Bingo!!! …and Thank You !!
That link will likely answer every question I’ve got.
I’m slowly going through it on one screen, while I follow along with PL4 on my other screen. SO MANY things are now starting to make sense to me. Muchly appreciated!
It was something to do with the DxO One camera, which is an add-on for a phone or tablet.
Then you might also like to look at creating your own custom workspaces and palettes, where you can arrange whatever tools in whatever palettes you want and save the workspace.
To better understand that, maybe you should open an image and apply the DxO Standard preset.
Then go to the top of the right palette list and check the Active Corrections toggle
This will then hide all palettes except those that have been changed. What you see then is just the corrections that the standard preset has changed from the untouched file
Just a note to clarify a potential misunderstanding (Perhaps I’m being pedantic - but I’m not sure what Mike meant by “processing”).
Applying the “No Corrections” preset means that none of the possible PL corrections are applied to the image (such as corrections for lens distortion, vignetting, etc, etc) - - but, the RAW image is still processed by PL via its algorithms that convert it from a RAW file to an image you can see.
Yes, that’s correct, Mike … However, you will find it very useful to create your own custom preset that includes your favourite correction settings, and have them applied automatically - rather than laboriously repeating the same correction settings for each and every image.
The “DxO Standard” is a good starting point - - you can fine-tune it and save the result as your own;
See menu: Image / Create preset from current settings.
John M
John, thank you, and thanks to everyone else who responded. Between all this, and watching PhotoJoseph’s wonderful video on PL4, I think I understand what’s going on, and why.
Had I known about this video, I probably wouldn’t have posted my questions here.
What I meant by “processing” is how the software takes the raw data captured in a DNG file and turns it into an image I can view on my screen. Back when I shot film, I used the same chemicals for the same times, to develop my negatives 99% of the time. The “processing” was very simple. If I was careful in taking the photograph, I knew what to expect in the negative. PL4 does that, and usually a lot more. It is “processing” the image to come up with what we see on our monitor screen. I realize that is a good thing, and now I understand what it might do, and how to control this. Yesterday I knew none of this. Between all of you, and a lot of testing, and watching that video, I am much more comfortable with PL4 now.
A future question I am going to eventually ask, is if I don’t organize my images in Lightroom, and I switch to PhotoLab, how will I find my images in the future?
…and now that I understand more about how PL4 works, many of the images I created over the past few weeks are horrible. I “over did it” with all the fancy tools I can use. Things like “Clear View” can be dangerous when over-done.
I’ve also signed up for several more Webinars. I learn a lot from them. I especially like PhotoJoseph’s style, as I find it very easy to understand him - and when I don’t, I just re-play those parts until I do.
I can higly recommend to use a proper DAM software. I personally use Photo Supreme and I am happy with it BUT there is also other good DAM software out there that makes people happy.
A number of PL users who “came over” from LightRoom continue to use LR’s DAM features (which, I understand, you can continue to do without having to succumb to the dreaded subscription model), and use PL for everything else.
Personally, I simply have a well structured folder system - by date and subject/trip.
John M
Short update. In looking for DAM software, I found the new program from Camera Bits, “Photo Mechanic Plus”. It seems to have everything I ever dreamed of in organizing, plus it’s as fast as Photo Mechanic has always been. I spent over an hour talking to John, a support technician at Camera Bits. Photo Mechanic Plus is available as an update, and it’s also available at a low introductory price. I bought it, installed it, then spent a few hours watching videos on how to use it.
I plan to use the same folder where I am placing all my images for PhotoLab 4 as my default folder for Photo Mechanic Plus. I can use PM to add keywords to the metadata, or do it in PL4.
As John mentioned up above, I also plan to have a reasonably well structured folder system, which is what I’ve been doing “forever”. I guess it’s like storing photos in shoe boxes, but the DAM software will allow me to quickly find anything (assuming I set things up properly to allow this).
I’m still paying for Photoshop and Lightroom on the “plan”, but at some point I expect to stop.
Maybe tomorrow I need to stop messing with software, and go out and find some photos waiting for me to capture!
Hi Mike. An oft-seen complaint on this forum is the claim that “PL is very slow to start-up to the point where I can start working with it” … and then you find they’re pointing it at a folder containing many 100s or even 1000s of images. Don’t fall for that trap.
A better approach is to use a Work-in-Progress folder where you place all new images, and work on them therein with PL - a batch at a time. When each batch is completed, move all resulting components (RAW + sidecar/.dop + Exported-Image} to your storage structure … and repeat with the next batch. This approach will keep PL working at optimal speed.
Regards, John M
I was referring to folders being seen in Photo Mechanic Plus, not Photo Lab.
I haven’t used PhotoLab 4 enough to know that it does or does not slow down. Usually it starts up quickly. Today, one time it started up more slowly.
Since I delete most of my images in PhotoMechanic, by the time I get to editing in PhotoLab there aren’t that many images left. The only images that make it to PhotoLab are images that I like.
Thanks for the warning - I’ll pay attention to this from now on. Is there a quick way to measure how many images my PhotoLab now includes? The only images it should be aware of are those under my main folder PhotoLab (that is PhotoLab with an underscore character at the beginning and end, but the underscore doesn’t show up here - in this forum it just changes the word to be in italic font. No idea why.). I don’t think your idea will work for me, as if I place 20 new images into my PL folder, I don’t edit all of them. Some I might edit at the time, and others I might not edit until many days later.
I always work in “mode projet”, probably the same as Work-in-Progress, never directly in OS folders.
For the same reason as John said but for a more important one : if you work directly in OS folders, when you trash a picture, it does not go in os trash but disappears definitely !
If you have made an error, you must have recover from a backup…
How many photos do you work on at a time, to avoid the slowdown?
As for me, most of the work is done in Photo Mechanic, which is extremely fat. That leave maybe 20 to 50 images going to PL4. So far, it hasn’t slowed down on me.
As we are in Mac section, I can say that with PhotoLab 4, this is not true.
I’ve deleted an image from DPL filmstrip directly on OS structure without project, and it goes to the dustbin from where I can restore it easily.
I can confirm
I’m getting more confused than usual. I’ll try to explain.
I take photos, and they are captured on a memory card.
I “ingest” them into Photo Mechanic, where I review them and delete any that I obviously don’t want to keep. When I’m finished, I move everything from the temporary “ingest” folder into the folder where they will remain, in my mostly organized filing system.
From then on, maybe the same day, maybe later, I open PhotoLab 4, go to this new folder, and do my editing, deleting images I don’t think are worth keeping. When I finish editing, I use the PL tool to export them to a new folder, which is a sub-folder of where the images are being kept. If they are going to go to my SmugMug gallery, I export them as full size images. If they’re going to the Leica Forum, I reduce them to a maximum of 2 megs.
When everything is finished, I leave everything as-is, including the exported images.
I should add that for many years, I saved my images in a folder labeled like -lightroom- and all the organization was done below that main folder. Now I’ve created a new top-level folder named -photolab- and that is where all my new images are going. I haven’t used Lightroom in months.
…and I also created a top level folder for Luminar, for photos I plan to create as “photo illustrations”. As such, I can replace the sky and do all sorts of other things I would not do to “photographs”.
Having said all that, I wish for Mac, PhotoLab would have worded it as “Move to Trash” rather than “Remove”. I think you guys are telling me that my deleted photos are gone, but I’ve assumed until now that they just got moved to the trash, and won’t vanish until I “empty the trash”. Is this correct?
I have encountered this problem several times ; perhaps they have corrected but a rapid test confirm what you say.
Having tested, I have another issue : the list of pictures is not updated in photothèque…
Decidedly, I don’t trust this way of working!
Yes,
As stated (and tested) above, images deleted/removed in DPL filmstrip are going in the trash.
And you can easily test it by yourself to check it.
Yes, I understand, and I did check out my ‘trash’ and found them. What I’m suggesting, is that DxO use the same terminology as the computer it is being run on, Windows, or Mac, or ??? If its Mac, instead of “Remove” it ought to say (in my opinion) “Move to Trash”. No big deal, and they way they’re actually doing it is exactly what I would have preferred. …except that I’m too new to this software to talk about my preferences. Maybe in six months I’ll be fully acclimated to it.
Yes, could be renamed to comply with the finder…
I don’t paid attention to that until now as I’m using Cmd+<- keys to delete files…
When I started this thread, I barely knew what anything was in PhotoLab. That, and much of what I thought I knew was incorrect. I was mostly trying adjustments that worked on the entire image, so if something looked better after an adjustment, other things looked worse.
I clearly remember people telling me to stop doing this, and instead mostly use “local adjustments”, which back then were as clear to me as mud.
I have watched this video going on three times now, and it is finally sinking in. I have thoroughly enjoyed watching PhotoJoseph explain things, as it’s easier for me to follow and learn. Actually, I have watched lots of videos, and I’ve been participating in all the Webinars I can. It’s nice that I’ve gotten to the point where they make sense to me.
I very much appreciate all the help that everyone here has given me. Starting with tomorrow, I’ll be using this new way (for me) to edit images.
I’ve been using PhotoLab extensively since November 2017. Being retired I have the opportunity to use it almost every day, often for hours. I keep a camera and two lens in my car most of the time and capture images almost every time I go out. I’ve used PhotoLab more than 2000 hours at this point,…and I’m still learning how to get the best from it.
Mark
