Help us make DxO PhotoLab even better: take the survey!

Firstly, welcome! I would echo the message given by other members regarding using the forum rather than generally meaningless surveys to create, communicate & deliver a work plan.

I would also ask about supporting & keeping up-to-date in this day & age with support for the Android DNG format. I have had to use Raw Therapee to process my Android dng raw and find that I am gyrating to using that more as a unified processor for my NEF, CR2 & dng but would rather continue using PL3 as a very very long time DxO user.

I do agree. :+1:

Hi Rick,

We’re working on many fronts like speeding up our lab processes (where possible) and broaden the accepted formats… It’s not something you do on a spare weekend, but we are on it.
BTW, speaking of the Leica D-Lux 7. Guess what? It’s finally (almost) there. The update will be pushed out next month. Thank you for your patience Rick!


1 Like

[quote=“noddy, post:62, topic:11678”]
support for the Android DNG format[/quote]

Don’t forget that DPL is not about supporting a particular format. It’s about supporting a particular camera/lens combo associated with a particular sensor pattern which is something quite different. I don’t think that DxO will make any effort to read a generic format if they don’t have the opportunity to also measure the optical characteristics of the camera/lens combo that has produced the DNG file. In the case of Androïd DNG this implies testing and measuring a lot of smartphones. Moreover, it’s not obvious that measuring and testing a smartphone in their lab according to their usual procedures is merely possible.

Ok … thank you. I wasn’t aware of that. It makes the decision easier for next time round.

[quote=“Pat91, post:65, topic:11678”]
I don’t think that DxO will make any effort to read a generic format [DNG] [/quote]
It’s already in the backlog, as it should be.

Quote: …any management of your image files and their folders outside of Lightroom, intentionally or accidentally […]
That is precisely the point why in the end I did not pursue getting more familiar with Lr 6.14 (perpetual license). The thought that my image holdings in a folder structure of years-quarters-months-days and day folders with keyword name could get messed up by accident …scarry. Rather than a DB with pp capabilitties I have a pp application with access to my image folders and adding ratings, keywords, processed and exported images. That’s the DAM that suits me.

@StevenL One UX feature on the Mac side would need a look into. The folder structure in the library palette has “room for improvement”
I would like to see there only the folders that I need there and not the whole folder-tree


1 Like

I agree with @Sigi on this.

So do I. It gets too confusing to find more than one path to a folder, with both the “direct” one, which starts at the hard drive, and the “favourites” one, which really isn’t, because it still starts at the Pictures folder.

At first I found the “Favorites” confusing until I realized it was only a reproduction of the favorites in the Finder sidebar.

That would be OK if it weren’t for the times when DxO also unfolds directories from the MacintoshHD root as well from time to time, thus leaving two open hierarchies.

If anything were to be a true Favourites, then it should only contain those directories that I most use, not the whole disk or user root directory.

I agree…

Expression Media/Media Pro had a nice solution for the the folder tree. You just dragged the folders you wanted to see into the programm and voila, there it was.

Hi! I totally agree with @renren.

Anyway, I’d love to see PL add some more features to its DAM / folder navigation structure. For example, more import settings, batch renaming and IPTC metadata would be great features, as would be pre-defined export settings and smart folder creation.

I don’t think software like PL should do “only post-processing”, but I totally agree post-processing needs to be the priority.

I am very happy with DxO. The only thing I miss is highlight recovery. Some details lost in not extreme highlight I can recover with Capture One Pro but not in DxO PhotoLab elite. I love DxO because the colors and the shadow details are much better. I use Canon 5DS (50 Mp).
Regards, Willy


@Willy1 , have you seen this discussion?

Thank you Greg,
I have read it partly. Fact is, what I try, highlight recovery as Capture One can do is not possible (for me) in DxO. I think what I wish is already an very old wish. I remember a discussion about it in Optics Pro 9.
Kind regards Willy

1 Like

See the difference at the back of this ship. Capture One versus DxO.

Regards Willy

Hi Willy,

Without access to your RAW file, I simply took the DxO.jpg version of your image and added a touch of DxO Clear View and some Smart Lighting “focus” on the ship (30secs of effort) … with result as follows:

Note: There’s a bit of a colour-cast in the clouds - but that’s probably just 'cos all I had was the jpg.

John M