… as they were after the then newly developped “Snapseed”
1 Like
Yes, very true.
At the same time NC ‘targets’ e.g. the Adobe user. – In the past it was extremely practical to apply Nik as SmartFilter in combination with PS’ masking capabilities (no experience w/ recent versions).
And DxO spent a lot of effort just to keep their Selective tool going (which I never understood, but didn’t have to get plenty of pics done in short time etc).
What I’m really annoyed about is the unnecessarily confusing UI and crippling down easy to handle masking capabilities that exist in Nik 3.3 and PL.
2 Likes
The original Nik was made of independent monolithic applications. Since v4, DxO is moving these applications into a new shared framework (the QT Framework). Silver Efex and Viveza passed under this framework in v4. In v5 DxO added Analog Efex and Color Efex. These two applications can now share code and features with Silver and Viveza. It probably required to rewrite most all of the application code, so even if the changes in features are slim, behind the curtain it prepares the applications for a more active and easier development. Will DxO will also pass Dfine, HDR Efex, Perspective Efec and Sharpener Pro under QT and what is the strategy for Nik is not a question I can answer, but this move to QT looks very positive for the future of the suite. Note than QT is cross platform, Linux, Windows, macOS and Android.
8 Likes
And I’m OK with that. I think it’s fantastic. But don’t give the Collection a major version upgrade number when only a portion of the Collection is upgraded. And, don’t make customers pay for it as if it is a major upgrade. And, ESPECIALLY, don’t make owners of a more recent version pay the same as owners of an even older version. That’s just bad business and complete disregard for those who actively support the upgrade process with their money. DxO, in charging the same upgrade price for both v3 owners and v4 owners, essentially rewarded v3 owners/punished v4 owners. It shouldn’t even require good business sense for DxO to have recognized that. 
4 Likes
Technically in terms of development efforts it is a major update, but of course as customers we only care about the result. I have the version 4, I may skip the 5, and maybe wait for the fully QT integrated version. At the end I may pay less for the full v6 version than for an update from the v4 to v5 to v6 version. 
Getting yearly paid updated for PhotoLab and Nik (and possibly for FilmPack as well as ViewPoint in years to come) does not make sense, unless the update brings the key feature that makes upgrading worthwhile. Luckily, we can get the 30 day free trials to find out.
From a purely financial point of view, I can get 3 years of Adobe’s Photo plan for what I have to pay for the DxO Premium bundle. A “perpetual” license only pays, if you don’t buy every update - but it still might “expire your apps” at some point, when you update your computer’s OS. DxO’s support matrix is simply too restrictive imo.
1 Like
You are correct of course, but also keep in mind that a non-upgraded perpetual license will likely work correctly for many years before running into some type of operating system or hardware incompatibility. If you stop an Adobe subscription you loose all editing functionality immediately. I suspect many DxO users only upgrade every two or three years, and some are still happily using Optics Pro versions from 6 or 7 years ago.
Mark
Yes, sure, subscriptions last as long as you pay and stop when you don’t. As of now, I’ll keep that subscription because I use LrC for keywords and search functionality. Once I decide to end the subscription, I’ll let Lr re-write the XMP sidecars and let something else use the data. This might happen in a few years, when DPL eventually gets metadata- and database management right.
Considering that PhotoLab’s asset management features were only recently introduced and some of the main issues are related to compatibility with third part DAMs, I think DxO could have well developed functionality with a few more iterations, perhaps by PL 7 or PL 8.
Mark
It’s still speaking a broken language for Monterey. Therefore, not an upgrade worth paying for by those users. When they pay someone to write that, then I’ll pay for it.
an interesting article (in German)
→ https://www.docma.info/blog/lohnt-sich-das-update-auf-die-nik-collection-5?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=623-docmatische-depesche_93
att.: @StevenL
@Wolfgang Thank you for the link as it describes very well what I think are the main reasons not to buy an update, namely the inconsistent UIs. For me, the poor legibility of the controls is also still an issue, as I don’t feel like turning up my display to face tan brightness. The differences between Mac and Win, which are also mentioned in various threads, are another point and a constant construction site.
I checked once from when I have license keys and it was really version 1, which amazed me a bit myself. Anyway…with the money I saved for DXO/Nik updates I recently bought the Topaz AI Bundle Denoise, Sharpen, Gigapixel and realised that other mothers have beautiful daughters too 
But DPL remains my first and favourite RAW developer and the Nik Collection 4 the tool for fine. And since I certainly don’t do as complex projects as many of you, that’s enough for me for now. But in the end everyone has to decide for himself where to put his money 
And as a good friend of mine always says … “there is my truth, there is your truth and there is the truth”.
So enough philosophising I now have to create the technical drawing for my new barbecue table, which by the way I do with an old Sketchup Make locally installed, free version…works perfect 
have fun
Guenter
1 Like
Thanks - that’s interesting. If the move to QT makes it possible to improve the modules and introduce new features, that’s good news. When those features appear I’ll consider if they bring value to me and upgrade if they do. Just the framework change on its own does not bring value to the user.
1 Like
Moving all the Nik modules to QT is a lot of technical work, is taking time and will bring few benefits to customers until it is done. I understand it costs to Dxo, but having to pay about $86 to upgrade to v5 with such small improvements is a no go for me. I am ok to pay for a product, not for cleaning the mess of what Dxo bought.
2 Likes
That’s my guess too, but the lack of database maintenance functionality is what worries me most. Today, the DB is like an eternal dump, it can not get rid of entries, unless we delete the whole DB!
Unless Lightroom’s database has changed since I last used it in LR 6.14, doesn’t it have a similar issue? Or, am I remembering it incorrectly?
Mark
I only know that I never had anything weird like finding a non-existant file (see next paragraph) and such… I can remove images from the catalog without having to delete the file etc. I’ve been using Lr (and DxO OpticsPro etc.) from the start of my using a digital SLR. I never had to delete Lr’s database to “fix” something, although others at least say they had to.
When I move a folder with Finder, Lr presents the catalog entry with a question mark. Clicking on it lets me find the moved folder and Lr will reconnect it to the catalog. Same with individual files…
Lr’s database is too complex for me to dig into. It’s about 5 times the size of PhotoLab’s too.
1 Like
I’m not sure I understand your obsession with punishing users who skip a version upgrade. I wouldn’t stay a customer of your company long, let me tell you.
The issue here is DxO charging full upgrades on what are point releases. I was burned on Nik:
- owned Google/Nik version
- bought first DxO version which was basically a repackage
- upgraded to second DxO version which bug fixes (should have been DxO Nik v1)
- upgraded to third DxO version which was a decent upgrade and made Nik run more smoothly and integrate better
- skipped v4 which made DxO Nik less compatible and took away some of the benefits of the original control point technology and added some silly presets (the history of photography wizard)
So I’ve paid for four versions and only received two (Google/Nik version, DxO Nik v3). Why should I be penalised for eventually upgrading to Nik v5 or Nik v6? I paid my price of admission and have invested a substantial amount subsidising DxO (and have an extra PhotoLab license I don’t need due to the games DxO played with v2 where one had to buy a new PhotoLab license to upgrade).
I’ve pretty much had it with DxO’s weird upgrade policies, particularly around Nik. Your desire to make those policies even more draconian would make a bad situation worse.
2 Likes
Yes, the same w/ Win – very reliable and easy housekeeping.
From LR 5.7 on, I even made use of catalogues per project, which kept their database and backup file size ‘under control’ as well as serving for simple ‘disaster management’. That is, when something went really wrong in a project, I just had to ‘import’ its last database backup. – All I needed to do was to go through the backups once in a while and delete the older ones. And since using a 1TB SSD quick access was no more a problem.
I too have had a bad Nik experience. I bought PL2 at the end of the launch discount period, only to discover that a few days later on Black Friday I could have bought it at a lower price. I complained to DxO but the best they would to to appease me was to give me a credit note for my ‘overspend’ on PL2. I used that and threw in a bit more cash and bought Nik1.
I then discovered Nik1 was essentially the free Google version with a little bit of spit an polish, not a proper re-release (Viveza2 only works properly as a standalone app, as a plugin the colours go a weird mix of green/magenta at anything other than a zoom of 100%).
When Nik2 came out I thought the upgrade price was too much so gave it a miss.
When Nik3 came out I again thought the upgrade price was too much so gave it a miss.
When Nik4 came out it was such a disaster I didn’t even think about buying it.
Now that Nik5 is out DxO are not offering me any sort of upgrade price and they are bundling it with PL Essential, which I don’t need, so I’ll pass yet again.
If I was able to buy just a key for Nik3.3 (I have the installer) at a modest price, I might spend money.
1 Like