I wasn’t referring to Prime/Deep Prime being removed, I meant the Export to DNG: Optical corrections and NR exporting capability being removed. I was essentially just joking, but they did do that with Viewpoint. Then again, it was a different company when that happened.

I do not disagree with your final statement. What makes you think that? I have a LR6 perp license that I can no longer use and I’m definitely in a crusade to use anything but Adobe’s products.

As regards market share, I don’t know neither. What I wrote was DxO’s own statement, not mine. Check it here:

It states:

DxO tells us that of the roughly 10 million photographers currently shooting in a Raw format, 90% use Adobe Photoshop, Lightroom or some combination of the two in their workflow. And of those who don’t, many more will already have moved to non-DxO third-party rivals like Capture One, Exposure and more.

1 Like

You’re assuming Lightroom. There is no “Export to Capture One” or “Export to ON1” button.

I watched the PhotoJoseph video last night and accept there are some optimisations with PureRAW that I did not appreciate and some of those will apply to PhotoLab as well. I also accept that some pre-planning such as default presets that can be done (although that would affect any “normal” use of PhotoLab as well). But my planned use case (which I think is the most obvious one) is to start the process with PureRAW. As in, point it at my memory card for input, and the output would be their final resting place. I’m seeing PureRAW filling the same role as Adobe’s DNG converter which I used for a short while.

I didn’t disagree with there being no need for PureRAW but nevertheless there are benefits to PhotoLab users to use PureRAW instead, especially if there is a desire to use something different than PhotoLab’s tools for the rest of the processing. All it would take is a simple ability to script the conversion and it would become totally invisible. Yes, PhotoLab could be scripted too, but that is a much bigger ask.

Pure Raw might be a good thing, like those using Affinity Photo, I’d like to see DxO updating Sharpener Pro from the Nik collection, then those not using PL can have all the goods DxO has to offer while keeping your workflow.

1 Like

It is also worth noting that the DPReview post linked above does mention that PureRAW does not always produce the same output as PhotoLab at default settings.

Pure raw is like a preset which turns off a lot of things in the dxopl elite.
Maybe the colorrendering in pure raw is somewhat different.

If DNG only optics and deeprime in dxopl is a “non colorrendering” output ( native colorspace of the sensor) then pure raw should be, when it is also the same DNG output, the same.

Still it’s offer to people who are deep in Photoshop/lightroom to get some money of those who don’t need the full package.

1 Like

I find this confusing. How is this a benefit to Photolab users If they use PureRaw and then some other software for the remainder of their edits instead of Photolab? It sounds like you’re saying the benefit to Photolab users is they don’t have to use Photolab. Besides the fact that many of us here prefer using PhotoLab over anything else, in the circumstances you suggest, they are not actually Photolab users If Photolab is not included in the workflow.


1 Like

Perhaps I should have said “PhotoLab owners” rather than “PhotoLab users”.

My original post included…

…and the initial responses were…

Maybe it’s just me but the implication I took from those responses was “why would you bother spending more money?” Which is why I felt it worth explaining the benefits of using the black box compared to the full product, even if it cost more and reduced control.

That’s it. If you want to use PL4, use PL4. If you want to use iMatch and not PL4’s DAM, then do that. And if you want to use a fully featured product only to do basic RAW conversion, then do that too. I’m not suggesting what anyone do, just offering a perspective.


I must admit that I’m a bit confused too about what @zkarj wrote. PureRaw is somewhat an excerpt of PhotoLab. So if you already have PhotoLab, it would indeed be a double spent for the same thing. The workflow would be the same between both softwares as it seems you’re using another DAM. Yes, it would be the same (spare one mouse click, maybe two).

What I would better understand though is this narrative: “I presently have DxO PL, but I mainly use it for demosaicing + optics corrections + NR. Since DxO has released PureRaw, I won’t buy DxO PL Elite 5 in the future, I’ll just buy PureRaw 2 instead”.

I can’t think of any other way to write it, but it doesn’t matter. My point is made for anyone who sees value in it.

I do value everyone’s opinion here, and as much as I feel I have been misunderstood, so I have probably misunderstood others.


I see that as simply a statement of reality; Adobe is the “gorilla” in this marketplace - but, that doesn’t mean there’s not room for other players too … and PureRAW is a clever move (I reckon) that gets DxO a bigger share of Adobe’s user-base; who, otherwise, would never consider anything other than the Adobe rut that they’re stuck in.

Remember, PhotoLab is a LOT more than simply its RAW conversion engine and DeepPRIME - and non-DxO buyers of PureRAW may be tempted to have a closer look at PL once they’re introduced to PR … Again, a clever move by DxO, I reckon.

For example: I reckon there will be requests for “more control” over PureRAW processing paramaters … and punters can then be pointed to PhotoLab.

John M


Even better, provide more control over output-sharpening in PL’s Export to Disk process
See here to vote for this (Currently 42 votes as I write).

John M

Yeah, a valid point here (PureRaw as an entry ticket for DxO PL).
But then in the future DxO definitely has to make an upgrade plan from PureRaw to PhotoLab so that in the end, the user pays exactly the price of PhotoLab Elite, but in 2 steps.


Morning :),

  • Please, do not worry - no plans to cut any functionality in PL :wink: . As most of you said - this app is mostly for those who is not a PL user and works with RAW format.

But if you want to buy it even if you have PL, it’s up to you :grin:

Svetlana G.


Thanks for that confirmation @sgospodarenko . I was actually trying(unsuccessfully) to be funny, but that is very good to know.


Attention DxO PureRAW marketing team:

There’s a mix of languages in the promo material:

… which may be off-putting for someone considering purchasing PR - but worrying that it’s not in their native language.

John M

1 Like

Attention DxO PureRAW marketing team :
There’s a mix of languages in the promo material:

but at least a ‘consistent behaviour’ :upside_down_face:

1 Like

@John-M, @Wolfgang, as with most software, version 1.0 lacks some care regarding peripheral functionality. It’s a pity, because all these things have been pointed out during the tests.

The situation reminds me of something our math teacher said quite a while ago:
"Master, the work is done, should I fix it now?

Thanks John for pointing it out!
Was this in the promo email that you received or somewhere else?