This is my first post on our forum and probably you don’t know me yet, so just let me introduce myself: I’m Steven, the lead UX designer at DxO Labs, and my work consists of relentlessly improving our products & services.
I’d really like to have your personal feedback on DxO PhotoLab: how can we improve it for you?
The survey is completely anonymous and should only take three to four minutes to complete. Would you mind helping us out?
This survey will not be enough if you want to achieve your goals. There are enough interesting threads and legitimate requests in this forum to give you work for a few years. Visiting this forum as often as you can will be a good source of inspiration. As an early user of the DxO products (since the beginning, actually), here is what I think about further developments of DPL :
Focus on what’s really important and on what DxO really master : image processing. Don’t spend time trying to implement a DAM that will never reach (considering your resources) the level of the DAM module in other tools. Even Phase One is unable to implement in Capture One a catalog as good as the one in Lightroom. I prefer a solid image processing tool. I’ll manage my images myself. I would even say that you should release a version of DPL without any DAM feature. I’d prefer this.
The DPL UI has to be reworked but I guess you know that already. There are a lot of inconsistencies in the current UI and they are piling up as new features appear. I have often posted requests about this. One good example is this thread : Make image browser window size and location mode dependent .
Do not delay too much the support of Fuji X-Trans RAWs (actually, I mean do something quickly). As an instructor and animator in a very big photo club, I’m in touch with a lot of photographers (including professionals) and I do see how quickly many people are moving to Fujifilm cameras. Their success is based on very good reasons and no software editor should ignore this. I have myself sold a good part of my Canon gear in order to acquire Fuji hardware. This is considerably limiting my use of DPL.
Do not rely only on user forum and beta testing to get feedback. DxO should organize meetings with users in order to facilitate exchanges. This is a good way to get a feel for user problems and needs.
Hi Patrick
I completely agree with the two first points.
For the last one. DxO listens to its customers and fall into the trap.
Users asking for everything and its opposite!
DAM is a case study but we can’t blame DxO to listening customers.
Pascal
Nice to e-meet you
Thanks for your feedback and your inputs!
As you said, feedback comes from various sources…I completely agree with that. Browsing the forum is as important as this survey. There are people that prefer to post here, others feel more comfortable taking a survey, some users would prefer to have an IRL discussion, and the very same person often says something interesting and new on each occasion. This is why gathering any type of contribution is key for anyone doing my job.
Behind the scenes, there is a lot going on,…we have a roadmap to follow, a backlog to check, technological pitfalls to circumvent, deadlines to respect, decisions to make. It’s not a straight process, like drawing a line from point A to point B, it’s more like connecting dots on a multi-line path.
We consider and evaluate every input, suggestion and feedback of our users.
Again, thank you for your time and your help!
that could be a good thing and getting PL run faster, doing like “Adobe Bridge”, independent but can be use as image browser/culling for those that need/use PL only, as many customers already have a DAM or use/make their own DAM.
after all, VP and FP can be stand alone so why not their in-progress image browser/DAM.
I can’t add more, I think the 3 other input says it all for me.
Let me start to say that DxO staff members are easy reachable even the “CEO” you can MP directly. Try that with adobe…
DxO is migrating from a raw processor and plugin for serious photshoppers to a standalone fullblown image creator with the local tools and creative tools.
Next is the DAM.
It’s a pitfall of creating things we like,want and don’t make it sluggy and slow.
Most needed thing is autopassthrough of xmp and ptci and exif data from raw files, dng’s, tiffs and jpegs as import to the export tab. (This has no inside DAM functionallity but it supports outside dam functionallity for people who has large library’s which are monitored by profesional DAM.)
Search functions, building database and tagging has no use if you can’t export it further.
Second, a simple editing function, but this is only usefull if it can read most data of exif xmp and such.
Third a more expanded export utility, which data i want connected on the export file and how (inside or xmp, export of resolution pixelxpixel(size).
This are extra things who don’t improve a image but apperently “we” in general want it. So please keep the speed of proccesing and navigating inside on par with the improvements.
(the more you can do differently the less you know in detail)
Libray&search module / editing file metadata module / editing image file module / export module that’s i my mind the main TAB fields.
Much more details but hence, you need to do the rough part before the sanding and polishing…
I know that DxO is working hard to improve things so i just wait to see what’s popping up in the new releases and
Personally I think that your top priority should be to get everything in the ‘backlog’ done (search this forum for ‘backlog’)! It’s great that your colleagues are open about which ideas are being taken forward - but it can take years for them to actually get implemented.
For example, I requested basic Android DNG support back in 2016 on the previous forum; it’s been in the backlog for 2 or 3 years, but still no sign of it.
And as others have said, you should restrict DAM functionality to the basics (others have that area covered much more comprehensively that you can hope to compete with) and concentrate on helping us produce great photos instead.
Talking about DAM functionality, can I suggest that could be created as an additional module that integrates into PhotoLab, as do FilmPack and ViewPoint? This would then allow its development to continue without having to touch the PhotoLab codebase and without the possibility of introducing unintended bugs.
This would mean that a dedicated palette would simply appear in PhotoLab when the module was installed.
Not everybody wants or needs a DAM, just as not everybody wants or needs the other two modules already available.
In the meantime, I can’t believe that people are more interested in future features rather than fixing bugs
Agreed. There’s nothing more exasperating than seeing developers working on new features (OK, upgrades need to be justified) instead of fixing bugs or program quirks. This is less a problem with DxO than with Adobe (no significant new features, bugs lasting since 7 or 8 years, everything’s OK, the subscription is paid). But I see issues that should be taken into account without waiting too long.
One of the biggest ongoing criticisms of Luminar was its lack of a promised DAM. Likewise, one of the main criticisms I’ve read about PhotoLab, in almost every professional review, is its lack of a robust DAM. You and I may believe that developing a DAM is not the best use of DXO’s limited resources, but the marketplace seems to disagree. I just hope DXO will never require importing files. I hated that in Lightroom and it was one of several reasons I ditched it for in favor of PhotoLab.
Agree, there’s many ways to process raw without the “must import” like Lr or C1.
That you can preview in other like PM or fastrawviewer then send those you want to process is still my best way to do thing.
Unless the latest version of Capture 1 has changed significantly, you do not have to import files inorder to edit them. I believe the C1 import feature is primarily related to their DAM.
Lightroom, on the other hand, requires you to import files even if you have no intention of making use of its DAM features. The unfortunate downside of being forced to import files in Lightroom is that you must do all your image file management within Lightroom itself using it’s less than ideal set of file management tools. Additionally, any management of you image files and their folders outside of Lightroom, intentionally or accidentally, is a recipe for disaster.
Me too, even when it’s no more then what’s it now with a one on one passthrough of exif, taggs and keywords without any inside editing of those i find this good enough.
Ofcoarse if i like to change something and i need to do this outside it wil be a extra aplication but this way anyone can use it’s own holygrale.
I am not an active user of C1, however I downloaded and extensively used the trial version on two different occasions. The last time was when version 12 was released, I just drilled down to a folder and selected the image I wanted to edit, not unlike PhotoLab. I don’t recall being asked to create a session or catalog for every image I edited. It is possible I created a session and catalog at the beginning but it did not require me to indicate all the images that would be in it upfront. What I absolutely did not have to do was import files like with Lightroom. Perhaps the product has changed since I auditioned it.
Thanks for your feedback.
I’d love to just have a backlog to clear out, one item after the other, but unfortunately, it’s not that simple… As mentioned before, we need to ponder, to give a priority, to keep the windows and mac version on parity…and in the first place, we need to collect as many feedback as possible.
I would like to see a full range of colors available for the split-toning tool. I’m disappointed that there are only 6 options (three for highlights, three for shadows.)
