DxO Photo Lab can still not display resulting DNGs of it’s own making.
I refresh this old request because I still find it silly and stubborn to refuse to display its own results.
It feels like DxO is not proud of what they produce in DNG, a black sheep in an otherwise happy family.
C’mon guys and gals, jump your shadows and finally show your DNGs too!
Why do you want this ?
Do you want only to look at them and be able to process them like RGB files, or do you expect them to be process able like the original raws? Because the second would not be possible, as far as I know.
Why do I want this?
Because I do and because it feels kind of snooty to ignore on’s own product.
Hmm never checked this, did a test made a DxO.DNG and a Adobe DNG converter file.DNG which makes a file which is able to open in PL and indeed a dxo.DNG is not visible…
So you can’t store your rawfiles as a DNG if you want in order to be able to open them eternity. (i believe that was one of the reasons DNG is made. univeral container for raw formats which overcome the age of time.)
Not that i do but hence indeed it is strange that a self produced DNG can’t be re-opend.
Tiff and Jpeg can so why DXO.DNG not?
DNG is just a container format. There is a difference between a DNG containing RAW data, which is supported by PL, and an exported/processed DNG which contains data, that is more like an RGB image. You can read about it here:
http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/dng/linear.htm#what
https://www.cambridgeincolour.com/forums/thread50494.htm
I think, there is no support for processing/viewing linear DNGs and that is why it is not possible to use the DNGs exported from PL. Even if these files would be visible in PL, you would have only reduced functionality on them, more like the one on TIFFs or JPEGs.
It is a valid request to be able to see them, but then maybe people would start to ask, why one DNG allows different adjustments than the other.
People ask a lot of questions. While it is welcome to develop applications along user feedback, it should also be possible to develop a product in an “absolute” way, meaning to go a way that is not determined by fear of what people might say, but in the interest of whatever idea drives that development.
The original file is and always will be the original file. In this sense, DNG is an intermediate format (unless your camera speaks DNG) between the original and whatever the target might be. While DPL can display and offer for customising TIFF and JPEG files, it cannot even display its own product. Maybe DxO should create another product that will process DxO’s DNG files? Maybe Adobe should buy DxO instead? And transform DPL into a subscription based service?
Hm, DxO did develop some things in an absolute way without asking for user feedback in the past. The result could be seen in the last months. It is really cool, that people are asked now, what they want and that this is merged into the company’s own strategy.
For the remaing part of your post, I do not understand, what you want to say, sry.
Posts often revolve around their respective centres as planets around a sun.
What I say is: I want DPL to be able to read/display/process DNGs produced by DPL.
Here’s why: I have a lot of negatives from the chemical photo era that I digitise. When I now invert the negatives to get me a positive, most sliders adopt a negative logic. When I’d export images do DNG after the inversion, I’d be able to work on the images without having to twist my brain. I could use TIFF instead of DNG and lose the benefits of having a “digital negative” and use a lot more space on the disk.
Today, I invert the raw files in DPL and send them to Lightroom for further processing. I’d prefer to be able to work without having to change apps.
Yes, that is OK. I only wanted people to understand, why it is currently not possible, and that DNG is a special format. There is always a way to mark exported DNGs in a special way, so that it is obvious, that they allow less than the original raw DNGs, to avoid questions and make them distinguishable.
Digital Negative G… that part i get and i also get that its a format/container like Mpeg4/Divx or for stills Jpeg/Tiff. (how they put the raw data inside and encode this readable for all raw converters well that’s far above my knowledge.)
The lineair part i also grasp bearly in the most basic way.
(i did some test with the liniar DNG out DxO in a other raw converter app and the first thing i discovered was that the “noise” wasn’t recoqnised any more because it was “pixelized” and because of that some other things like camerastyle info was also stripped which could be read from straight rw2.) I also could zend the correction of exposure and contrast settings with the dxo dng towards the other application and stil control WB. The problem was color stability. (which is discribed in DxO manual)
Thanks, it helps but a real understanding is a shelf to high for me.
You have a firm point. I don’t have a other app which can provide a liniar DNG to see what it does. (DxO dng loaded in Silkypix 7pro does give some strange effects, CA/ purple fringing is still correctable also vignetting or WB. But some of the denoise sliders do nothing anymore.
To speak in favor of DxO why should you export a DNG and loop this into DxO again without loading it first in to a extern application like any photo app which can read DNG?
And if loaded into a application as DNG after some tinkering it would be Tiff or Jpeg as export container i think.
So there isn’t any practical use other then save a rawfile half processed like freezing dough to make bread later.
This is a good description for the exported DNG. A half processed raw, I think mainly developed to be opened in Lightroom to make the final steps, developed in the era, where OpticsPro was more a plugin than a standalone application.
But if there is no LR anymore, it makes sense to be able to see, what you have exported in the standalone application.
I would export my stuff in TIFF/JPEG anyway. It lets less room for look interpretation and is hence a better format for archiving, at least for me.
Yes it makes sense to me. Does a viewer not be sufficient? ( to much interpretation room?)
It would be interesting to extract the DNG info indeed like a dopfile does for reopening a rawfile in dxo pl. You don’t have any “undo history” but a reset to base is stil possible to start over.
i just store rw2 and dopfiles in a archieve and delete all inbetweens like dng or tiff exports of dxo when i be done processing and made a Jpeg for achieve/viewing.
every time i want to redo i copy the dop in a second folder (for restoring purposes) or make a virtual copy first.
I suppose the rawdng like ARC can make is later in the time when the original rw2 isn’t decodeble in dxopl v20xx still there. so no worries.
I’ve followed this thread with some interest. Now however I have revisited it because I bought a training course video with “follow along” files that were in DNG format. The files open in ACR but not Dxo(anything). The course is about prepping raw images before going into an editor. Luckily I have and use CS6 but I normally use DxO for my raw development. Not with these files where the local adjustments would have been perfect.
This thread is now of importance to me. For what that is worth.
Eh what does this “follow along” exactly mean? which different types of DNG is there?
what is placed in this DNG-file and what not?
Sounds like a step by step tutorial where DNGs are used as base images for raw development training. Because they are linear DNGs, they cannot be opened in PL.
Yes - I would certainly expect (hope?) DxO to be taking this approach into account - - along with input from we punters that guides the usability and user-interface.
John M
With oncoming asset management functionalities, DPL needs to be able to display images of more file types.
The most pressing seems to concern DNG files. Some of them display, others don’t. This has to go away because we don’t just want to see that a file matches the search criteria, we also want to see what is in the file too.
“wouldn’t it be nice” is not just a bunch of words from a Beach Boys song…
I really hope that DxO will bring in more file formats into their products.
I still think that it makes sense to be able to display the images created by their own apps.
I come across this thread today because I would like to export my file into DNG and re-read it straight back to DXO Photolab!
I am fully aware that the DNG file generated by DXO Photolab is not a raw file anymore because “some corrections have been applied in a non-reversible fashion, such as demosaicing, noise reduction, etc.” (quoted from DXO website).
I want to export my file in DNG because I want to save disc space! I am using the 45MP Nikon D850 and take mainly pictures of birds, small birds. The reach is never enough, therefore, I crop my image most of the time. However, I am still stuck with all those 45MP data! The cropped DNG is smaller than the cropped 16bit TIFF file or the original raw file. In addition, I assume that DNG file still has more than enough data for future processing (not like JPG). Also, I do not have to assign a color profile (not like when exporting to JPG or to TIFF)! That may sound minor but I already came across situations where my picture just get muddy once I view it on other device because I messed up the color profile!
I don’t crop my raw file with other softwares and import it into DXO Photolab because once processed by other raw converter, the image is no longer a raw file. Therefore, I loose “Prime denoise” which is the main reason why I bought DXO Photolab Elite in the first place (I almost bought Topaz Denoise and I hope I made the right decision)!
One may ask why don’t I switch my camera to the DX format mode. The answer is because switching back and forth between FX and DX is not always that convenient. Just not have time for it in the field. In addition, the extra field of view on FX format can save your bird in flight shot! Nothing is more frustrating than having that bird in the shoot with the right light, perfect body position, tack sharp focus but with the tip of the wing touching the edge of the frame!
Now that the file is cropped and smaller, I want to read the smaller DNG file straight back to DXO Photolab for further processing. I find it inconvenient to process the image between several softwares (I do not photoshop my shot I only gimp them lol 
). This is another reason why I chose DXO Photolab over other Raw processor software + Topaz Denoise.
I agree with the OP, it is quite weird that a software cannot read the file that it generates! It would be a nice feature to have! I hope they will have a look at it. It should not be a major implementation and therefore, hopefully, will be implemented not only in the next major release => $ 
$