DXO PureRaw 4: A Bait-and-Switch Nightmare

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

ducky124

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1
Name
Richard
Edit My Images
Yes
Let me tell you, I feel completely ripped off by DXO PureRaw 4. When I purchased it, they loudly touted "free updates." What they didn't mention was those "free updates" would systematically break the very functionality I paid for.

For months, my workflow has been a frustrating mess. Every update seemed to introduce new bugs, rendering the software unreliable. I'm talking about critical issues that impacted image processing quality and speed. And after three months of dealing with these problems, DXO's response has been a deafening silence. No fix, no patch, nothing.

Instead, they've decided to abandon PureRaw 4 and push a paid upgrade to version 5. Classic bait-and-switch. "Here's a broken product, now pay us more to fix it!" It's insulting.

And here's the kicker: PureRaw 4 isn't even the best in its class. There are other denoising and lens correction software options available that offer equal, if not superior, results. I'm not going to name them here, but a quick online search will reveal plenty of alternatives that don't treat their customers with such blatant disregard.

If you're considering PureRaw 4, save your money and your sanity. Don't fall for their "free updates" trap. You'll be left with a buggy product and a company that clearly doesn't value its customers. Look elsewhere for reliable image processing software.
 
Doesn’t sound good, I have always gone for Photolab elite rather than pure raw for the extra adjustments and features
I have never had any issues, have been using it since Photolab 5 came out am now on version 8
There is a forum specifically for DXO software the people there are very knowledgeable and helpful, they may be able to advise
 
ducky124 said:
Let me tell you, I feel completely ripped off by DXO PureRaw 4. When I purchased it, they loudly touted "free updates." What they didn't mention was those "free updates" would systematically break the very functionality I paid for.

For months, my workflow has been a frustrating mess. Every update seemed to introduce new bugs, rendering the software unreliable. I'm talking about critical issues that impacted image processing quality and speed. And after three months of dealing with these problems, DXO's response has been a deafening silence. No fix, no patch, nothing.

Instead, they've decided to abandon PureRaw 4 and push a paid upgrade to version 5. Classic bait-and-switch. "Here's a broken product, now pay us more to fix it!" It's insulting.

And here's the kicker: PureRaw 4 isn't even the best in its class. There are other denoising and lens correction software options available that offer equal, if not superior, results. I'm not going to name them here, but a quick online search will reveal plenty of alternatives that don't treat their customers with such blatant disregard.

If you're considering PureRaw 4, save your money and your sanity. Don't fall for their "free updates" trap. You'll be left with a buggy product and a company that clearly doesn't value its customers. Look elsewhere for reliable image processing software.
Click to expand...
It's frustrating when this happens, but "free updates" is a rather imprecise concept, as it nearly always comes with caveats. Normally, it's only until the next version number, and many programs are on an "annual" cycle when it comes to changing version number.

PR4 was released on 5th March 2024, so I would have only anticipated free updates until the 5th March 2025. With a discounted upgrade price.

Unfortunately, it's not uncommon (not just with DXO) to pay for an upgrade "in the hope" that a bug has been fixed, which isn't always the case. Sometimes, it's compensated by useful new features, but sometimes none of the new features are of any value.

What were the bugs? When you say DXOs response was a deafening silence, did they not respond at all? They have always responded to my support questions, even though the last bug I reported is still there. Maybe PR5 will fix it, and it will make it to PhotoLab (PR4 didn't fix it)

As regards "best in class", based on my own testing and an almost obsessive following of denosining reviews, I think DXO is still best in class as regards lens correction. Other programs seem to rely on the lens manufacturers correction embedded in the EXIF, or open source lens correction databases.

You may think that the lens manufacturers corrections would be the best, but that isn't always the case, and DXO will often/sometimes give better correction while maintaining more of the image area and greater sharpness at the edges of the frame.

The quality of the denoising and the compromise between detail and noise across the different programs is a bit of a lottery, and the "best in class" varies with subject and file type. When testing, the best may well be program A. for this file but program B for a different file. There can also be differences colour and Dynamic range between the different programs. AND, the results aren't necessarily repeatable. If you get artefacts the first time round, sending the file through the same denoising program will sometimes fix them.

Although, I now prefer the overall results of Adobe AI Denoising, it cannot match the detail and sharpness that DXO can extract, nor can Topaz PhotoAI (Others such as ON1 etc, aren't in the same league as Adobe, DXO and Topaz, as my own tests and the reviews show them to have very variable results).

Topaz can still sometimes give the best results (but not if you use their own Raw convertor) and has unique tools. But up to about 5000 ISO, if you are willing to sacrifice a bit of detail and sharpening my view is that Adobe AIdenoise gives the most natural, artefact free results, but above 5000 ISO DXO is the most reliable option, and normally, visibly better than the alternatives. Overall, I don't think there is a "best in class" but DXO is probably still the closest to winning the title.
 
As a general rule, I use open source as much as possible and put some money in the developers' kitties when they ask, provided the software is worth it.

There is, of course, good quality commercial software but there's too much of stuff on the market which just isn't adequately tested, let alone debugged. Take a look and see if there's something out there that will do the job but costs you only what you think it's worth.
 
I agree that PR4 is very slow to process files and the updates haven't changed that.
The image quality sèems ok although I do quite often use my still installed PR2.
Won't be paying out for the latest version, usually get these things at every other release.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top