacement for Lightroom. See my post here on this forum.

 mujana's gear list:mujana's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony a7R II Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 +4 more
xPhoenix
xPhoenix Senior Member • Posts: 1,523
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

Meh, I'm still waiting for a LR replacement.  I've been trialing C1 Pro, but I'm not really feeling it.  I also tried DxO, and it works well.  I like that they have a lot of profiles to choose from as a starting point, and some of their features like smart lighting worked nicely.

I would prefer to have software with DAM, and I just like the workflow in LR better.  DxO just seems a bit cluttered, and it seemed to lag a bit, speed wise.

I'd love to ditch Adobe, but I've yet to find something I like as much (or better).  One huge thing for me is that I like Nikon's color rendering.  I don't want to shoot jpeg, but I can re-create this look in LR with the camera calibration profiles.  Why no other manufacturer has bothered to include this feature is beyond me.

OP mikeng1 New Member • Posts: 24
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

I thought Photolab also had camera calibration profiles. In fact, I find their profiles for Nikons to be far too rich and saturated (the Canon profiles are much less intense and more realistic, but that almost defies the purpose of using a profile)

xPhoenix wrote:

Meh, I'm still waiting for a LR replacement. I've been trialing C1 Pro, but I'm not really feeling it. I also tried DxO, and it works well. I like that they have a lot of profiles to choose from as a starting point, and some of their features like smart lighting worked nicely.

I would prefer to have software with DAM, and I just like the workflow in LR better. DxO just seems a bit cluttered, and it seemed to lag a bit, speed wise.

I'd love to ditch Adobe, but I've yet to find something I like as much (or better). One huge thing for me is that I like Nikon's color rendering. I don't want to shoot jpeg, but I can re-create this look in LR with the camera calibration profiles. Why no other manufacturer has bothered to include this feature is beyond me.

 mikeng1's gear list:mikeng1's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Nikon D7500 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm 1:1.8 Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 +1 more
xPhoenix
xPhoenix Senior Member • Posts: 1,523
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

mikeng1 wrote:

I thought Photolab also had camera calibration profiles. In fact, I find their profiles for Nikons to be far too rich and saturated (the Canon profiles are much less intense and more realistic, but that almost defies the purpose of using a profile)

xPhoenix wrote:

Meh, I'm still waiting for a LR replacement. I've been trialing C1 Pro, but I'm not really feeling it. I also tried DxO, and it works well. I like that they have a lot of profiles to choose from as a starting point, and some of their features like smart lighting worked nicely.

I would prefer to have software with DAM, and I just like the workflow in LR better. DxO just seems a bit cluttered, and it seemed to lag a bit, speed wise.

I'd love to ditch Adobe, but I've yet to find something I like as much (or better). One huge thing for me is that I like Nikon's color rendering. I don't want to shoot jpeg, but I can re-create this look in LR with the camera calibration profiles. Why no other manufacturer has bothered to include this feature is beyond me.

They do have some different ones to choose from.  There is a neutral profile, neutral tonality one that's not bad.  DxO did seem pretty nice, but no DAM.  Maybe in the future?

Austinian
Austinian Veteran Member • Posts: 7,472
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?
2

xPhoenix wrote:

mikeng1 wrote:

I thought Photolab also had camera calibration profiles. In fact, I find their profiles for Nikons to be far too rich and saturated (the Canon profiles are much less intense and more realistic, but that almost defies the purpose of using a profile)

xPhoenix wrote:

Meh, I'm still waiting for a LR replacement. I've been trialing C1 Pro, but I'm not really feeling it. I also tried DxO, and it works well. I like that they have a lot of profiles to choose from as a starting point, and some of their features like smart lighting worked nicely.

I would prefer to have software with DAM, and I just like the workflow in LR better. DxO just seems a bit cluttered, and it seemed to lag a bit, speed wise.

I'd love to ditch Adobe, but I've yet to find something I like as much (or better). One huge thing for me is that I like Nikon's color rendering. I don't want to shoot jpeg, but I can re-create this look in LR with the camera calibration profiles. Why no other manufacturer has bothered to include this feature is beyond me.

They do have some different ones to choose from. There is a neutral profile, neutral tonality one that's not bad. DxO did seem pretty nice, but no DAM. Maybe in the future?

I don't want a DAM in PhotoLab unless it is purely optional; avoiding a built-in, near-mandatory DAM was one (of several) reasons I chose Optics Pro rather than LR.

 Austinian's gear list:Austinian's gear list
Sony a7 II Sony a7R III Sony FE 28mm F2 Samyang 135mm F2.0 Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro +2 more
mujana Veteran Member • Posts: 5,583
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

Austinian wrote:

xPhoenix wrote:

mikeng1 wrote:

I thought Photolab also had camera calibration profiles. In fact, I find their profiles for Nikons to be far too rich and saturated (the Canon profiles are much less intense and more realistic, but that almost defies the purpose of using a profile)

xPhoenix wrote:

Meh, I'm still waiting for a LR replacement. I've been trialing C1 Pro, but I'm not really feeling it. I also tried DxO, and it works well. I like that they have a lot of profiles to choose from as a starting point, and some of their features like smart lighting worked nicely.

I would prefer to have software with DAM, and I just like the workflow in LR better. DxO just seems a bit cluttered, and it seemed to lag a bit, speed wise.

I'd love to ditch Adobe, but I've yet to find something I like as much (or better). One huge thing for me is that I like Nikon's color rendering. I don't want to shoot jpeg, but I can re-create this look in LR with the camera calibration profiles. Why no other manufacturer has bothered to include this feature is beyond me.

They do have some different ones to choose from. There is a neutral profile, neutral tonality one that's not bad. DxO did seem pretty nice, but no DAM. Maybe in the future?

I don't want a DAM in PhotoLab unless it is purely optional; avoiding a built-in, near-mandatory DAM was one (of several) reasons I chose Optics Pro rather than LR.

Why?

 mujana's gear list:mujana's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony a7R II Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 +4 more
fuego6
fuego6 Senior Member • Posts: 2,287
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

DAM = IMatch... pick whatever RAW editor you may like... the rest doesn't matter.

mujana Veteran Member • Posts: 5,583
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

fuego6 wrote:

DAM = IMatch... pick whatever RAW editor you may like... the rest doesn't matter.

Nice...for iMac...? 

 mujana's gear list:mujana's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sony a7R II Zeiss Batis 85mm F1.8 Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 +4 more
Austinian
Austinian Veteran Member • Posts: 7,472
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

mujana wrote:

Austinian wrote:

xPhoenix wrote:

mikeng1 wrote:

I thought Photolab also had camera calibration profiles. In fact, I find their profiles for Nikons to be far too rich and saturated (the Canon profiles are much less intense and more realistic, but that almost defies the purpose of using a profile)

xPhoenix wrote:

Meh, I'm still waiting for a LR replacement. I've been trialing C1 Pro, but I'm not really feeling it. I also tried DxO, and it works well. I like that they have a lot of profiles to choose from as a starting point, and some of their features like smart lighting worked nicely.

I would prefer to have software with DAM, and I just like the workflow in LR better. DxO just seems a bit cluttered, and it seemed to lag a bit, speed wise.

I'd love to ditch Adobe, but I've yet to find something I like as much (or better). One huge thing for me is that I like Nikon's color rendering. I don't want to shoot jpeg, but I can re-create this look in LR with the camera calibration profiles. Why no other manufacturer has bothered to include this feature is beyond me.

They do have some different ones to choose from. There is a neutral profile, neutral tonality one that's not bad. DxO did seem pretty nice, but no DAM. Maybe in the future?

I don't want a DAM in PhotoLab unless it is purely optional; avoiding a built-in, near-mandatory DAM was one (of several) reasons I chose Optics Pro rather than LR.

Why?

I see DAM as an entirely separate function from raw processing. A mandatory DAM makes it harder to switch raw processors if a different, superior raw processor arrives.

 Austinian's gear list:Austinian's gear list
Sony a7 II Sony a7R III Sony FE 28mm F2 Samyang 135mm F2.0 Sony FE 50mm F2.8 Macro +2 more
jjacoberger Junior Member • Posts: 40
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

Austinian wrote:

I see DAM as an entirely separate function from raw processing. A mandatory DAM makes it harder to switch raw processors if a different, superior raw processor arrives.

+1

I totally agree with this, any why I chose Photo Supreme as a standalone DAM tool.

FX Robot
FX Robot New Member • Posts: 7
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

I recently ditched LR5.7 for DxO Photolab Elite and Viewpoint3 and IMO DxO is is by far and away a better raw processor than LR 5.7. I do not need DAM and hope DxO do not clutter it up with it, as others allude to you can get a separate dedicated DAM. Maybe the difference is more narrow than with LR6 not sure I never used it, standalone is dead and I don't want to subscribe.

Smartlighting, clearview and Prime NR are excellent tools with Prime doing a superb job on the RX100 high ISO files.  My D610 files are looking great in DxO so I have spent time revisiting some of the images I processed in LR and have seen improvements. PL takes longer to load up on my laptop but is quicker in actual use.

Haven't actually used the Nik tools very much but on occasion when I have the results are good and it integrates well, nice to be able to use Nik on raw files.

I don't miss LR and clearly Adobe are not missing my money! So a definite DxO convert here.

-- hide signature --

Rgds
John

 FX Robot's gear list:FX Robot's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon 35mm F1.8G ED
robgendreau Veteran Member • Posts: 5,204
Re: DxO Photolab as LR replacement?

jjacoberger wrote:

Austinian wrote:

I see DAM as an entirely separate function from raw processing. A mandatory DAM makes it harder to switch raw processors if a different, superior raw processor arrives.

+1

I totally agree with this, any why I chose Photo Supreme as a standalone DAM tool.

How does it make it harder to switch raw processors? (although I'm not sure what a "mandatory" digital asset manager is). Every DAM I'm aware of has an "edit with" type command.

I use DxO but prefer it stay as it is. Adding what would be a mediocre DAM would just get in the way. It works great in conjunction with Lr; love how I can send DNGs back from DxO to Lr and thence on to Ps if necessary. The Nik additions were a smart move IMHO; rather unique in the local adjustment world.

-- hide signature --

“Art is not what you see, but what you make others see.”
— Edgar Degas

 robgendreau's gear list:robgendreau's gear list
Pentax K-1 II
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads