When can we expect PhotoLab 2.3 release?
When can we expect PhotoLab 2.3 release?
Second that, more than 8 months with very little update. I and others have been premised fixes to long standing bugs in the next update, but when?
Glad someone finally asked!!! I have been trying to stay positive towards PL, which isn’t an easy thing to do these days?
Guys, I am not here to complain about lack of new features, etc. I am fairly happy with PhotoLab features set as is. Sure it could have more features or be faster, but it is definitely useful for me.
I am waiting for the upcoming release because of camera support for Sony RX100VA which has been planned for this release.
My workflow consists of using FastRawViewer/Adobe Bridge to cull photos, then I use DXO PL to develop raws (remove lens distortions, improve dynamic range, tweak exposure, white balance, reduce noise, maybe applying some basic FilmPack film renderings). Finally, I move processed image as TIFF to Luminar for artistic finish with creative filters and presets, perspective correction and cropping.
Sure it’s not the simples workflow, but staged approach allows me to use best features in each of the applications to achieve my creative vision. You can check some of work on 500px.
Well said. Keeping up with cameras and lenses should be job one for the DxO development crew. Doing it late doesn’t diminish the time required and just provokes existing DxO PhotoLab photographers and turns away potential new users.
Still, asking about the date for a release is definitely not a feature request. Could a moderator please move this to the normal discussion forum to prevent future feature request forum spam?
Yes,camera/lens updates should be part of the teams work task, however, keeping the program’s platform up to date is equally as important.
Both are required to keep and add new users!
When everything is a priority, nothing is a priority Mike. New functionality is welcome but PhotoLab is very powerful as is. What the program needs is to be up to date with cameras (essential) and lenses (part of its unique selling proposition). And quite a bit faster to keep up with C1.
What’s driving me mad now is how slow PhotoLab is. On a MBP with i7 quad core, it’s been very painful to prepare just 18 images (mixed A7III, 5DSR, 5DIII) today. Everything is slow. Nothing like C1 on this same machine. I have a 12 core i7 nearby but I didn’t feel like moving the images and wanted to test performance properly on my mobile platform. Performance has been a serious disappointment. I don’t want a single extra function until PhotoLab runs more snappily.
If DxO won’t improve performance, I will be obliged to move to C1. And will no longer be able to support DxO as an informal advocate for PhotoLab at DPReview, fstoppers, etc…
We’ve talked about performance before and I’ve indicated that 25-30mb 7D Mark II raw files process quite quickly on my machine. Perhaps you could capture a raw file on your 5Dsr for me, and if there is a way you could get it to me I could test it here to rule out the possibility of other issues impacting performance on your machine.
I’m not speaking too new functionality, but to improvements to existing tools/functions… In my view PL has been just riding along for awhile now and it’s is now time to get with it.
I have a I5,32GB ram ,good graphic card and all SSD drives and PL will process my (GX8) 20mb files just fine.
Also PS6, Lightroom 6, ON1, Topaz Suite, ACDSEE 13 and IMatch all work fine on my machine and more importantly the latter 4 programs offer frequent updates to all areas of the programs. And talk about it to the public!!!
Thanks for the offer Mark, but I’ve processed sessions seriously now with DxO PhotoLab on three different machines. All of them are pretty high end:
All of them have pretty awful performance in terms of real time sliders and waiting up to 15 seconds for a preview to process when either noise reduction is turned on together with lens sharpening. The 12 processor one does better, not because of the extra processors but including a recent AMD video card. Perhaps the extra RAM helps too.
In my opinion, the level of performance I’m getting is by design on Mac. I.e. I’m well within spec for larger files. Granted today I had a 30" monitor plugged into my MBP 17 which probably made matters worse (and shouldn’t, as I’m sure there are lots of people out there with a MBP and a large external monitor, I’m fortunate to have three solid machines at my disposal: home, office, notebook).
What are the file sizes coming out of your Canon 5D Mark III? Are they just as slow to process as from your higher-resolution bodies?
Mark, today I had work to do so I was measuring progress through the set which was mixed. All files were pretty slow on the MBP 17, 5DSR files slower than the others though. When I’ve compared 5DSR and A7III photos on the Mac Pro 5,1 with 12 processors and the Radeon 580X, A7III performance was okay (still an order of magnitude slower than C1 on the MBP 17) but 5DSR performance was very slow unless I didn’t add Lens Sharpness or Noise Reduction at the every end.
Apparently DxO have taken some steps to optimise the Windows version with OpenCL and left us on the Mac version without very limited GPU acceleration and/or proxy optimisation. There’s lots of us on Macs complaining about performance. Adding features without fixing performance just makes a slow application even slower. Some long time users have mentioned: DxO PhotoLab 2 is significantly slower on a Mac than Optics Pro 9. This regression really worries me as I bought into PhotoLab to enjoy a faster and more intuitive workflow. Without speed, despite the great interface and great tools, intuitive goes out the window.
The more tools, more tools brigade here who could care less about performance really grate on me. I don’t know what they need all those tools for if the tools are too slow to use effectively. We don’t need a DAM (FastRawviewer, iMatch, PhotoMechanic already exist and do the job better), we don’t need a pixel editor (Affinity Photo is cross-platform and all of $50 and infinitely more powerful than anything DxO can wedge into PhotoLab), we need a RAW processor which works quickly and intuitively.
I’m on a Windows 10 machine as I’ve mentioned in the past, and apparently on my machine Photolab thinks my old middle of the road NVidia GTX 745 is slower than my i7 processor and recommends unchecking the OpenCL option, so I’m not running with GPU optimization at all but I’m quite happy with the snappiness of the performance on my machine. I would like it to be a bit quicker, but it certainly is not slow. Judging from the many comments I’ve been reading here for months it seems that Photolab on Mac’s has significant performance problems regardless of whether the GPU performance is optimized or not.
I will second Maciej question !!!
Where is version 2.3 ? I have been waiting a long time for Panasonic LX100 Mark II support listed for PL 2.3 that was to be available in April.
Is the camera support downloadable as a PL version 2.2 module ?
Hi DxO. You are late on the 2.3 release due in April. Can you set some expectations for delivery please.
What are your expectations to the release 2.3?
Minor bugfixes were done in 2.2.2 already.
PhotoLab 2.2.3 has been released today. This release concerns mostly camera support.
We have added support of:
And also support of some lenses:
This is an awesome update Marie. So many cameras and a good set of lenses. This will really make a lot of existing PhotoLab users happy and will keep new users minds open to adopting PhotoLab. To keep up with the new hardware (it’s a busy year) inspires confidence in DxO.