Any reason I should Not use DeepPrime every time?

HQ and DeepPrime are available

→ The export with DeepPrime takes much longer, when set to Use CPU only
as normally DP uses the GPU.

With feedback to support let them have files from both Fuji cams
to countercheck the correct behaviour of DeepPrime. :slight_smile:

I have this also, from time time:

Detail crop:

I’ve other issues with DeepPrime (perhaps related, I don’t know): a support ticket is pending (I didn’t mention this artifacts issue in my report, maybe I should)

PS the forum software does something with my images: they’re completely flat as if a sRGB profile was assigned to a Adobe98 image … very weird. They are in the sRGB colorspace…and their EXIF is completely stripped. Is that normal for a photography forum?

1 Like

Unfortunately, only the downloaded pics have a profile and look more or less correct. :frowning:

Not even so. I uploaded that sample pic, saw the colorspace issue, and downloaded again to check what happened and the downloaded pic was as off as the published one. Just to make sure I posted the initial one in the test section of another forum and of course it showed up great (Don’t know if you need to login but it’s here: )

So we are on a forum all about image processing and we can’t even get images correctly rendered???

1 Like

I’ve never had any problems with DeepPrime.


Some fact’s:
40 DeepPrime is less agressive as 40Prime. (the default) why? Because DeepPrime is around twice as effective as Prime that they turned down DeepPrime a bit.
So the strength line is from 0-40% like 0-20% for Prime.
Thus 0-40 had a more detailed selecting then the 40-100% after that. Because from 40 the strenght is steeper towards 100% in order to end up to the same strength at 100% as It would be in a straight line.
An other fact is much less artefacts in the image which Prime suffered from.
Prime and DeepPrime is luminance selective, which means it only denoises the parts which are shadows and plains of color like sky.
Last fact DeepPrime has much better detail enhancement or preservation then Prime.

So with that in mind the deepprime default is a good start for all images.

Good morning!

Could you, please share this image+sidecar+output with these artifacts via and let me know when ready?

Thank you,
Svetlana G.

Ok, done. It’s not the same image because I deleted it (makes no sense to keep faulty dng’s on my harddrive).

Please note the following:

-this is related to the GPU issue discussed here :Problems with PL5 and Lightroom - #23 by Photo-DKO and for which I have a support ticket open (including Windows error reporting logs) here:

-it happens after an export has first failed with the “correction failed at the excute stage” but I manage to “resuscitate” the process, usually by switching back an forth between “high quality” and “deep prime” while having moved the “loupe” tool to another region or by switching the antivirus realtime protection off; the latter still needs confirmation, it’s very time consuming to test such issues)

-it’s always in the upper left corner of the image when in landscape orientation (and upper right if rotated 90° to portrait mode), in a square area of approx 1024x1024 pixels of a 6000x4000 pixel file

Let me know if more information is needed


EDIT: I uploaded a second set of files (I reproduced the issue with the images I posted earlier)

Thank you. Got your files and added them to your support ticket. We’ll investigate.

Svetlana G.

Here’s some more information: I got the same artifacts when using the CPU for export. So it’s not specifically tied to the GPU, which I initially thought.

1 Like

Hi there, I believe I have found the solution to both the artifacts and the “correction failed at the execute stage”.

My support ticket came back with the dev team saying that this was an error in the Radeon driver (my card is a Radeon RX570 8GB) and that this could not be solved by modifying DeepPrime code.

I did a clean reinstall of the driver and associated software using the AMD cleanup utility, but that didn’t make a difference.

But I finally stumbled up this article:

I applied the suggested tweak of a hidden parameter and that seems to work. I have been test-exporting random images with Lightroom open in the background, I tried all the scenarios that failed before, and all the images that were problematic and gave those artifacts, and have not yet experienced a failed export. I did have one error that triggered the error reporting popup, but I realy was stress-testing the system. I have now exported successfully over 50 images without a problem. Processing time is much faster too: in between 15 and 25 seconds for a 26MP Fuji raw file, that’s an average of 10 seconds faster than before (when it worked, that is). My GPU is now at a 60% load during DeepPrime processing, instead of 100%.

After 5 month of struggling with this, deep frustration and several support tickets and forum posts, I have now something that works, finally. This is what I did (as per the instructions:)

Close DxO PhotoLab.
Locate and edit the following file: "C:\Program Files\DxO\DxO PhotoLab 4 or 5\DxO.PhotoLab.exe.config”.
Just under the “WinMLUseGraphicQueue” setting, replace “<value>False</value>” with “<value>True</value>”.
Restart DxO PhotoLab.

The support website search NEVER found this article: I was actually checking the DeepPrime minimum requirements for a GPU card, because after receiving the reply from support, I was on the verge of buying another one. So I googled “DxO compatible GPU” and got there. Saved my a couple of 100’s € for a new card… glad I insisted!

Hope this will help others. It could work for you too.

But I’d suggest that this hidden parameter should be exposed in the performance tab in preferences.

That would have saved me, and others, a lot ot time and frustration



Hi Dirk
Thanks a lot for the link.

My Radeon PRO WX5100 8 gigs, after DXO installation it is a bit different from you. I found a file under C:\Progran Files \Dxo called ''DXO.Photolab.exe" that is not an executable file but a " config " file. After opening it and doing a search with ‘Ctrl+F" and writing for the search “WinMLUseGraphicQueue” it found it at line 409. I changed the value to “True” saved it and restarted Photolabs DXO 5,2,0 build 4732 and DeepPrime so far didn’t failed after numerous processed files with very heavy amount of noise and trying without using the "magnifier tool’ a single time. The process time is at least twice faster than peviously before changing the “False” value to “True”.

Note that I had to change the “Properties” of the file to modify it.

Its a chance guys like you, don’t quit at finding solutions to problems.


Hi Luke, glad to hear it worked for you too. I have been stress-testing the system hard since I posted this, and now it works every single time, and it’s faster than before. So I consider it’s a confirmed fix.

Now I need to find a solution to get PL5-generated DNGs “all corrections applied” to display with the correct profile in Lightroom: that’s another HUGE frustration where support couldn’t help me out…

Yes, you need to run your editor as administrator (I use Notepad++ for this sort of simple code editing, I recommend it)

Let’s just hope that PL5 updates don’t overwrite the config files (there’s no reason to do so, but DxO sometimes makes weird decisions)


1 Like

Wouldn’t be a great idea to let DXO technical support know what we did and ask them to correct it in their updates not to have to start all over again, re-inventing the wheel again ?
I wish you good luck for your DNG files. I use Capture One mostly for editing. I plan to use also my Ukrainian Luminar 4 & AI for replacing skies, or erasing electrical lines and all the things I would like to erase. Luminar “erase” tool is the best easy way that I found to do theses tasks. I don’t know what should be my process to take advantage of DeepPrime for noise reduction on theses Luminar processed images.
Have a nice day

1 Like

Yes, I posted a feature request (put this switch in the preferences/performance panel), and also posted a follow-up in my support ticket queue


PS you can vote for the feature request, that is the way it seems to work here.

DeepPrime must be the very first step in the workflow. It only works on raw files anyway, since it’s a demosaic processor.

True, it only works on RAW files. As soon as I will process my file in any software such as in Luminar or DXO the output can not be saved as a RAW anymore. … Maybe the best way would be to :
1- open in DXO and . fix everything except what need to be corrected in Luminar. Output as a “Dng or Tif”
2- Open The output of no 1, in Luminar fix “shy’; 'erase”, output in the chosen format. Should I avoid using the Luminar denoiser at the output, because will it add artifacts to the already previously denoise files ? . If I want to print the output, maybe output in tif format.

If you already work with a denoised RAW in Luminar, what will the Luminar denoiser do? Probably tackle the details DeepPrime was preserving and treat them as noise? At best, Luminar’s denoiser doesn’t do anything (so, why use it additionally?), but I’m afraid, it will harm the output.

What can you lose if you try for yourself?

I use PL5 and Lumina (AI and now the new Neo), how much I do in each application obviously depends on what I am working on.
But generally, Deep Prime and profile based changes come first in DxO, and maybe obvious crops any technical changes such as geometry. All the things DxO simply does better than any other product I have found.

After that which ever app feels right for what I want to next.
I export from DxO as DNG (if I am going to use Luminar Neo) or TIFF (Luminar AI).

I have found the Luminar denoise does nothing after deep prime has been run - maybe just softens the image a little, not usually a good thing.

Other than the time involved, I have not found a downside to putting everything through Deep Prime, even low ISO images. But I am open to ideas and opinions on that!
Bottom line is Deep Prime has saved me a fortune in expensive lenses. It really is an ISO game changer.
This is a DxO forum so I won’t go into why I use Luminar, other than to say it appeals to my lazy side!

Running a different noise reduction program after DeepPRIME will not improve anything and will likely do more harm than good as you’ve discovered.