PureRAW 1.5 was released yesterday and in that version Users can now toggle ON or OFF the addition of Global Lens Sharpness when using the DeepPRIME denoising method.

ON: lens sharpness is boosted
equivalent settting in PhotoLab is

OFF: lens sharpness is not boosted.
equivalent settting in PhotoLab is



Good idea…but the addition looks bolted-on imo.

I’d opt for the following structure:

Raw Processing

  • Optical corrections
    Global lens sharpening (on/off)
    Lens distortion correction (on/off)
    Noise Reduction (HQ/PRIME/DeepPRIME)
    Estimated processing time (distortion correction takes time too)

  • Format
    Export file as (JPG/TIFF/DNG)
    Estimated export size

  • Destination

Text within sections left of buttons (consistency)
Add TIFF export

1 Like

This setting at 0 in photolab is already way too much…
Global lens sharpening on OFF should correspond to this setting on OFF in Photolab.
I use between -2 and -1 depending on the case.

0 is maybe a good setting when exporting JPEG, but when producing a DNG meant to be processed in another software, it’s not.

1 Like

You seem to overlook one important aspect: DeepPRIME is not just about denoising, it’s demosaicing and denoising at the same time. This is why it sits at the top (under the “RAW processing” title and not a “Denoising” title).
Moving it down doesn’t make any sense…


1 Like

The oversharpening does not come from deepprime, it comes from the optical corrections.
And adding sharpening does not improve demosaicing, if the setting is too high, it actually destroys fine details and adds artifacts.

Taking all optical corrections off in PureRaw makes the oversharpening go away, but as I use micro four thirds, I need the distorsion correction.
(The dng doesn’t keep the metadata for the embedded corrections)

1 Like

Well, however the switches are ordered, I’d make them visible at all times, look similar and sequence them as we read, text left, switch right. The current implementation works, which is the main thing, but I still think that the interface could be improved esthetically.

The groups I set up correspond to

  • Corrections: what do I want DPR to do
  • Output Format: which is the one I want
  • Destination: where should the output go

…and from a user point of view, it is fairly irrelevant to know if functions are technically independent or intertwined.

Wording is absolutely DxO’s choice as is design language, my feedback revolves around UX in this case here.

1 Like

I do agree that visually we could improve it.


I have been waiting for the new DJI Modules and this oversharpening fix.
Just processed all my drone photos with Global turned off and looks much better.

1 Like

I completely agree with you. Thanks!

I have used some images from a wedding. What I have found is that when it comes to sharpening people on a particular camera and lens specifically noticeable for people it shows up loads of artefacts. It is unusable. As I am a new user I cannot upload new images so that does not help. But I am definitely still struggling to use this, I have turned off global sharpening, lens distortion, tried HQ/Prime/Deep Prime and all the same results. Really frustrating as the results on the other lens camera combo work fine. PS two shooters one 28-70mm Tamron + sony A7iii 2nd shooter Sigma 18-35 with e mount converter + Sony A7iii.

Hello @vangellis.19 ,

In PureRAW 1.5 you can toggle ON or OFF the addition of Global Lens Sharpness when using the DeepPRIME denoising method. Have you try to play with it ?

ON: lens sharpness is boosted
equivalent settting in PhotoLab is

OFF: lens sharpness is not boosted.
equivalent settting in PhotoLab is

If you still can’t get a fine result please upload some RAW files on upload.dxo.com so we can analyse it.


1 Like

Thanks for sharing the exact equivalents, Marie. That’s very helpful.

@drosky you wrote

PL 4 gives much more reasonable sharpening results with its default settings. However, if I increase the “global lens sharpness” slider in PL 4 to its maximum position, I get the same exaggerated sharpening results that PureRAW gives.

It’s strange with sharpness. If I were to process portraits of my partner with the same sharpness settings which look great on my football portraits, she would be furious. That speaks to turning off pre-sharpening for most sets in PureRAW and sharpening in the final RAW editor. Of course for a sports shoot I’d probably put it through at On. In PhotoLab 4/5, after much trial and error my sports lens sharpness setting is +0.65. Anything more mostly looks unnatural/over-sharpened. Wouldn’t want to miss out on the bite that Lens Sharpness gives applied judiciously though.

It is unfortunate that PureRAW doesn’t allow users to make the same granular adjustments to its features that are available in PhotoLab.

PureRAW’s two stand-alone competitors, Topaz Denoise and ON1 NoNoise are inferior to PhotoLab in my opinion, but they both allow users to make adjustments to the settings. PureRAW needs to follow suit.



Im on the fence getting this for the black friday sale so I tested it out and it works amazing but too much sharpness on some images.
It would be great to have a slider for the sharpness just like in PL5 as PR is just better for my kind of workflow and I guess for other too who wants to use PR as an pre raw processor and then use LR/PS
The slider could even be an advance potion so people who just wants an 1-click solution can have that too.

So I should buy PhotoLab if I want to choose my own level of sharpening, instead of just a toggle in PureRAW? Does PhotoLab do everything PureRAW does, and also gives additional options? If so then I’ll just look at buying that and forget PureRAW since I need more sharpness control than just a toggle.

In a nutshell, if I own PhotoLab I don’t need PureRAW correct?

1 Like

that’s correct

1 Like

I took the same picture into both PR and PL5 to see if I could replicate the same in PL5 with the same settings shown here for the global lens sharpening and it looks that PR sometimes does more.
To get a similar result in PL5 I had to crank Luminance all the way up to 100, at least on the picture I used as a test, but even then the image is more smooth in PR

I wanted to give the software a new try, to see if the new option was OK, but unfortunately, it still considers that my trial has ended.
Too bad that updating the software for a problem that was a showstopper doesn’t allow users to try again a 30 days period to see if the solution is satisfying or not.

Specular highlights sure like the use of Pure RAW. A workaround, something none of us like…I post the ‘corrected’ image and the original in PS. I then paint out what I don’t want or use the Flow or Opacity of the brush to dial it in. Clicking to achieve the perfect image is the dream of newbies. Working images in post is part of the fun!

I’ve no problem working on an image, but working juste to try to lower the sharpening that has been added at some point of the process is just a lost of time.

I much prefer being able to choose the amount of sharpening I want to add to my images.

Sharpening is one of the operations that is the most difficult to correct afterwards, that’s why a software that does a pre-processing should be very very cautious on the sharpening level applied.

It’s very easy to add some afterward if needed (in Lightroom for instance), and it’s almost impossible to get it right if you want less

PureRaw should have different sharpening levels applied wether you choose a jpeg output (final image) or if you use it only for preprocessing (Linear dng)