Hello @Yoms,
Thanks for your feedback. You are perfectly right: at the moment we do not provide a well-structured series of video tutorials (e.g. “Getting started”, “Interface walk through”, “Importing & Exporting” and so on…). We are aware that this is less than ideal and we want to be better at this, to empower our users.
@mwsilvers, @OXiDant, @platypus when someone starts learning something new, having a “pre-done order” to follow can be useful and it’s often the case (take your camera’s settings for instance, where images settings usually come first because “it’s better to start there”…). I guess for Yoms it’s not about the order of which corrections should be done first when editing an image in PL, but to have a “learning order” to follow to accelerate his learning curve, being sure not to miss the most important things to know…
@yoms if you have any suggestions on how we can do better, please get in touch with me directly through DM!
DxO’s website currently presents 82 tutorials under the “DxO PhotoLab” tab.
Many of these tutorials carry “OpticsPro” in their name, which means that they are either outdated or general enough to be kept - even under an older product name. A few tutorials are webinars, others are reading material etc. the whole thing feels like a box of legos scattered in the room…
There are several ways to present information
Reference, explaining what there is and what it does - basically what’s in the user guide
→ add links to the online guide (or the pdf) that point to specialised tutorials…
Use cases, explaining which tool to use, why to use it and how (my image is flat and noisy…)
Often, there is more than one way, so it might be useful to also show alternatives
Level of detail (surface tutorials vs. in-depth tutorials)
Beginner, intermediate, advanced
Reading vs. Video
Structured presentation vs nonchalant chatting vs length
Key technologies vs. working with them
other
The sheer number of tutorials offered dictates a comprehensive directory with filters/switches for language, length, type, content, depth etc. Adding such a directory is possibly the easiest first step for better accessibility of the content. Define characteristics, assign to available tutorials.
Create a matrix (this is an example, a different structure might fit our needs better)
clicking on a row title creates a list of relevant content from where the user selects a tutorial
→ e.g. Tutorials for new users about general/special etc. features
clicking on a column title creates a list of relevant content from where the user selects a tutorial
→ e.g. Tutorials about Colour for new/intermediate/advanced users
Your right about learningcurves and path’s to follow.
But it’s for every one different.
Changing processing software means delearn habbits and adjust aproaches.
Some learn by watching video’s.(edit, forgot to end the sentens,some learn by reading manuals.) I like to watch also but most tutorials, from any one not just ambasadeurs from dxo, are skipping to easy over first base things. What does it, how does it the adjustment, where to be carefull learning about the tool itself.
Most are what you can do with it and you need to watch them serveral times to catch up.
And indeed a good logical videolibrary index will help.
But as i wrote the fastest you learn is trail and error on test images just try everything out, push the tools over the edge to see what happens and when you have questions search on google and ask here.
I agree Steven. People learn in different ways. Some people are more comfortable with detailed step by step guidance, and other people, myself included, like to jump right in and experiment. However, as I indicated in an earlier response, currently there is no series of integrated step-by-step training videos available.
For me learning by doing has been a more successful approach. I primarily use videos to fill in the gaps when a feature or concept is unclear. I try not to be timid when learning new things. I will try and use every single feature.
Absolutely correct Steven. The number of training videos that are available today are significantly greater than what was available when I started using PhotoLab at the end of 2017. The online help manual is also greatly improved. And this forum has become an excellent source for detailed information about features from both advanced users and DXO’s staff.
Of course experience in other software certainly helps since the general approach to raw image processing is somewhat similar from application to application. As a result, for someone like me, with years of experience using Lightroom, and more moderate experience with other raw processors, the switch to Photolab was relatively painless. However, for people who are new to raw processing, the effort to learn PhotoLab with the current available resources is probably much more difficult
Hello @StevenL,
Thanks for understanding, I started to feel dumb. It’s definitely not about the edits themselves.
Some may call me old school, but by following a book and/or a tutorial, I learned new stuffs in the past that, then, helped me better develop/organize/whatever my photos (hence, the above reference to a humble approach). The “move-the-cursors-randomly-and-see-what-it-does” approach is pretty respectable, it’s just not my approach.
As for the manual, of course it’s nice to have. I use it as a reference when a definition/understanding of something specific is needed. It that case, yes rtfm! Tutorials have a different approach, they are meant to teach you and ease the learning process through examples. They are complete workflows on their own.
Placing the DxO Optics Pro tutorials in another category
Placing the PL3 tutorials that no longer apply to PL4 tutorials in a different category
Add keywords to tutorial “Beginner”, “Intermediate”, “Advanced” or something like this. My wording is not ideal as it sounds like difficulty levels and I meant stages. By “Beginner” I rather mean “To begin with”. For example a tutorial about interface presentation is “To begin with” and a tutorial about “Watermarking” is definitely at the end of the cycle at an advanced stage.
You could simply initiate a playlist on your YouTube channel before modifying your website, the effort would be just about ordering the videos in playlist. Maybe Gilles Théophile has an idea of the order since he is used to writing books about LR.
For those who are only interested to learn at the same time of developing pictures in a creative way, I read a really nice book a few years ago from David duChemin:
(FR version) L’Intention du photographe: Comment donner un sens à vos images en postproduction
(EN version) Vision & Voice: Refining Your Vision in Adobe Photoshop Lightroom (Voices That Matter)
It’s based on Lightroom though, but basically it explains how “cursors” are moved to achieve an artistic goal while giving you some technicals about how the cursors work. It’s not overwhelming though (algorithmically speaking).
Yoms, keep in mind that many of the older OpticsPro videos may still relevant for Photolab 4 depending on the tools, features and techniques they describe. Because of that don’t avoid them altogether.
Don’t be, and editing is al about knowing the use of tools.
i was used to Silkypix 5 pro, many people are confused about there user interface and they always think it’s not learnable. when i was searching for a new and better processing application i was trying out LR7? i was used to manual control and no “self thinking actions” which LR does in my eye’s frequently.
And DxO’s essentials free version was the other which was a instant optical improvement but not in contrast/toning. trying the suite elite version did bring me over to DxO PhotoLab v1.
i spent one year before i understand the real power of Controlpoints and learned to master the contrast types and tonalty control in highlight and shadow. every time i used to compare my old silkypix to my new toolset trying to equal the outcome.
So i understand your question and the confusion about the tutorials sequens.
In this forum there are lots of “try outs” and “tutorials” connected to a question or image with problems.
The youtube and dxo support site video’s do help out.
Pieloe’s tutorial is great in basic understanding the way things should work.
The way i learned my way in DxOPL was open two Applixcations(your LR in this case and DxO) and make a test folder place a rawfile in there and edit step by step in both the same image and try to get the same outcome.
This give you a anker of known stuff to compare new stuff.
every time a tool doesn’t what you expect start investigate that tool in behaviour or look for other approaches (other tools).
Ask questions on this forum if things arn’t clear.
And i was stumbling on the same problem back then lots of watching tutorials and lookingfor clues.
now we are at v4 (four years)
And i am very happy with the toolkit DxOPL provides.
So i understand your quest and the short answer is take your time to get to know the programs toolkit and ask here every thing you like to know about it.
@StevenL is active in user experience improvement and its improving in side the application and on the webside.(edit: i didn’t ment your slow but changes are as this gears in the video below.)
But it’s no complain but more a observation:
when the wind is slow the production is low, like these wheels and gears of wood: Talking about looking “under the hood” of making Peanut oil
Personally, I use the order of adjustment groups set up in PL4. Starting from light and ending up with local adjustments. This is a good rule-of-thumb for workflow.
The local adjustments should always be made last to avoid the masks or adjustment points shifting location. I do hope these will in the future versions be located in relation to the image and not in relation to the frame as present.
Do bear in mind that many adjustments affect each other and it may be necessary to go back to an earlier adjustment to re-adjust. But, be careful with local adjustments!
Like Yoms I have switched from LR5, in my case, to DXO PL3. I found the camera/lens correction, sharpness and noise tools to be very powerful. Clearview and Smart Lighting also work well for me. I find Viewpoint very useful too.
U Point is conceptually different from the Radial Filter in LR, and as Oxidant notes local repair and cloning does not work well with horizon and perspective adjustments. This has proved a great frustration to me and I am not sure even now I have fully mastered it, but certainly in my early stages it wasted a lot of time and caused a lot of frustration. I don’t miss the DAM capability of LR as I have developed my own technique for archiving my material, but keywords would help.
Overall I am vey pleased with DXO and coming from LR was not a great leap for me. There are various tutorials that I have dipped into but have generally found it better to experiment and then search for specific detail if I need for further help.
The one thing I do miss though is the Radial Filter and the ability to manipulate this to my specific requirement and bring about the local fine tuning of exposure/colour that I want. I have yet to really master this using the DXO tools, and frankly for me it would just be easier to use a LR style radial filter as that is what I know and understand.
I will be interested to hear more about your transition Yoms, and how you get down the learning curve. As an experienced LR user I would be very interested to hear of any tips and techniques you have for similar switchers such as myself.
Hi,
Actually, I am transitioning “slowly” at the moment although I’ve been rather active on the forum lately. I say “slowly” because I’m rather preparing the future, so to speak. I’m a travel photography enthusiast which means that I basically only shoot while going for long trips (several months). I’m currently preparing for my next one in a few months. So, at the moment I’m just playing around with the trial version of DxO. I’ll do the same with C1. Recently, I’ve made up my mind to keep using LR as my DAM (LR Classic is free to use beyond the trial period as a DAM-only software; pretty cool if you have an existing LR library).
As for the radial filter, look at this message:
At the moment, I think you could paint circles using the local brush diminishing the density of each circle as you go outwards in order to mimic a radial filter. Not sure how good that would be.
Thanks Yoms, very interesting to hear your views. A further update in due course would be appreciated. I am particularly interested in macro work and have found that sharpness has been particularly good, with my 60mm Olympus macro lens. I was aware of the discussion about the radial filter on the forum, and am pleased that it has progressed up the list of to-do jobs. I have tried using the various brushes etc, and also further processing in Affinity, but I guess I am just too familiar with the radial filter and what it can do. I find the brushes in DXO too imprecise and lacking in feather for my purposes.
!
