DxO Pure Raw - Deep Prime: Software review
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 вер 2024
- DxO Pure Raw - Deep Prime: Software review
Disclaimer
I was not paid by DxO to produce this product review and I paid for my own copy of the software. If, however, you click on the link to DxO below and make a purchase I will get a referral fee.
DxO Pure Raw 3: tidd.ly/3yFunCz
DxO Pure Raw: tidd.ly/3oUfyHp
Topaz Photo AI: www.topazlabs....
Ultra HD Album of images: flic.kr/s/aHBq...
Mark Galer is a Sony Alpha Ambassador for Australia.
Join Mark Galer on Patreon for the best Alpha Support and Guidance. A single $10 Membership fee includes access to member-only Q&A Forums + Over twenty 1-hour member-only seminars, 'over 15 downloadable' eBooks + cameras settings files (there is no contract or commitment beyond the first month). / markgaler
Mark's supporting website: www.markgaler.com
If you find Mark's work for the Alpha community helpful please consider making a donation to support the creation of new learning resources for Alpha users. Go the Donations link: www.paypal.com...
#SonyAustralia #SonyAlpha #SonyAmbassador #SonyAlphaANZ
I started using Dx0 Pure Raw (1) while using a Sony AR7II. Now using a Sony AR7IV, and using DxO Pure Raw 2. Can't say enough good about it.
But there was a bonus I wasn't expecting. I had used a Canon G9 for years, shooting RAW. I discovered DxO Pure Raw processes RAW files from many advanced point and shoot cameras! Pure Raw breathed new life into my G9 images - simply amazing results!
Likewise - I revisited some of my high ISO shots captured with my RX100VII and was amazed at the results :-)
See my comment, it complements yours perfectly !
Those results are quite amazing! I'll buy the software and revisit some old, noisy pictures. Thank you for your detailed review!
Revisiting old photos is amazing.
Thanks for this, Mark. A quick test for myself reveals that DxO does a better job (subjectively) than Topaz Denoise and NIC Define2 on couple of A7R III RAW files @ 6400 ISO. So, I don't regret my purchase ;-)
Purchase DxO Pure Raw: tidd.ly/3zZlTrs
If it wasn't so slow (even on a 14-core, 4Ghz i9) I'd just use it as my default RAW converter. As it is, I import RAW and run only selected ones through PureRAW2 - and then only the pics that really show the benefit from it. Then onto normal post-processing. It is very good software.
I didn't realise PureRAW corrects motion blur at first. It does, and it does an unbelievably good job at it too. Thought my low-light handheld technique had improved no-end all of a sudden! Nuh-uh. If anything, it was getting sloppier because the s/w was correcting it and I hadn't even noticed the camera shake in certain situations. Corrected now...
Hi Mark, I am also a Mark Galer Patreon member. The results you showed on this video seemed unbelievable but I did download the DXO PureRAW software and it worked exactly as you demonstrated it would! I struggled with Capture One Pro, Lightroom, and Topaz to remove that color noise and now of them worked like DXO. Thanks for sharing a quick fix for this problem!! Travel safely
I am always reluctant to purchase software above and beyond my Adobe Creative Cloud subscription but this software just raises the bar in terms of what is an acceptably high ISO setting. Well worth the purchase Price in my opinion,
Wow! I'd be interested to see how it handles astro images.
There specific software for astro. I wouldn't use dxo for that use case.
Thank you Mark, long time Canonista (brand is irrelevant), you did a great job on this Video, and i used link to purchase DXO Pure Raw today! Outstanding content sir! Bravo from a new sub… and my wallet thanks you, Black Friday sale of $89.00.
I only review products I have purchased myself and intend to continue using - life is too short to review products I don't like :-)
Wow, extrem good comparison, by far the best after watching +20 other videos!
Glad to hear that!
Wow, though I do have DXO Pure Raw, the first tip involving masking out the subject and applying a reduction of texture and noise to the out of focus areas is a brilliant hack.
Thanks for the positive feedback. I have lots of post-production seminars on my Patreon.com/markgaler support channel.
@@AlphaCreativeSkills Yes, I'm aware. I'm a current Premium Plus member.
Thanks as always for the very informative video!
I got DxO Photolab 5 and absolutely love it!
Great to hear
IMO, DxO DeepPrime blows Topaz out of the water. I can strongly recommend it for anyone shooting raw.
Yes - In most but not all instances
Hello. Mark can You please tell me when do You apply the DXO processing - before or after developing image in lightroom?
I apply it after because I don’t want to spend the time processing an image that I then don’t end up sharing.
Lightroom retains edits but in Capture One do you need to use DXO before beginning to edit? Thanks for the great video!
I don’t use Capture One
Thanks for the detailed review Mark. I own both Topaz and DxO and I think DxO delivers consistently better results with fewer image artifacts. Trouble is I feel that at $129, it’s a little on the expensive side. However the argument could be made that you save much more by not necessarily having to upgrade to sharper, faster lenses.
One thing I have learnt over the years is that some photographers will not flinch at spending 2 or 3K on a lens but often software is a different story. Maybe because it is not something tangible that we can hold in our hands. Personally I am happy to purchase an A-grade monitor, update my computer every two or three years and use the best post-production tools available and it is a still a small fraction of the cost I have invested in cameras and lenses.
Considering how well it works, I'd say it's by far the best bang for the buck in our "photography ecosystem" camera - lens - editing software.
Just wait for black Friday, I got PL5 and NIk collection for half price as I didn't want to go the subscription route. They're BF deals are well worth it👍
Dxo is hands down the best, and I emphasize, the BEST image denoiser out there, the image looks very clean, but unfortunately I don't like how it handle and process color from my a7iii. For me it is too harsh and strange. The fact that it change the white balance of Marks photos makes me think they don't have a good "color" team so to speak. I now exclusively use Capture One for raw processing because they handle the color very smoothly and the results feels very good for me. Yeah C1 image denoiser is not great, easily outclassed by Dxo Prime, but I'd rather have pleasant color than great noise remover. It's the compromise I happily choose right now. I will try Dxo again if they have revamped their color process.
Capture One and DxO Pure Raw are not interchangeable - The DxO Pure Raw software is meant to complement and not replace programs such as Lightroom or Capture One
@@AlphaCreativeSkills yeah too bad they don't integrate it with c1 as I don't use lightroom. I'll gladly buy it just for the prime denoising alone if they can integrate it to c1.
Following their workflow for ex. If I feed my raw first in dxo and outputting it to linear dng and back to c1, it won't be good option because I'll lose the raw status and missing out on optimization c1 do to the Sony's raw files.
The only way is to integrate dxo primes in c1 so they get the same raw feed at the same time and work in tandem. I hope they can work with c1 to achieve this.
I am well pleased with DxO's handling of typically noisy images from the Olympus TG6. Very useful information from you. It is a bit of a fudge camera.
Closer inspection after processing several images is that the software engages in extreme sharpening, which is not such a good thing.
My initial enthusiasm is tempered following use of the software because of limitations in control possibilities, for example there appears to be no control over sharpening. However good the noise removal it is easily spoiled by over sharpening, which is happening.
Further investigation reveals that it also causes prominent image distortion, the opposite of barrel distortion (I forget the term). This is despite the correct camera lens setting.
You can disable the sharpening when processing the file and accept the sharpening you applied in Lightroom
If you accept the incorrect lens profile when offered a choice you can experience pin-cushion or barrel distortion. if your lens-camera combination is not listed you can disable the lens corrections and accept the lens corrections you applied in Lightroom.
In my experience nothing beats neat image
I have been testing Pure Raw2, Photo Ninja and some other software, and the funny thing is I found that Photo Ninja and Pure Raw2 give similar results in standard mode, PR2 is better on noise reduction,,it seems DXO is using the Photo Ninja's Engine..!
Interesting!
I've also found sharpening is bad at higher ISOs. For me with my Olympus OMD E-M1ii ISO 6,400 there are small gain artifacts. At ISO 6,400 I turn it off if I can. I emailed DXO to add a feature that at this ISO you set it at that the sharpening turns off by itself. Its a pain when you have so many wedding photos and you just want to turn sharpening off at ISO 6,400.
You can set up different sharpening defaults for different ISO values in Lightroom
One feature I want to come over from DXO PhotoLab to DXO PureRaw is the luminance slider. For my camera the Olympus OMD E-M1ii when I'm shooting there is grain in the bokeh with DXO PhotoLab I can move the luminance slider to 50 or 55.
I am not familiar with PhotoLab as I only need the noise suppression
Hi Mark, just though you'd like to know that your video quality settings for your DxO Pure Raw 2 - Deep Prime: Software review UA-cam video only go up to 1080p
Check again - the 4K version may still have been processing by UA-cam
As usual great video. What is your general workflow with post-processing? Running the ARW file through DXO Pure Raw, then export it to DNG for further editing in Photoshop?
Edit and convert the file to DNG and then process in Pure Raw if required.
Thanks Mark, Just ordered DXO Pure Raw 3 via your link. Hope you get a few shekels. 😀
Thanks for your support 😃
Interesting. Thanks. Gonna have to try this.
Hope you enjoy
So, to conclude: your workflow is: first do all the editing stuff in e.g. LR like highlights, shadows, cropping and after all that is done you do the denoising in DXO raw? Is that correct? And with the denoising there is als an impact on the sharpening.. Do you then do extra sharpening after returning to LR (from DXO)?
Correct - but you have to convert to DNG if you want the edits to be applied after DxO has finished processing the file. You can add more sharpening if required.
@@AlphaCreativeSkills Thanks.
Mark, I did a test. From Capture One I exported the modified RAW file as a DNG. Loaded the DNG file in DXO Pure Raw 2 and processed the DNG (and 6 others too) with DeepPrime. Result: all 7 not processed ?! Reason: "7 images couldn't be processes as a processing error occured"
Then I thought: let's load one of the original RAW files of these pictures. This one got processed as expected.
What am I missing here? I thought DXO should be able to process the DNG files with Deepprime but it doesn't work. Any ideas / suggestions / clarifications?
I did another test with 2 pictures exported as DNG out of LR and they got processed in DXO?! Don't get it why LR DNG's get processed while Capture ONE DNG's do not..
Ive been trying this out this month, and there are some serious negatives which I feel makes Topaz DeNoise a much better choice better. First, the output file sizes are up to 4x larger than the original raws (especially important with the a1's already enormous file sizes). DXO only treats the original file, no LR edits will be applied so there is no hope of cropping to a smaller file first. (If you write to an xmp file, you can have the edits re-applied afterwards upon import.) If you elect for a jpg file, it bakes in its own color profiles (remember, no pre-edits transfer) like Mark pointed out. There are very little adjustment options, and no re-naming options. Every file will have "-dng_dxo_deepprime" added to it. File creation is much slower than Topaz (Im a high-volume sports shooter), plus Topaz works just as well on jpgs. And the worse issue of all is how DXO treats the backgrounds. It seems to increase the contrast, clarity, and sharpness of the backgrounds too, which make for some really ugly photos. (Mark was mostly showing photos with blownout or no backgrounds, so he did not really catch this). Think of sports shots with out of focus crowds in the background. Topaz makes the crowds a lot more "buttery" smooth and less noticeable, whereas DXO makes them harsh and crunchy.
You can avoid the large files by adopting a different work flow.
Here's mine:
I shoot Sony, so my RAW files are .ARW files.
Convert to DNG using Adobe DNG converter. Discard the .ARW file. (The .DNG file will be considerably smaller.)
Process the .DNG file using Pure Raw. (The new file is larger.)
I edit the resulting file in Raw Therapee. The edit results in a sidecar file (.XMP).
Continue your personal work flow from the point of sending the image to your image editor.
The Pure Raw .DNG file can then be discarded.
What you're left with is the the .DNG version of your original RAW file (smaller than both the original RAW file and the Pure Raw .DNG file), an .XMP sidecar file, and your working master file. You've deleted your original RAW file from your camera, and the Pure Raw .DNG file. The latter can be regenerated from the conserved .DNG, and the regenerated Pure Raw file can be opened in a RAW editor and the saved .XMP file can be re-applied, so you lose nothing by deleting the original RAW file nor by deleting the Pure Raw .DNG file, but you will save space.
@@davegrenier1160 My workflow is: “semi-batch edit” the raws (and/or jpgs), batch send to topaz denoise, batch publish directly out of topaz, delete everything that isn’t rated 1-star or higher, done. I do events where I need to shoot thousands, and publish hundreds of photos. I don’t have time to add extra conversions and round-tripping thu additional apps.
I did mention that if you convert to DNG before processing your Lightroom edits are retained and the processed raw file is re-imported with the edits visible.
Excellence in reviews as always Mark! And this software is blowing minds in noise reduction department. I always see you use Adobe LRC or LR to process your RAWs. It is said for many professionals the C1 does a better sensor interpretation for Sony cameras than the Adobe software. Have you tried C1 or Luminar to process your RAWs? What's your opinion in this matter? Thank you in advance!
After extensive testing a few years back I decided that the only difference in C1 was that it used a completely different starting point when editing Raw (more sharpening, more saturation and more base level noise reduction to low ISO images). Given that I start with my own Develop Default in Lightroom with my own dual illuminant custom camera profiles (a featured not supported by C1 when I last tested) I realised that there was no advantage to using C1. A disadvantage was that I had to shell out extra money to purchase it as I cannot live without Photoshop ...and if I have Photoshop I have Lightroom.
I have lived long enough to see a dozen Raw processing software packages come and go and the only ones I trust to be around in years to come are made by Adobe and C1
@@AlphaCreativeSkills well said Mark. When I was shooting Sony my photo to results were faster in C1. When C1 offered some photoshop type features I was prepared to move over, but they were pretty rubbish compared to Adobe. I tried Affinity but it’s Camera Raw features were very lacklustre but the hardcore processing was outstanding. I hope to see Affinity do a LR clone.
@@AlphaCreativeSkills Thank you Mark as always! ❤️
Always a pleasure to watch and enjoy your perfect images.
I am not sure about what the payment plan is?
The payment plan for DxO or one of my support services?
@@AlphaCreativeSkills At the time I was in the process of buying DxO PureRAW 2 and was in doubt whether it would be a one time payment or a series of single payments as with Capture One and Topaz. So far - I have at least received one free upgrade from DxO since I posted the question to you. The only con I have with DxO is their customer service which isn't the fastest in the world.
I have a license for the Topaz AI series and the flagship Topaz Photo AI too. In most cases I prefer DxO PureRAW 2. Topaz have thrown a lot of functions into the Photo AI application, but the noise reduction is far from being as sophisticated as with DxO. Topaz still suffers from white artifacts along high contrast edges, it removes fine structures in textiles, and it tends to create a synthetic look of surfaces with subtle structures - or where heavy noise has been removed. DxO is also better with numbers and letters.
Inspired by Bruce Williams I dropped Adobe, replaced ACR with Darktable and Photoshop with Affinity Photo 2 (Darktable is even better than ACR/Bridge, and Affinity is a fair replacement for PS). The new combination works very well for my needs. I use DxO PureRAW 2 up front, sometimes with - sometimes without the lens sharpening. The output DNG from DxO responds to Darktable the same way as the ARW file.
SOLD!
DXO is the best noise reduction there is. But I hate how they don't support built in lens profiles. For example Mark you are a full frame shooter. Let's say you hired me as a second shooter for a wedding. You shoot 3:2 and I shoot M43. I can set my camera to 3:2 and Olympus will use the lens profile when I'm shooting. In Lightroom you just have to apply the 3:2 crop cross all my images.
DXO profiles don't line up how things are seen in the viewfinder. I'm not saying they should not make their own profiles but there should be the option. Also sometimes there are internet issues and then if you can't download a profile that's a headache at times its rare but there are always internet issues.
Olympus is the only company I am aware of that apply there lens profiles to their Raw files in-camera and then don’t share the profiles with other companies
Main problem to me is that they / DXO doesn't support my most important lense: the Sony FE 50 F1.2 (but also several other GM lenses)
That's no good then.
Have you checked there list?
The DxO plugin may not support a particular lens but Lightroom can apply its own lens profile if you enable that, after processing an image _without any DxO lens correction_ ...
Is DxO Pure Raw Deep Prime Software compatible with Capture One Pro ?
I am a Lightroom user so have only checked it using Lightroom.
I am using PureRaw2 with C1. In my opinion, it's the best combination I have tested so far with my A1 and A9 up to ISO 64000. The Software I tested include PL6, ON1 2023 and Topaz Photo AI.
Amazing review of this product. Do you simply add your RAW files into the software and begin to edit? If so, how does it handle Sony's A7IV's ARW files? Not many editors seem to be able to read them for some reason.
You can add unedited ARW files or edited DNG files and then let DxO weave its magic. I couldn’t find a camera/raw file format that DxO did not recognise
@@AlphaCreativeSkills Nice, do you know if there is a particular kind of photo that the software struggles with? I shoot photo journalistic works which often involve single or multiple subjects, among a crowd. I shoot with a 135GM.
It seemed to only struggle a little where fine detail and noise are difficult to differentiate- I processed several hundreds images and it only struggled with the two or three images I showed towards the end of the review.
@@AlphaCreativeSkills Awesome, I've been holding out on getting any adobe products due to their subscription based services, so I think this is just what I've been looking for.
You still have to process the raw files processed by DxO. I personally wouldn’t save money by purchasing a cheap monitor or cheap software- you just end up creating images that don’t realise the full potential of your expensive camera and lenses.
Nice video bro 😁👍📸
Thanks ✌
The workflow starting within LR has been very unreliable (with the auto reimport)
It hasn't failed for me yet although there is often a 1-minute delay before the processed file is imported. If this fails to reimport I would right click on the source folder in the Folders panel and choose sync folder.