Had to put the video on pause for this: Lightroom doesn't alter the RAW files in any way whatsoever. Any change you "apply" on a raw are just some infos (on settings/sliders/curves etc) saved in a database that are recalled later every time you view/edit that file. DXO (be it PureRaw or Photolab), doesn't care either about those LR "changes". It opens the "pure RAW" file, regardless of the "edits" made prior in LR. So, for the purpose of just sending a RAW file from LR to DXO, setting a specific color profile and sharpen to zero is a waste of time. More so, since DXO automatically presets the sharpening slider to zero anyway before the DNG is sent to LR. Though, the beauty of how LR works with DXO is that if you decide to send an already LR heavily edited raw to DXO at some point, the DNG it returns is the unaltered RAW file + the conversions of DXO to DNG + the initial LR edits applied on top. Only limitation is not to touch the LR Denoise before sending it to DOX (which make sense, since LR also creates a new DNG for denoising) On the same theme: in another video about OM settings, although you shoot RAW only, you bothered to set the color space from SuperRGB to Adobe. That has zero effects on the RAW files. It only affects the JPGs the camera produces when converting the RAW to JPG internally. The only theoretical difference would be that the camera displays the images using the JPG settings (including probably the color space) and it renders the exposure based on the JPG. But on that tiny camera's monitor it wouldn't make a difference, and note that I'm talking about the color space, not color profiles (Muted / Natural etc). Those indeed can indirectly affect how the camera exposes (actually how you judge exposure). Now, please pardon my weak french and let's hope all this makes sense... 🙂 PS. OM System should pay you a comission. You're one of the reasons I jumped from the magical full-frame (and retarded R7) to the blamed, low-life micro mini junk DOF sensor of OM-1 M2. 🙂
First, thank you for the kind words and welcome to the OM System family! I hope I followed your meaning but if English is your second language, it is WAY better than any second language I would have! So, if you send a file to DxO PureRaw with edits done in LR, it returns a DNG with ALL the same edits applied! I prefer to do any editing after pre-sharpening and noise reduction because that will have a big impact on what I might do AFTER it is processed in DxO PureRaw. With regards to shooting in sRGB and Adobe RGB, there is 100% a difference in your images! I just did another test shot in my living room and will share the difference in the images in a video. The histograms are different, there is way more detail in the Adobe RGB shadows and the file IS bigger! I have heard this from several photographers, I am curious why people think a larger color space wouldn't have more data, that is just common sense to me.
Great timing of this video. I just purchased Pure Raw 4. Now I can learn your steps of processing using LrC & PR4 to get the best results with the OM-1.2! Thanks!
Really good practical advice Lee. The processed files are big so I was considering dumping the original raw to save space. However your only process the best comment made me think that I am keeping too much rubbish. Thanks for that! 👍
did you make sure to see which was RAW file and which was DxO Pure Raw file? They aren't necessarily in the same order depending upon which file I click first in the compare!
Completely agree about this software. I found the DeepPRIME XD to be a bit overdone, so I usually just used the DeepPRIME in version 3. But version 4 DeepPRIME XD2 has dialed it in nicely -- amazing software. It does only work on RAW files, so the Topaz software is handy to have for things like scanned slides. If anyone complains about noise at ISO 6400, they should see what ASA 400 looked like on slide film!
I could actually toss most of mine! I cringe at most of the work I did back then. But there are some surprisingly good keepers, family stuff and scans I've done for others that they need to revisit every now and then. I'm glad you started up with your UA-cam postings again -- lots of great information! I've been very happy with my OM-1, but I'm interested in how the new OM-1.2 autofocus differs from the first version. I keep hearing that it has been refined, or "re-imagined", but no definitive information.
I have DXO Photo Lab 7 Elite but they have not updated pure raw in that software so I can process images from my OM1 Mark II. I have been looking at purchasing Pure Raw 4 and this makes sense to purchase now. I can process in LR and PS but DXO handles the ORF files better. Thanks for the timely video.
DXO Photo Lab 7 Elite has updated the software to accept the OM1 MarkII raw files. Hope to join you in the field in the future. Keep the videos coming. @@leehoyphotography
A couple of minor points. When you select process instantly in DXO Pureraw4 a dialog box pops up showing you what you are about to do (processing type and output). These have an edit button allowing you to change them. When the output image displays in the dxo collection you can right click on the image and use "go to folder in library" this will take you to the DXO subfolder directly (so you just need to click on the folder above to get to 'original folder') I assume if you are placing the dxo output in the original folder it will get you there immediately. (I prefer the subfolder because a) the images still display in the original folder; and b) it gives me a simple way of just scrolling through the dxo images for edit and display). I think that DXO operates on the original raw file so you don't need to change any sharpening or colour space settings before you pass the image to dxo. When mine come back from dxo the sharpening is already set to 0 but that is possible through some lightroom or dxo config that I can't remember.
Yes, I am aware of that edit button which is sort of stupid given that the point is to process the image quickly. I didn't bring it up as I was trying to keep it as straightforward as possible for folks new to DxO PureRaw 4. It is an option, but if I wanted to change something, I would simply choose the other processing option. Yes, I use click on image and find in library all the time, but want to make a different video just about using a couple of tools like that in Lightroom to find images! So many video ideas but so little time. I am a control freak and I still will always import into Lightroom with a preset that makes sure the file is ready for DxO PureRaw 4. I am just not as trusting as many, applying a preset on import is so easy, I don't worry about an extra step. Too many things in life not even related to photography means I do it myself! Because, if it is screwed up, I am the only one to blame! You know, like "crapyoucantavoid." Hahaha, love that username!
@@leehoyphotography I think that the greatly improved photo editing software OM-systems will help a lot with better sales results. Om-systems has always been very progressive with in-camera options. the Olympus M-zuiko lenses are also very good. If Om manages to give the censor more pixels, it would help them a little extra to acquire a better market position. It will not be due to the Om-system ambassadors and their efforts.👍🙏
I hate everything Auto ISO chooses to be! ;) So, no I would rather learn how to read light and develop an internal database of ISO's and be able to pick an appropriate one!
I am finding my results are just as good for wildlife (can't say I see a huge difference, but minor one), but I feel with landscape images it is a lot better. But no hard core testing!
Great information, thank you!!! I did the free trial and played around with it for a couple of days and then decided to purchase it. Like you, I'm not a fan of the collection option. Something else I found I don't like is when I add metadata to the original ORF file in Lightroom (label, city, state, country/region, sublocation, copyright info) and then export to DxO PureRAW 4, when the new DNG file comes back into Lightroom all the data I added to the original ORF files are blank in the new DNG files. It appears the data is not transferring when the DNG is created in DxO. Am I missing a setting somewhere???
Even before I get in front of a computer, I cull the images in-camera (star-rating + erase all). Then, I just select everything that's on the SD card, throw it into PureRaw, and go do something else. That way, I come back to a folder of de-noised, optically corrected DNG files. The big advantage of DxO PR is that it doesn't degrade files taken at low ISO, so no cherry-picking is necessary. I just wanted to share an alternative workflow, in case it's useful to someone.
NEVER ever delete cards in camera, that is the #1 cause of memory card issues. I will never recommend that to any photographer. Also, why do I want to waste time in the field deleting images. I have never seen a great image captured while looking down at a camera! ;) Plus, I can't imagine culling 5000+ images in camera! I would quit photography today! Might work for some, but wouldn't work for me! Thanks for watching!
Hi Lee, you made a comment about LRc does not handle OM systems raw file so well. Does this mean that it would be better to process all images in DxO instead of LRc. I may have misunderstood?
Well, I made it in reference to Capture One doing a better job right off the start with all OM Raw files than Lightroom. Honestly, I use DxO on all images at ISO 1600 and above. Not usually on landscape images, but every now and then. But remember, I only edit about 1% or less of ALL my images due to time and only doing the best of the best! Did that help?
@14:56 - this is something I dont like about PureRAW 4 - It changes the sharpness as it uses AI machine learning which overrides the actual RAW processing job. I believe PureRAW should have a separate AI processing panel - in this panel, they could include all the AI related variables. Otherwise, the AI driven RAW processing wont be a good option at least at this stage as AI is still more of prototype.
So far, I would say it is pretty close in output. Not a giant difference to me, but I think with a lot of technology in photography, software, etc. We are reaching the point on the curve where future advancements will be negligible (and still be able to call it photography)!
Thank you Lee! I’ve had DxO for several years and used it stand alone only. I going to use this guide going forward.
You bet, glad you enjoyed it!
Had to put the video on pause for this: Lightroom doesn't alter the RAW files in any way whatsoever. Any change you "apply" on a raw are just some infos (on settings/sliders/curves etc) saved in a database that are recalled later every time you view/edit that file. DXO (be it PureRaw or Photolab), doesn't care either about those LR "changes". It opens the "pure RAW" file, regardless of the "edits" made prior in LR.
So, for the purpose of just sending a RAW file from LR to DXO, setting a specific color profile and sharpen to zero is a waste of time. More so, since DXO automatically presets the sharpening slider to zero anyway before the DNG is sent to LR. Though, the beauty of how LR works with DXO is that if you decide to send an already LR heavily edited raw to DXO at some point, the DNG it returns is the unaltered RAW file + the conversions of DXO to DNG + the initial LR edits applied on top. Only limitation is not to touch the LR Denoise before sending it to DOX (which make sense, since LR also creates a new DNG for denoising)
On the same theme: in another video about OM settings, although you shoot RAW only, you bothered to set the color space from SuperRGB to Adobe. That has zero effects on the RAW files. It only affects the JPGs the camera produces when converting the RAW to JPG internally. The only theoretical difference would be that the camera displays the images using the JPG settings (including probably the color space) and it renders the exposure based on the JPG. But on that tiny camera's monitor it wouldn't make a difference, and note that I'm talking about the color space, not color profiles (Muted / Natural etc). Those indeed can indirectly affect how the camera exposes (actually how you judge exposure).
Now, please pardon my weak french and let's hope all this makes sense... 🙂
PS. OM System should pay you a comission. You're one of the reasons I jumped from the magical full-frame (and retarded R7) to the blamed, low-life micro mini junk DOF sensor of OM-1 M2. 🙂
First, thank you for the kind words and welcome to the OM System family! I hope I followed your meaning but if English is your second language, it is WAY better than any second language I would have! So, if you send a file to DxO PureRaw with edits done in LR, it returns a DNG with ALL the same edits applied! I prefer to do any editing after pre-sharpening and noise reduction because that will have a big impact on what I might do AFTER it is processed in DxO PureRaw. With regards to shooting in sRGB and Adobe RGB, there is 100% a difference in your images! I just did another test shot in my living room and will share the difference in the images in a video. The histograms are different, there is way more detail in the Adobe RGB shadows and the file IS bigger! I have heard this from several photographers, I am curious why people think a larger color space wouldn't have more data, that is just common sense to me.
@@leehoyphotography I find DxO PR4 ignores all prior edits in LR and the returned DNG even has sharpening reset to zero.
You will be Wellcome to Spain. I will check the your web, thanks.
Looking forward to April 2025! Should have listed by mid-July!
Another great video, thanks!
You bet, thanks for watching and commenting!
Great timing of this video. I just purchased Pure Raw 4. Now I can learn your steps of processing using LrC & PR4 to get the best results with the OM-1.2! Thanks!
You are welcome! Glad the timing was great! Thanks for watching and commenting!
Really good practical advice Lee. The processed files are big so I was considering dumping the original raw to save space. However your only process the best comment made me think that I am keeping too much rubbish. Thanks for that! 👍
Most likely! ;) Cull, pick the top of the top, post process, share! ;) Thanks for watching!
very useful information, helped me configure my workflow in PureRaw 4
Glad to hear it Tony! Hope you are having fun photographing somewhere at somepoint!
Thanks again, Lee. This was very helpful.
You are welcome!
Excellent tutorial. Thanks for sharing.
Love these comments, makes the hard work worth it!
Last pic of bird seems to have more detail in the feathers in the raw unprocessed file.
did you make sure to see which was RAW file and which was DxO Pure Raw file? They aren't necessarily in the same order depending upon which file I click first in the compare!
Completely agree about this software. I found the DeepPRIME XD to be a bit overdone, so I usually just used the DeepPRIME in version 3. But version 4 DeepPRIME XD2 has dialed it in nicely -- amazing software.
It does only work on RAW files, so the Topaz software is handy to have for things like scanned slides. If anyone complains about noise at ISO 6400, they should see what ASA 400 looked like on slide film!
Hahah, omg, scanning slides! Now you are taking back to a task I hated so much, that I actually just tossed a ton of slides many years ago!
I could actually toss most of mine! I cringe at most of the work I did back then. But there are some surprisingly good keepers, family stuff and scans I've done for others that they need to revisit every now and then. I'm glad you started up with your UA-cam postings again -- lots of great information! I've been very happy with my OM-1, but I'm interested in how the new OM-1.2 autofocus differs from the first version. I keep hearing that it has been refined, or "re-imagined", but no definitive information.
Thanks!
Thank you very much sir!
I have DXO Photo Lab 7 Elite but they have not updated pure raw in that software so I can process images from my OM1 Mark II. I have been looking at purchasing Pure Raw 4 and this makes sense to purchase now. I can process in LR and PS but DXO handles the ORF files better. Thanks for the timely video.
Hey James, glad it helped sir! Hope you are getting out and about to shoot in some fun locales!
DXO Photo Lab 7 Elite has updated the software to accept the OM1 MarkII raw files. Hope to join you in the field in the future. Keep the videos coming. @@leehoyphotography
A couple of minor points.
When you select process instantly in DXO Pureraw4 a dialog box pops up showing you what you are about to do (processing type and output). These have an edit button allowing you to change them.
When the output image displays in the dxo collection you can right click on the image and use "go to folder in library" this will take you to the DXO subfolder directly (so you just need to click on the folder above to get to 'original folder') I assume if you are placing the dxo output in the original folder it will get you there immediately. (I prefer the subfolder because a) the images still display in the original folder; and b) it gives me a simple way of just scrolling through the dxo images for edit and display).
I think that DXO operates on the original raw file so you don't need to change any sharpening or colour space settings before you pass the image to dxo. When mine come back from dxo the sharpening is already set to 0 but that is possible through some lightroom or dxo config that I can't remember.
Yes, I am aware of that edit button which is sort of stupid given that the point is to process the image quickly. I didn't bring it up as I was trying to keep it as straightforward as possible for folks new to DxO PureRaw 4. It is an option, but if I wanted to change something, I would simply choose the other processing option. Yes, I use click on image and find in library all the time, but want to make a different video just about using a couple of tools like that in Lightroom to find images! So many video ideas but so little time. I am a control freak and I still will always import into Lightroom with a preset that makes sure the file is ready for DxO PureRaw 4. I am just not as trusting as many, applying a preset on import is so easy, I don't worry about an extra step. Too many things in life not even related to photography means I do it myself! Because, if it is screwed up, I am the only one to blame! You know, like "crapyoucantavoid." Hahaha, love that username!
@@leehoyphotography Thanks for the reply - keep up the fine videos
hi Lee
great video with clear explanations and examples. Om-systems and DXO are good partners for each other.❤
Their software totally changed my high ISO image processing and significantly reduced total time processing them!
@@leehoyphotography I think that the greatly improved photo editing software OM-systems will help a lot with better sales results. Om-systems has always been very progressive with in-camera options. the Olympus M-zuiko lenses are also very good. If Om manages to give the censor more pixels, it would help them a little extra to acquire a better market position. It will not be due to the Om-system ambassadors and their efforts.👍🙏
Great video, wondering if you pick your iso and how, or do you use auto ISO?
I hate everything Auto ISO chooses to be! ;) So, no I would rather learn how to read light and develop an internal database of ISO's and be able to pick an appropriate one!
Hi Lee. Do you find 4 produces better output than 3?
I am finding my results are just as good for wildlife (can't say I see a huge difference, but minor one), but I feel with landscape images it is a lot better. But no hard core testing!
Great information, thank you!!! I did the free trial and played around with it for a couple of days and then decided to purchase it. Like you, I'm not a fan of the collection option. Something else I found I don't like is when I add metadata to the original ORF file in Lightroom (label, city, state, country/region, sublocation, copyright info) and then export to DxO PureRAW 4, when the new DNG file comes back into Lightroom all the data I added to the original ORF files are blank in the new DNG files. It appears the data is not transferring when the DNG is created in DxO. Am I missing a setting somewhere???
I am going to have to look into that! I hadn't noticed that happening to me!
Even before I get in front of a computer, I cull the images in-camera (star-rating + erase all). Then, I just select everything that's on the SD card, throw it into PureRaw, and go do something else. That way, I come back to a folder of de-noised, optically corrected DNG files. The big advantage of DxO PR is that it doesn't degrade files taken at low ISO, so no cherry-picking is necessary.
I just wanted to share an alternative workflow, in case it's useful to someone.
NEVER ever delete cards in camera, that is the #1 cause of memory card issues. I will never recommend that to any photographer. Also, why do I want to waste time in the field deleting images. I have never seen a great image captured while looking down at a camera! ;) Plus, I can't imagine culling 5000+ images in camera! I would quit photography today! Might work for some, but wouldn't work for me! Thanks for watching!
Hi Lee, you made a comment about LRc does not handle OM systems raw file so well. Does this mean that it would be better to process all images in DxO instead of LRc. I may have misunderstood?
Well, I made it in reference to Capture One doing a better job right off the start with all OM Raw files than Lightroom. Honestly, I use DxO on all images at ISO 1600 and above. Not usually on landscape images, but every now and then. But remember, I only edit about 1% or less of ALL my images due to time and only doing the best of the best! Did that help?
Thank Lee, it does answer my question@@leehoyphotography
@14:56 - this is something I dont like about PureRAW 4 - It changes the sharpness as it uses AI machine learning which overrides the actual RAW processing job. I believe PureRAW should have a separate AI processing panel - in this panel, they could include all the AI related variables. Otherwise, the AI driven RAW processing wont be a good option at least at this stage as AI is still more of prototype.
Thanks!
Wow, thank you for the thoughtfulness! Glad you are enjoying my channel and I am VERY thankful!
Hi Lee. Do you find 4 produces better output than 3?
So far, I would say it is pretty close in output. Not a giant difference to me, but I think with a lot of technology in photography, software, etc. We are reaching the point on the curve where future advancements will be negligible (and still be able to call it photography)!