I noticed that PureRAW 1 is changing the color temperature of DNGs. For instance, when I use “Adobe Portrait” in Lightroom for processing my RAWs, export DNG into PureRAW and reimport into Lightroom, images have a more yellow tint.
Is this a know bug? Or is my workflow unsound? It is quite annoying - all I want is the denoising / sharpening without any other change whatsoever.
Any help / thoughts would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Always use PureRAW first (with the RAWs). Then LR (with the DNG). Both Raw and DNG are just interpreted from each application so there is no “correct” WB or color temperature.
As Michael advises …
Absolutely, yes - that’s the whole point of using PureRAW; its RAW processing capabilities (a sub-set of PhotoLab) are significantly better than other tools.
John M
Apples and oranges. PureRAW is a de-noising and sharpening tool, nothing else.I cannot use it to develop RAWs in any meaningful way. That’s why I feel it should do its thing and leave everything else the way it is - hands of my colors! 
Using it even before culling on thousands of images does not seem to make much sense to me, given the amount of time and power it takes. PureRAW is an added step in the middle for me, I use it only for the final selection of images before going into PS for retouching.
Regarding quality, it works just as perfectly on DNGs exported from Lightroom as it does on the orignal RAW from the camera. Well, apart from the color shift.
Hey Michael, Thanks for the input, you are right, the displayed color temperature in Lightroom (after re-importing from PureRAW) is displayed as the same value as before - but is in fact 150 point off. So maybe I have to go down a different path with a different solution, as this is quite annoying.
Starting the workflow in PureRAW doesn’t work for me - I start with hundreds of images, often thousands and only need the added quality from PureRAW for the final selection.
This looks like you are importing twice into Lightroom, possibly with the same preset, which might be doubling the effect of the preset?
This is not true. PureRAW is a RAW converter that also de-noises and sharpens. There is absolutely no need to convert from RAW to DNG before using it.
PureRAW is not intended to be “an added step”. It is designed to work on original RAW files, not those that have already been converted. You just happen to have found that it can work on DNG files but, in fact, this is then doubling up on the “deRAWing”.
Personally, I use PhotoLab, which does everything, from reading the RAW to producing a finished edited image, including the DeepPRIME noise reduction and superb fine contrast sharpening (with the FilmPack adding)
Unless you need pixel editing, PhotoLab gives you a superb all-in-one workflow.
Thanks for all the input, I appreciate it. I don’t agree with everything. I feel pretty strongly that a color temperature value should not be open to “interpreation” by a RAW converter (which is not developing, but purely converting). The core issue probably is that DXO took one function out of their workflow and made it available as a standalone app. That might or might not work well with other software and workflows.
I will have a look at PhotoLab in any case. Thanks again
This is also my point of buying DXO Pure RAW 2. Denoise the images that made the final cut and not ALL of it. But I guess for now we are stuck with denoising first ALL of our images and then select.
Welcome to the forum, Sascha.
The point of PureRaw is that it’s designed to be used as the first step in your RAW processing workflow. Effectively, it’s a sub-set of DxO’s PhotoLab software, which is regularly reviewed/declared to the best RAW processor around.
If you need/want to sharpen only part of your image, you might try some of the Sharpening tools included in the Nik Collection (by DxO). Topaz probably has something along those lines too - but I know nothing about that !
John M
If Pure Raw is the first step. Don’t you think it should come with a rating system ( 5 stars etc ). So we can just pick the photos that we like, process it and then export to LR?
You might want to review the statement of PR being a subset of PL. I made the same argument to DXO in relation to the lack of OM-1 support and their response is that the products and modules are developed independently and don’t share code, so either yours (and my) understanding of the products is inaccurate, or DXO support are telling porkies.
I also agree with the above about not using PR first, my first step is to import RAW images into LR, review, cull etc, and then send a set of images to PR to process to DNG - this is even a workflow advertised by DXO so not sure why you think you would start with RAW images in PR before they even go near LR etc. PR is very slow, so I don’t have time to process every shot. It isn’t uncommon for me to make several edits too, although I can’t do any masking LR as the optical correction in PR is different and the masks don’t often match, but otherwise all my edits get transferred to the DNG’s that return from PR.
Hi Alex,
It may well be that PR and PL are not actually sharing the same code base and/or it’s not worked on by the same dev. team (I don’t work for DxO, so I wouldn’t know, either way) - - but, the technology / intellectual property is certainly common between the two … that’s most specifically the point of PureRaw.
Yes, that’s fine; you’re using LR in this case as your image manager - but you’re not using Adobe tools to process your RAW files (instead, and properly, you’re using PR for its intended purpose).
On the other hand, I understand Sascha’s process as; i) using LR, via Adobe Bridge I assume, to process his RAWs into DNGs - and then, ii) using PR to process the DNGs … which is not making best use of PR.
Regards, John M