Any one rerunning rawfiles through DxOPlv5 elite?

DxO PhotoLab
#1

Hi,
i am slowly ploughing through my rawfile archive. (# im bored)
Updating xmp files with GPS and description details. (manual push new metadata to xmp.)
then a run through v5 for beter denoising and clearer view in sharpnes. (more development experience too)
add at export suffix “_v5” and archieve folder also adding v5.
So i can keep track on progres because it’s once in a wile when i have time and spirit to do so.

i think there is a decent improvement to be found for smallsensor and m43 sensor rawfile.
Even at low iso versions.

i think DxOPL v5 is complete enough to acomplisch this task from metadata to image.

1 Like
#2

I always reedit my favorite images whenever a new version of PL is released. I can usually see some improvement in the new edit over what I was able to achieve in the previous version. I always blame DXO for making me redo my old files. :rage: :grin: :rofl:

2 Likes
#3

The new control line feature with the luminance and chrome selection and better clone and repair does the trick on old sensors.
It’s a time consuming job.
Because i am updating all meta data. Adding information.
Then re -edit. Check against first version redo if not satisfied.
Then replace jpegs and rename folder “_v5” so i know which are done. And also rename source folder.
Update sub folder inside with dop and xmp as backup for mistakes by me or DxO.
Clean up remains.
Next folder.:sweat_smile:

1 Like
#4

I’ve been revisiting photos in PL3, 4, and 5 including going back as far as 2008. I’ve done considerably more than 2,000 photos. So far.

I was quite surprised just how good some of my early photos were. At the time, I didn’t own a good camera. Now it turns out I did… it just needed the right tools to reveal.

2 Likes
#5

So true. I’ve gone back as far as my first raws, which was 2011. I’ve reached 2017, so far!

1 Like
#6

my fz200 sensor is in base iso not deepprime friendly:

P1000326
P10003261920×1440 434 KB

original first edition probably PLv1.2 (PRIME)
P1000326-1
P1000326-11920×1440 297 KB

v3.2
v5 version 1 40% deepprime
P1000326_v5
P1000326_v51920×1440 365 KB

v5 20% deepprime and more microcontrast for the punch:
P1000326_v5-2
P1000326_v5-21920×1440 380 KB

which 150
which 1501920×1080 254 KB

and other:
bridge 3 edits
bridge 3 edits1920×1080 257 KB

but this is better:
better
better2560×1440 492 KB

Last compare details and noise at 200%
left first one mid v5 right a tryout earlier.
compARE
compARE2560×1440 431 KB

first is much noisier but has detail
right version is noisier and softer.
mid is best.
see glas reflextion
Edit :I add the image later i forgot the glas image to upload.
compARE2
compARE22560×1440 434 KB

1 Like
#7

Yes, all of the time.

I use one of the ‘star’ ratings to remind me to go back and re-check images when new PL versions / features are released.

However, I would appreciate an expanded and automatic metadata selection that includes the version of PL used to process the images as well as a flag there to indicate ‘look at this again in the future’.

1 Like