Here’s my personal list of things the introduction of which would encourage me to buy an upgrade to the upcoming PL3:
Let’s hope they improve the HSL module (as promised), and judging by a huge number of requests concerning improvements to local adjustments PL3 should bring some changes in that area as well. I also hope they include some form of “solo mode”.
Photolab v3 is nearly popping out the bun
So i leave new features thing to DxO staff to answer.
about number two: demosiacing and stuf, doesn’t that involve retesting camera’s and sensors to improve those things?
Or can they just rewrite algorithms?
number 3) if i take a possible ways to adjust, upoint/masking ,selective tone, contrast high , smartlighting, exposure compensation, color protection presentage slider and such i find it good. but i don’t have any benchmark like new LR or Rawtherapy or Silkypix 9pro or photoshop so driving one car isn’t a good testcase in these.
number 7: i used a huelight for my g80 and returned some examples to him for examination it blew some things out of range and i needed to use the general one of dxo to avoid that. Don’t know if that is same as your question.
My guess is if all or most of that list is a requirement before you purchase PL3, you won’t be upgrading anytime soon. Since we’ve been told that a clone tool will be implemented, based on past history there will be at most a couple of other new or upgraded features in addition to it.
I can only think of two reasons why switching to a different demosaicing algorithm might be an issue to the developers of PhotoLab: 1) impact on processing speed (AMaZE is more computationally intensive than e.g. VNG4 or EAHD), 2) it could potentially make the job PRIME engine more difficult – we have no way of knowing if that’s the case other than one of the devs saying so.
Personally I like it when a raw converter gives the user a choice of the demosaicing algorithm it uses – a similar approach is already employed by DxO when it comes to noise reduction, so why not do it for demosaicing?. There are not many popular raw converters which do that (the most popular are probably open source programs like RawTherapee or darktable, but also the latest Lightroom Classic offers that option).
I don’t see any highlight reconstruction going on in PhotoLab. Sure, there is highlight recovery (Smart Lighting is usually very good for that), but when one of the channels is clipped Lr, C1, PhotoNinja or RawTherapee do a much better job of creating context-sensitive new information on the basis of the existing channels and/or adjacent non-blown pixels.
It could be related to the DCP white/black levels or to the Adobe RGB working space of PhotoLab. Or the way the profile was designed…
it was color depending and as i remember correctly on all three types.
in a yellow and the orange/pink
The guy who builds them is examinating my examples. So i just wait to see what happens.
Nik filter Button nur wer den Benötigt, für alle anderen weg damit!
Geschwindigkeit verbessern!
Keine Werbung für Nik Filter oder und Nik Filter abschaffen!
Google Translator:
Nik filter Button only who needs it, for all others away with it!
Speed up!
Do not advertise Nik filters or Nik filters!
Sometimes one killer feature can push me to upgrade – that’s what happened when they introduced the DCP profile support last year (that, and the Black Friday pricing incentive). But if it’s just the clone tool and some masking improvements then I might not bother.
Well, everything I can say is that some of the
“wish-list” features will a part of PL3. Please, wait a bit and soon you’ll be able to decide if that’s enough to get the upgrade or not (different users - different needs).
For me, as a wedding photographer, I would like to see a few things to improve the workflow :
easyer selective sync between pictures (apparently they will take care of it), like a selective copy paste
rename at export (for god’s sake, that’s a basic), and yes, more sharpening option for the output
filigrane at export
Like you sankos I would like to see some improvements in the highlights recovery, but also in which area the highlights and shadows sliders affect : they “drive” far too much of the picture, leading promptly to artifical results.
Core performance should be priority number one - new version cannot run slower than previous version.
core performance “copy/apply presets/corrections” - that is unique feature of DxO PL2, it takes hours to simply apply settings to 1000+ RAW images. Once, you check out your overnight work, you find out 1/10 of images somehow missing applied corrections anyway. One wonders, how simple DB record or 20kB sidecard takes hours to apply on latest generation of Apple HW. No SW does that, it is instant on CaptureOne, Adobe products or Open Source. One wonders why.
SMP and scaling is/was issue - my dual Xeon CPU Workstation + nVidia Q5000 is slower than my single CPU Apple laptop Not important because most have no dual CPU machines anyway but it is interesting bug.
CPU + GPU processing - CPU runs flat out during export but GPU is bored. Adobe Pr utilize CPU and GPU…GPU adds extra “core” to your CPU or even adds extra “CPU” to processing. I wonder why nobody code GPU processing, it is at least 25 years old tech already used on my 3dfx voodoo vga card. Of course back then, it was revolution because 133MHz CPU was really slow for encoding video Modern PC operators (you heard me, you have frameworks, programs and you dare to call yourself programmers ) have everything easy, yet SW is less and less effective as in era of hackers back in 90ties. We have coded all single handely with “vi” or “Notepad” only. Most important parts were coded in assembler, rest in C/C++. Don’t tell me it is such a problem nowadays?
Better highlight recovery and reconstruction of blown channels;
Learn to shoot first “sankos”, there is only very few cases where you have to compromise and get overblown channel(s)
I do natural photography, the most difficult Art of Light, and I rarely have problems with overblown channels. I must confess though that sometimes I have to recover some highlights due dynamic range.
I wonder what do you need more, you have all highlights recovery tools in DxO PL2 already???
Adjust exposure level, use highlight recovery and then bring midtones, shade, blacks to their original values. What do you need to more? Despite I don’t like this kludge, on my Canon 5Ds is possible to “recover” at least 1EV of overblown highlights.
Remember, what is not sensor/memory card is just SW magic to reconstruct pixels. I recall some tExpert who fiercely defended the best camera in the world Sony A7III and argued he can shoot darkness and then recover 5EV in any SW Photo industry is built on poor fools, don’t be one of them
I’m sure you’ve come across situations like this one, where you have to clip both shadows and highlights (raw clipping) because of the wide dynamic range in the scene and limitations of the sensor.
PhotoLab lets me recover some of the hot highlights but it clips to white when there’s raw clipping, so you can’t push the recovery further because the transition would look unnatural:
What happened to “I do natural photography”, then? You flashgun “photographers” want to flatten everything out with blends and screens and n-point studio lighting which you always take with you on a hike in nature.
Modern PC operators (you heard me, you have frameworks, programs and you dare to call yourself programmers 
) have everything easy, yet SW is less and less effective as in era of hackers back in 90ties. We have coded all single handely with “vi” or “Notepad” only. Most important parts were coded in assembler, rest in C/C++. Don’t tell me it is such a problem nowadays?
