dxo pure raw

  • Thread starter Thread starter RKC
  • Start date Start date
RKC

RKC

Suspended / Banned
Messages
4,399
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi
Sure it is me a thickie, been looking dxo website, it states

DxO PureRAW optimizes your RAW files and lets you go even further with Lightroom​

can I ask why you would need to transfer to Lightroom, can you not just edit in pure raw?, I get photoshop etc for more complicated processing etc
 
PureRaw isn't a complete raw editor and will only perform some initial processing on raw files, including their excellent Prime and DeepPrime noise reduction as well as lens optical corrections.
The processed image is then exported as a DNG for further editing in the editor of choice. DxO Photolab is the complete editor and includes the functionality of PureRaw
 
@RKC : It helps to think of PureRAW as DxO's version of Adobe Camera RAW (ACR) and PhotoLab as their version of Lightroom.

Edit: But PureRAW can do more than ACR as dja has said above.
 
Last edited:
dja said:
PureRaw isn't a complete raw editor and will only perform some initial processing on raw files, including their excellent Prime and DeepPrime noise reduction as well as lens optical corrections.
The processed image is then exported as a DNG for further editing in the editor of choice. DxO Photolab is the complete editor and includes the functionality of PureRaw
Click to expand...

Bristolian said:
@RKC : It helps to think of PureRAW as DxO's version of Adobe Camera RAW (ACR) and PhotoLab as their version of Lightroom.

Edit: But PureRAW can do more than ACR as dja has said above.
Click to expand...

Thank you Dave and Steve, downloaded the trial and having a look
 
I import through LR then batch-run all files through PureRaw (I don't take many images per shoot). Of course, you could do it the other way round as well. But I now swear by the product.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RKC
Stephen L said:
I import through LR then batch-run all files through PureRaw (I don't take many images per shoot). Of course, you could do it the other way round as well. But I now swear by the product.
Click to expand...

I do it the opposite way to you selecting the images I want to process then exporting them to LR.
Tend to use Prime which only uses lens correction rather than the Deep version with global sharpening turned off.
Sometimes think the Deep setting is a bit too aggressive and prefer to make my own minor adjustments in LR.
Whatever way its done the results are very impressive indeed, also acts as a very handy dng converter too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RKC
Photolab includes a lot more functionality than PureRaw but is not really a full alternative to Lightroom (as I've discovered). There's a fair bit that you can't do in PL. The first thing I noticed was that there is no "whites" slider; there is probably a workaround but why doesn't DXO just include the slider? Nevertheless some people swear by it.

You can set it up so that it works in the same way as PureRaw does, and no more. That is the halfway house stage I am at at the moment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RKC
Yes, having no "whites" slider annoyed me too and I couldn't be arsed with using the Tone Curve as a workaround plus didn't really get on with much of the PL functionality so abandoned the product. As I use MFT gear, I now use just PureRaw instead to denoise raw images then do all my processing in ACR & Photoshop. I'm perfectly happy with this workflow.
 
dja said:
Yes, having no "whites" slider annoyed me too and I couldn't be arsed with using the Tone Curve as a workaround plus didn't really get on with much of the PL functionality so abandoned the product. As I use MFT gear, I now use just PureRaw instead to denoise raw images then do all my processing in ACR & Photoshop. I'm perfectly happy with this workflow.
Click to expand...

See - I am the opposite - I use the tone curve (all of them, inc the R, G, B ones) for all my editing.
 
tijuana taxi said:
I do it the opposite way to you selecting the images I want to process then exporting them to LR.
Tend to use Prime which only uses lens correction rather than the Deep version with global sharpening turned off.
Sometimes think the Deep setting is a bit too aggressive and prefer to make my own minor adjustments in LR.
Whatever way its done the results are very impressive indeed, also acts as a very handy dng converter too.
Click to expand...
How do you turn off Deep version Rich............got pure raw only and cant see away of just setting it to Prime
 
RKC said:
How do you turn off Deep version Rich............got pure raw only and cant see away of just setting it to Prime
Click to expand...
I'll have a look in the morning Bob when I fire up the PC.
Off the top of my head, I click process photos then the options come up
Its the middle of the three choices shown, but will check and reply on here.
 
Isn’t there a drop-down box where you can turn off lens sharpening? Or have I got the wrong end of the stick?
 
tijuana taxi said:
I'll have a look in the morning Bob when I fire up the PC.
Off the top of my head, I click process photos then the options come up
Its the middle of the three choices shown, but will check and reply on here.
Click to expand...
your right, found it which should have saw it but did not look again after trying it set to defaults
 
dja said:
Yes, having no "whites" slider annoyed me too and I couldn't be arsed with using the Tone Curve as a workaround plus didn't really get on with much of the PL functionality so abandoned the product. As I use MFT gear, I now use just PureRaw instead to denoise raw images then do all my processing in ACR & Photoshop. I'm perfectly happy with this workflow.
Click to expand...


I was wondering if i made a mistake buying Photolab when I could have used PureRaw as "pre-process" software, before outputting to LR, but then I remembered that my version of LR will never be updated to accommodate whichever camera body I buy next. I keep having to remind myself that...........
 
jerry12953 said:
I was wondering if i made a mistake buying Photolab when I could have used PureRaw as "pre-process" software, before outputting to LR, but then I remembered that my version of LR will never be updated to accommodate whichever camera body I buy next. I keep having to remind myself that...........
Click to expand...
PureRaw exports aa dng file so the version of LR you have is irrelevant.
I'm still using LR 6.14, saying that two out of my three cameras are still supported by it.
 
tijuana taxi said:
PureRaw exports aa dng file so the version of LR you have is irrelevant.
I'm still using LR 6.14, saying that two out of my three cameras are still supported by it.
Click to expand...


Yes, of course, but I wouldn't necessarily want to put all my files through PureRaw (or Photolab.....)
 
jerry12953 said:
Yes, of course, but I wouldn't necessarily want to put all my files through PureRaw (or Photolab.....)
Click to expand...

You would need an inordinate amount of time if my experience is anything to go by.
I'm not in a hurry so doesn't matter, reckon I would need to upgrade my PC if I did a lot of processing.
 
jerry12953 said:
I was wondering if i made a mistake buying Photolab when I could have used PureRaw as "pre-process" software, before outputting to LR, but then I remembered that my version of LR will never be updated to accommodate whichever camera body I buy next. I keep having to remind myself that...........
Click to expand...

I think you probably made a mistake buying PureRaw and keeping Lightroom/Adobe around.

PhotoLab is awesome and my sole choice of editing now.
 
tijuana taxi said:
You would need an inordinate amount of time if my experience is anything to go by.
I'm not in a hurry so doesn't matter, reckon I would need to upgrade my PC if I did a lot of processing.
Click to expand...
Takes me about 3 minutes per 10 files. As I don’t take many shots per shoot (I still think in film-cost terms!) and i do cull pre-processing, it’s not unacceptable. I just have to remember NOT to keyword before processing, as PureRaw naturally strips out all man-made metadata during its work.
 
SFTPhotography said:
I think you probably made a mistake buying PureRaw and keeping Lightroom/Adobe around.

PhotoLab is awesome and my sole choice of editing now.
Click to expand...
Im very happy to use both LR and PureRaw. Though if I wasn’t as heavily into LR, I do agree, PL would be my choice of editor. This old dog isn’t up to learning many more new tricks these days. ;)
 
Stephen L said:
Takes me about 3 minutes per 10 files. As I don’t take many shots per shoot (I still think in film-cost terms!) and i do cull pre-processing, it’s not unacceptable. I just have to remember NOT to keyword before processing, as PureRaw naturally strips out all man-made metadata during its work.
Click to expand...

Takes me about four times as long as that for 10 photos.
Not the newest or fastest PC, but it does the job and LR works well with it.
i5-7400 CPU @ 3.00GHz and 16gb ram, could probably do with more to speed things up a bit
 
Stephen L said:
Im very happy to use both LR and PureRaw. Though if I wasn’t as heavily into LR, I do agree, PL would be my choice of editor. This old dog isn’t up to learning many more new tricks these days. ;)
Click to expand...

Fair do's.

Personally - I find it remarkably straightforward and you can create your customer workspace - keeping all the tools you use close at hand and arranged the way you like. LR does cataloguing etc more effectively - but I find it awkward and a much steeper learning curve than DXO.
 
SFTPhotography said:
Fair do's.

Personally - I find it remarkably straightforward and you can create your customer workspace - keeping all the tools you use close at hand and arranged the way you like. LR does cataloguing etc more effectively - but I find it awkward and a much steeper learning curve than DXO.
Click to expand...
Horses for courses. I grew up with LR from its Rawshooter days, so although I don’t know it inside-out, I know enough to make it work for me. Today there are far more raw tools, most of them capable of excellent results.
 
My mate went to Iceland and came back with some extremely noisy images, he was recommended DXO and to be fair it has done an excellent job on that front.

This is just my opinion but I cant see the point of Pure Raw other than reducing noise, yes they claim a raw file renders better than Lightroom but after trying a couple of my files without noise comparing to Lightroom, they look a bit better but only because DXO sharpens the image and possibly a couple of other tweaks which is nothing that cant be achieved in Lightroom very easily.

Of course as sated just my humble opinion and could well be missing something
 
I’ve found it depends on which camera’s files you present to it. I found it made little or no difference to those from my Nikon Z6, some difference to those from Sony, and quite a startling difference to m4/3 files. At the time of testing it was incompatible with Fuji and I’ve not tried it on those since it did encompass them.
 
As I have said before for me its a game changer, but I exclusively use m4/3.
Lets me use higher iso and also enables better results from low light photography.
Well worth the eighty quid I reckon and made some of my older photos very useable too.
 
I've had the same experiences as Rich and usePureRaw only for denoising MFT raw images. Initially, the earlier version put me off the product because it automatically applied aggressive sharpening to each image. Now the 1.5 version allows lens corrections without any sharpening.
 
jerry12953 said:
I see that DXO have brought out a v2 version of PureRaw. From a quick look it seems that its only advantage over v1 is that integrates better with Lightroom. And it's not cheap to upgrade either......
Click to expand...
The other change is that it will now process Fuji X-Trans files.
 
Just incase like me you use Lightroom 6 as your DAM although DXO 2 gives the option to export from Lightroom 6 it will not work, assume because Lightroom 6 is old tech. Russ
 
russellsnr said:
Just incase like me you use Lightroom 6 as your DAM although DXO 2 gives the option to export from Lightroom 6 it will not work, assume because Lightroom 6 is old tech. Russ
Click to expand...


Just wondered if you have said that through experience or whether DXO told you that? The reason I ask is because they told me Photolab couldn't be linked to LR in the way i wanted, whereas in fact it can, and does so very well.
 
russellsnr said:
Just incase like me you use Lightroom 6 as your DAM although DXO 2 gives the option to export from Lightroom 6 it will not work, assume because Lightroom 6 is old tech. Russ
Click to expand...
Wasn't going to upgrade, been a bit miffed if I had though if it doesn't work with LR6
 
jerry12953 said:
Just wondered if you have said that through experience or whether DXO told you that? The reason I ask is because they told me Photolab couldn't be linked to LR in the way i wanted, whereas in fact it can, and does so very well.
Click to expand...
'through experience' I downloaded the new version to try it out , I use a Linear profile on images when sending to other apps but I also tried my camera profile for the Sony A9 ARW file and get same result.
DXO ERROR.pngARW.png
 
Hi,

As discussed above, I use Photolab in its "PureRAW equivalent" mode to pre-process my best files and then export them to Lightroom. I don't know if some setting has changed somewhere but I've noticed that the Photolab pre-process introduces colour balance and other changes which gives really horrible results. It seems to be a combination of white balance and added contrast and possibly other changes, because its impossible to return it to its original appearance using white balance only.

Has anyone else had this problem?
 
jerry12953 said:
Hi,

As discussed above, I use Photolab in its "PureRAW equivalent" mode to pre-process my best files and then export them to Lightroom. I don't know if some setting has changed somewhere but I've noticed that the Photolab pre-process introduces colour balance and other changes which gives really horrible results. It seems to be a combination of white balance and added contrast and possibly other changes, because its impossible to return it to its original appearance using white balance only.

Has anyone else had this problem?
Click to expand...

I set up a Preset to mimic pureRAW as suggested by Robin Whalley on YouTube. The only filters he suggests using are Denoising, lens sharpening, chromatic aberation and distortion.

I have not really had a chance to play with it but certainly other users have commented on YT that it works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top