In this video, I demo how to use DxO's PureRAW3 as a standalone application and as a plugin in Lightroom Classic; then, I compare it to the AI noise reduction that is available in Lightroom. My Ultimate Lightroom Classic Course Save $30 with Promo Code: BLACKFRIDAY2023 www.anthonymorganti.com/ultimate-lightroom-classic-training If you miss the Black Friday - Cyber Monday sale, you can save $10 with Discount Code: TENOFF Updated Lightroom Classic Keyboard Shortcuts PDF Download - It's FREE: bit.ly/LRCKBShortcuts To get more info about Lightroom, go here: prf.hn/l/lGnjDBl DxO To get more info about DxO Software, go here: tidd.ly/3MQ3uU7 Currently, I do not have a personal promo code to share. I am an Adobe and DxO affiliate and will earn a commission if you purchase anything using the links directly above. Please read my Code of Ethics Statement: onlinephotographytraining.com/code-of-ethics/ Please subscribe to my newsletter! anthonymorganti.substack.com/subscribe Contact Info: Anthony Morganti P.O. Box 805 Buffalo, New York 14220 Check out one of my newer websites - The Best in Photography: bestinphotography.com/ Here is the list of my recommended software, along with any discount codes I might have: wp.me/P9QUvD-ozx Here is a list of my current cameras, lenses, etc.: wp.me/P9QUvD-ozG Could you help me help others learn photography? You can quickly offer your support here, where I receive 100% of your kind gift: ko-fi.com/anthonymorganti You can change the default amount to the amount you want to donate.
One advantage of PR3 is that for systems like Fuji where the lens correction is normally baked in by Lightroom and can’t be disabled, you get control of it. This can help especially with wide angle shots where I might want to retain the pincushion distortion but remove chromatic aberration and vignetting.
I installed PureRaw3 today and tried it as a plugin to LR. One photo I sent, had a blade of grass over the fur of a black bear which I removed using the LR Content Aware Remove tool. PR did great, except for the oval I drew to remove the grass. In that exact oval spot, PR not only did not denoise, it actually revealed the color noise that had been swept off by LR. I compared PR to Topaz DN and PR is better on the black fur, except for the artifact. For this photo, I might have to export an intermediate and send that to PR.
PR3 is like magic when used on a supported camera and lens combo. It doesn’t do a good job with adapted lenses from other systems, at least on Fuji. For those I use the Lightroom Enhance feature, although that creates significantly larger DNG files. Often I try both on a sample photo from a session and go with whichever I like better for that session.
I use DXO Photolab which has the noise reduction of Pureraw built in, it is truly amazing in reducing noise, and as you say basically select and let er rip.
I use the faster DeePrime for low ISO shots and DeePrimeXD for ISO 3200 and above. XD doesn’t seem to help much at low iSO and it takes several times as long on my Mac.
Very nice demo and comparison. Thank you for doing this. For some reason, I always find that DxO PureRAW returns a file that is about a third to a half stop darker on overall exposure. I am not sure why it does this, but it is consistent with my set up (recent Dell XPS 17" laptop with a calibrated 27" Dell monitor). I like the results, but having to bump up the global exposure with the new file every time is a bit of a pain. Neither the Topaz products or Adobe LR Denoise AI do this. Because of this darkening problem and the fact the results are very similar, I tend to use the Denoise function in LR most of the time and occasionally Topaz Denoise. I have given up on DxO PureRAW. Again, thanks for the video! Terrific as usual.
I posted something similar earlier. My experience is a slight variance in WB and exposure. Nothing dramatic but just like you, it bums me out a bit that I need to correct WB / exposure each and every time. From what I read though, we are not alone.
Hi Anthony - I have 2 questions. #1. When using DXO Raw 3, the processed image always has a slight WB shift and a slight exposure shift. I don't see that on your pictures. #2. If I process a picture and then send it to DXO Raw3, DXO ignores the edits and reverts back to the original picture (pre-edits). Is thee a setting that I need to turn on, in order for DXO RAW 3 to take the edits into account? Thank! Luc
Some other users have voiced your Question 1 issue; I don't have an answer for that one. Try opening a DxO support ticket and be prepared to submit before and after images. Or search the DxO customer support forum. Question 2: The correct answer depends: where did you do the edits you're not seeing in PureRaw3 , in Lightroom? (You didn't say.) And are you using PureRaw 3 in standalone mode as Anthony demonstrates at the beginning of the video, or instead using in LR File > Plug-in Extras > Transfer to DxO PureRaw 3 as he demonstrates at the 8:30 mark of the video, or instead using Edit In > DxO PureRaw3, which he advises against doing? If you clarify with an additional comment here, I will offer a suggestion.
@@sounderdavis5446 Thank You for commenting. Greatly appreciated. I am glad that I am not the only one for Q1and I'll look at the DXO customer support forum - Regarding Q2, here is my workflow: Editing a picture in Lightroom (except cropping), then transferring to the LR plugin via the method recommended by Anthony (LR File > Plug In Extra > Transfer to DXO PureRaw 3). Having said that, I found out today that the edits have to be saved in a XMP file (side car) before sending it to PureRaw. I tried that, and yes, then DXO reapplies the edits based on the XMP file before sending the picture back to LR. Thinking about it, it makes sense, but I wish Anthony had mentioned that too. Thanks again! Luc
@@lucschoonjans4540 Thank you for following up in detail. That will help anyone else who also has your Question 2 issue. Anthony saves edits to XMP files in Lightroom--he has a very good UA-cam video recommending that setting generally, so he may not have encountered your issue.
Since it doesn’t use Adobe’s lens profile corrections but it’s own based on measurements, yes q1 is to be expected. For me the PR3 files are usually around 200K warmer and 0.06 brighter than Adobe’s but not always. Might depend on the lens or focal length.
Great post as usual, thanks Anthony. My findings are nearly identical to your previous posts comparing to LR, Topaz. I find PureRaw3 the consistent best. I’ve used PureRaw3 and all of the others with almost all major brand raw files. However, I get strange, nearly dark vignetting with Canon R5 files. I sent a note to DxO. They responded and asked for a couple samples, which I sent, but said they can’t duplicate the problem. I have found a couple other random posts about that online, but no answer. Would you have any idea why the Canon files are not working? Love your posts, very helpful and insightful.
That's correct, but you could instead choose to use High Quality or PRIME noise reduction in PhotoLab Elite Those two NR modes are intended for JPGs or non-compatible Raw files, though. A user processing a compatible Raw file will normally want to use DeepPRIME or DeepPRIME XD, because those work better. PureRaw 3 only works with compatible Raw files, so it doesn't offer the other two modes of noise reduction as an option.
@@sounderdavis5446 I know all that, thanks. My point is that Anthony said that in DxO Photolab Elite those two NR modes work on other formats - but they don't.
1. you can only do a video when there is a valid promo code (which is once a year) 2. they arent supporting reviewers like the other guys (which should suggest which is the good buy)
The version (tiger) you call "raw" is cooked beyond well done. It's simply the default raw conversion by Adobe Camera Raw. Very bad. Its handling of raw images from cameras without OLPF is very bad. With AI Denoise applied it is better, but it still is bad at detail extraction from the raw file. From the tiger image it's not clear if it was shot with a camera with, or without, OLPF, but whatever the answer to that, the initial raw conversion is really bad. This all is not very relevant in the context of lower resolution display, but with larger prints, say A2 size, it becomes very important.
In this video, I demo how to use DxO's PureRAW3 as a standalone application and as a plugin in Lightroom Classic; then, I compare it to the AI noise reduction that is available in Lightroom.
My Ultimate Lightroom Classic Course
Save $30 with Promo Code: BLACKFRIDAY2023
www.anthonymorganti.com/ultimate-lightroom-classic-training
If you miss the Black Friday - Cyber Monday sale, you can save $10 with Discount Code: TENOFF
Updated Lightroom Classic Keyboard Shortcuts PDF Download - It's FREE:
bit.ly/LRCKBShortcuts
To get more info about Lightroom, go here:
prf.hn/l/lGnjDBl
DxO
To get more info about DxO Software, go here:
tidd.ly/3MQ3uU7
Currently, I do not have a personal promo code to share.
I am an Adobe and DxO affiliate and will earn a commission if you purchase anything using the links directly above. Please read my Code of Ethics Statement:
onlinephotographytraining.com/code-of-ethics/
Please subscribe to my newsletter!
anthonymorganti.substack.com/subscribe
Contact Info:
Anthony Morganti
P.O. Box 805
Buffalo, New York 14220
Check out one of my newer websites - The Best in Photography:
bestinphotography.com/
Here is the list of my recommended software, along with any discount codes I might have:
wp.me/P9QUvD-ozx
Here is a list of my current cameras, lenses, etc.:
wp.me/P9QUvD-ozG
Could you help me help others learn photography? You can quickly offer your support here, where I receive 100% of your kind gift:
ko-fi.com/anthonymorganti
You can change the default amount to the amount you want to donate.
One advantage of PR3 is that for systems like Fuji where the lens correction is normally baked in by Lightroom and can’t be disabled, you get control of it. This can help especially with wide angle shots where I might want to retain the pincushion distortion but remove chromatic aberration and vignetting.
Thank you Anthony your work and Lightroom Course is very much appreciated by me
I installed PureRaw3 today and tried it as a plugin to LR. One photo I sent, had a blade of grass over the fur of a black bear which I removed using the LR Content Aware Remove tool. PR did great, except for the oval I drew to remove the grass. In that exact oval spot, PR not only did not denoise, it actually revealed the color noise that had been swept off by LR. I compared PR to Topaz DN and PR is better on the black fur, except for the artifact. For this photo, I might have to export an intermediate and send that to PR.
Hi thank you for the video, your videos are always interesting. I have Denoise but don't use it that much, but will start. Thank you once again.
PR3 is like magic when used on a supported camera and lens combo. It doesn’t do a good job with adapted lenses from other systems, at least on Fuji. For those I use the Lightroom Enhance feature, although that creates significantly larger DNG files. Often I try both on a sample photo from a session and go with whichever I like better for that session.
I use DXO Photolab which has the noise reduction of Pureraw built in, it is truly amazing in reducing noise, and as you say basically select and let er rip.
I use the faster DeePrime for low ISO shots and DeePrimeXD for ISO 3200 and above. XD doesn’t seem to help much at low iSO and it takes several times as long on my Mac.
Very nice demo and comparison. Thank you for doing this. For some reason, I always find that DxO PureRAW returns a file that is about a third to a half stop darker on overall exposure. I am not sure why it does this, but it is consistent with my set up (recent Dell XPS 17" laptop with a calibrated 27" Dell monitor). I like the results, but having to bump up the global exposure with the new file every time is a bit of a pain. Neither the Topaz products or Adobe LR Denoise AI do this. Because of this darkening problem and the fact the results are very similar, I tend to use the Denoise function in LR most of the time and occasionally Topaz Denoise. I have given up on DxO PureRAW. Again, thanks for the video! Terrific as usual.
I posted something similar earlier. My experience is a slight variance in WB and exposure. Nothing dramatic but just like you, it bums me out a bit that I need to correct WB / exposure each and every time. From what I read though, we are not alone.
Excellent - thank you for the comparison! How about the DNG-file sizes after denoise: are they comparable in size?
Hi Anthony - I have 2 questions. #1. When using DXO Raw 3, the processed image always has a slight WB shift and a slight exposure shift. I don't see that on your pictures. #2. If I process a picture and then send it to DXO Raw3, DXO ignores the edits and reverts back to the original picture (pre-edits). Is thee a setting that I need to turn on, in order for DXO RAW 3 to take the edits into account? Thank! Luc
Some other users have voiced your Question 1 issue; I don't have an answer for that one. Try opening a DxO support ticket and be prepared to submit before and after images. Or search the DxO customer support forum. Question 2: The correct answer depends: where did you do the edits you're not seeing in PureRaw3 , in Lightroom? (You didn't say.) And are you using PureRaw 3 in standalone mode as Anthony demonstrates at the beginning of the video, or instead using in LR File > Plug-in Extras > Transfer to DxO PureRaw 3 as he demonstrates at the 8:30 mark of the video, or instead using Edit In > DxO PureRaw3, which he advises against doing? If you clarify with an additional comment here, I will offer a suggestion.
@@sounderdavis5446 Thank You for commenting. Greatly appreciated. I am glad that I am not the only one for Q1and I'll look at the DXO customer support forum - Regarding Q2, here is my workflow: Editing a picture in Lightroom (except cropping), then transferring to the LR plugin via the method recommended by Anthony (LR File > Plug In Extra > Transfer to DXO PureRaw 3). Having said that, I found out today that the edits have to be saved in a XMP file (side car) before sending it to PureRaw. I tried that, and yes, then DXO reapplies the edits based on the XMP file before sending the picture back to LR. Thinking about it, it makes sense, but I wish Anthony had mentioned that too. Thanks again! Luc
@@lucschoonjans4540 Thank you for following up in detail. That will help anyone else who also has your Question 2 issue. Anthony saves edits to XMP files in Lightroom--he has a very good UA-cam video recommending that setting generally, so he may not have encountered your issue.
Since it doesn’t use Adobe’s lens profile corrections but it’s own based on measurements, yes q1 is to be expected. For me the PR3 files are usually around 200K warmer and 0.06 brighter than Adobe’s but not always. Might depend on the lens or focal length.
@@dmacnet Thank You for confirming this. It makes me feel better to know I am not imagining this 🙂
This software is a game changer if you shoot Fujifilm cameras…
Topaz Photo AI oder DXO PureRaw3?
Great post as usual, thanks Anthony. My findings are nearly identical to your previous posts comparing to LR, Topaz. I find PureRaw3 the consistent best. I’ve used PureRaw3 and all of the others with almost all major brand raw files. However, I get strange, nearly dark vignetting with Canon R5 files. I sent a note to DxO. They responded and asked for a couple samples, which I sent, but said they can’t duplicate the problem. I have found a couple other random posts about that online, but no answer. Would you have any idea why the Canon files are not working? Love your posts, very helpful and insightful.
I'm using DxO PhotoLab Elite 7 on my Windows PC and it tells me that Deep Prime and Deep Prime XD are only available for raw files.
That's correct, but you could instead choose to use High Quality or PRIME noise reduction in PhotoLab Elite Those two NR modes are intended for JPGs or non-compatible Raw files, though. A user processing a compatible Raw file will normally want to use DeepPRIME or DeepPRIME XD, because those work better. PureRaw 3 only works with compatible Raw files, so it doesn't offer the other two modes of noise reduction as an option.
@@sounderdavis5446 I know all that, thanks. My point is that Anthony said that in DxO Photolab Elite those two NR modes work on other formats - but they don't.
1. you can only do a video when there is a valid promo code (which is once a year)
2. they arent supporting reviewers like the other guys (which should suggest which is the good buy)
DeepPrimeXD output looks overprocessed almost CGI.
The version (tiger) you call "raw" is cooked beyond well done. It's simply the default raw conversion by Adobe Camera Raw. Very bad. Its handling of raw images from cameras without OLPF is very bad. With AI Denoise applied it is better, but it still is bad at detail extraction from the raw file.
From the tiger image it's not clear if it was shot with a camera with, or without, OLPF, but whatever the answer to that, the initial raw conversion is really bad.
This all is not very relevant in the context of lower resolution display, but with larger prints, say A2 size, it becomes very important.
Who
Cares