Oh sorry, missed the post from Lucas, thx Peter.
1 Like
Hi Lucas, thank you for trying to help. Do you mean with âSample Processâ âProzess analysierenâ, which means analyse of the process? If yes, I did save the analysis text. How to send this now to whom please?
P.S.
Sent you a message with the file
Had to do a little research first on how to find the database. Mine with PL 3.3 has 2,59GB. And there is also already one for PL 4 with the same size. Just wondering the date of it is from yesterday. There is also a file âDOPDatabaseV4.dopdata_outputâ with 1,14GB. For PL 3.3 there is none such.
Wow, thatâs bad news. My main laptops are a 17 inch and a 15 inch 2011 MBP which are capped at High Sierra (last MBP where one can upgrade storage oneself and which can be easily repaired, last MBP with matte screens, next to last MBP with a non-butterfly keyboard). Not impressed with DxO starting to require the latest OS to use their software. It makes a lot more sense for third party developers to allow as many people through the door as you can. The only publisher with an interest in forcing people to upgrade their OS (and hence their computer) is Apple. DxO, no need to do Appleâs dirty work for them.
Here at home I run Mojave on my Mac Pro 5,1 but I really need cross-compatibility between my laptops and the main system. Wow, Iâm speechless with disappointment. I would personally sponsor DxO to add back High Sierra support.
Ok, I solved the problem, but not really. Temporarily removed the database of PL 3.3 and the already existing one of PL 4. Now PL 4 starts without any problem.
So the problem seems to be the database created by PL 4 that it converted from PL 3.3.
The same happend with win7.x when v3 came out.
Not running the install.
This v4 has got a major under the hood reprogramming to let DeepPrime do itâs thing.
So win10 needs to be up to date too.
Itâs something about support and garanties i think.
Itâs build, scripted, wrote for a certain OS and uses in Deepprime modes alot of ânewâ
Of this OS.
Sometimes a application runs but dodgy when itâs recromented for a newer OS and you use it in a older one.
About the stop of OS update, yes itâs in my eyeâs a oblication of the manufacturer to keep your hardware running safe and up to date. Itâs a commercial forced way to buy new hardware. Vs a commercial nightmare for software builders to retrobuild backwards compatible application versions or have multi OS versions tangled together
like in the 32 64b win version earlier . Itâs even in the folder visible:
Program files and program files (x86)
Revering to this?
Jykes!
Put the database from PL 4 back to the corresponding folder, âDxO Photloab v4â in ~/Library/.
PL 4 starts to create a file named, âDOPDatabaseV4.dopdata_outputâ. Before it was more than 1GB. Now it stucks at a size of 212MB. So for me this file seems to be the trouble maker.
P.S.
Deleted the first database built by PL 4. Put the database of PL 3.3 back and started PL 4. Works now. But PL 4 also does not create anymore a converted database from PL 3.3.
Now you can place the v3 version of the database back (edit: In the dxoplv3 folder) without any problem.
If you donât used the database for keyword entry and such itâs better to use :delete and recreate database in v4. It gets all edit data from the dopfiles back. So you get a new fresh database.
In preference you can uncheck âupdate dopfile writingâ and use only database and reading dop file.
So you can browse and test v4 wile keeping the dopfiles in v3 level.
on a later moment you can manual force to create dopfile from database and activate the automatic updating dopfiles.
This is a very helpful advice for me because I have never dealt with this topic before. Will try it now like that.
Alec,
Support for High Sierra was discussed at length before PL4 was released. DXOâs position is that they are only willing to support a limited number of OS versions. As new ones are added, presumably old ones will drop off. Iâm just reporting their position, not defending it, but it is unlikely DXO will backtrack and support PL4 on High Sierra
Mark
1 Like
Thereâs usually no good excuse for cutting off OS versions except that the developers are lazy to run the older X Tools to build on the older OS. DxO really isnât in a position to be cutting off its users. Iâve bought the upgrade to 4 now, but without support for High Sierra, I may refund that upgrade. It would make me sad to do so as I support the mission at DxO intensely but it really pains me that DxO would arbitrarily cut off their customers.
This kind of arbitrary behaviour motivates me to look more closely at open source applications (not just for photo software). This upgraditis has made IT a net productivity loss over the last dozen years after being a huge part of productivity improvements in the previous twenty years.
@OXiDant Your response makes little sense. It sound more like the twisted apologetics a religious scholar contorts him or herself into to justify the contradictions of their beliefs. What the OS developers are doing is security theatre, not real security (if you followed the OS X security issues, youâd realise that the only person locked out of his or her computer now due to all the extra security theatre is the user, not the malware developer).
Well my opinion is lost in translation i think.
I agree with your complain that this kind of force to buy new stuff isnât fair.
If it was me i would keep my win10 version for ever but each update they do will bring me one step closer to the end of life of win10.
The fact that in this case DxO did a cut off in which OS will be supported is made by them even doh the macBetatesters argued about that decision. So it must be a large change and costly change to include Siera.
Thatâs more what i said.
When OSâs are changed defelopers has to go with that change and when you write a totaly new part of software you have include every OS which is out there for 10 years down?
Reasonâs why OS is changed is mostly forced by hardware thatâs released by the request for faster, slimmer, better pcâs mac,s and smartphoneâs by us customers.
Not the bassing of criminals on your virtual doors is the reason for new versions OS.
Those can be writen in the present OS.
And yes like covid economical cost are backfired due taxes in the future by goverments itâs end up on our doorstep.
Only thing you can do against it is not buying and thatâs not working for taxes by goverment unfortnunaly. 
No developers donât have to go with that change. They can continue to support OS which are in use, rather than that recommended by the corrupt manufacturers who are forcing endless âupgradesâ on the public just to generate churn. And of course I donât mean infinite support. Occasionally there are major revisions to the OS which improve the ability of software developers to add new tools. As Photolab is cross-platform, I donât think there were changes which required orphaning High Sierra or even Sierra users. In particular, all MBP 2011 which is very popular with photographers can no longer run Photolab at all.
Generally five years of support for any application would be perfect. In that case, OS X 10.11, El Capitan would have been the best crossover point as it was introduced in September 2015 and was rather a stable and troublefree OS (Mountain Lion OS X 10.8 and Snow Leopard OS X 10.6 were the previous good ones; High Sierra is the last headache free OS X version, after that Apple starts to lock down the OS to make it less convenient for users and more convenient for them).
As Photolab 3 only went as far back as 10.13 High Sierra I wouldnât expect DxO to go further back in a future release. The GPU processing DxO are doing would preclude going too far back.
I didnât join the beta program as I read the terms. You promise to effectively say nothing about Photolab ever again. It meant giving up oneâs independence. Clearly I should have, as my voice was needed there to make the case for High Sierra support.
Early impressions of Photolab 4 (on the one computer I have which can run it) are positive. DeepPrime is slightly different than Prime (not sure if itâs better or worse: you be the judge on this ISO 16000 photograph) but at least four times faster to render. These are both set at Luminance 12 (default is 40) and Chroma at 100 (default).
Standard Prime on ISO 16000 D850 image
DeepPrime on same ISO 16000 D850 image
Hereâs the original RAW image in case anyone wants to experiment with a difficult ISO 16000 file under artificial light.
Iâm missing two-screen layout at this point and an easy way to bring up my Essential Tools palette (I have to use the workspaces menu to bring them back). Essential Tools should really be the first of the six tool boxes at the top of the right hand set of palettes.
We donât know if it is arbitrarily. But I donât like forced obsolescence, and agree with the spirit of everything you say.
I think it is a matter of resources and where developers want to spend them, pure and simple.
The problem is testing. The more versions you have to support, the more testing you have to do, the more virtual machines you have to maintain, the more dependencies you have to manage, and the more exceptions there will be. And DxO is a small shop with limited resources so it absolutely makes sense to cut off older versions (where the cut-off point is a matter for discussion but for that you more information).
And then there is a matter of clarity⌠it seems like DxO has a clearly formulated policy that they support the latest 3 OS releases and we can all decide if that is acceptable.
Often there are still ways around this⌠changing a flag in a configuration file. Not sure if that works for PhotoLab 4 on Mac? But you would still run unsupported software once you run into problems, which for me is undesirable.
However, based on the current macOS market share I do see your point since High Sierra still sees significant use (over 1 in 10 Mac users):
I would like to see Long Term Support versions for more software, that might not change much over the years but do get patches for lens and camera support and better algorithms. I also find it a pity that we donât have more creative software running on Linux. I tried some open-source software over the years but never fully enjoy it.
BTW, Windows looks like this (Windows 7 is also still quite substantial):
I guess you would still need to look at the market share for actual PhotoLab users before you can make a solid judgment about these matters.
1 Like
Hello,
DxO is a relatively small company with limited resources. Generally speaking, supporting more OS versions means more testing work and more complex code to write (because OS updates provide newer technologies that simplify our work, or fix bugs which doesnât force us to write workarounds). So we have to make a choice between the amount of features youâll be able to get, and the supported OS. We cannot just provide as many features AND support older macOS versions.
To give a more concrete example, DeepPRIME on macOS uses a technology called Core ML. This is what runs our DeepPRIME algorithms either on GPU or on CPU. Machine Learning is a rapidly evolving area, as such Core ML already existed in macOS 10.13 but was a lot more limited than it is in macOS 10.14. As of today, DeepPRIME cannot work on macOS 10.13 without writing workarounds for these limitations. And we come back to the choice between OS support and features.
I understand that this is frustrating and that major OS updates come with downsides like sometimes forcing you to update hardware or with software features that you donât want. In an ideal world we would have unlimited resources and would write all the technologies ourselves which would make us independent from OS updates, but thatâs not how it is. I just wanted to make clear that DxO doesnât drop older OS versions just for stupid reasons.
8 Likes
Since PL 4 is now working fine for me, I also can say it runs so far smooth on my iMac. See the specs above. It feels even more faster. But thatâs maybe also because its using a fresh database 
1 Like
I just ran into this same issue w/ PL4 Upgrade. I have a 6 core I7 w/ 32GB of ram on a 2018 MBP, and let it run for over an hour and PL4 just sat there stuck. Yes I have a lot of photos, etc but isnât photolab for professionals? Gave up and had to blow away all my PL3 and PL4 settings and start from scratch. Guess I wonât be wasting money and upgrading ever again.
I too feel that cutting off operating system support for older versions is a big mistake, although understandable in some ways when the versions being dropped are those that still support 32bit.
However, now we should all be on 64bit OSs, I would be severely annoyed if Apple decreed we needed a new machine every three years to support this or that âadvanceâ in the OS. That then starts to add around âŹ800 per year of costs, on top of software upgrades, which for some may be unsupportable.
I guess for some it needs to be both. I know, from time to time, I would like things like the ability to flip an image or to merge images as in a panorama or multi-exposure shots, although the need for multi-exposure to get rid of noise should be less now we have DeepPRIME
1 Like
To be honest, @gregor this is not at all what DxO should be telling its users. 2020âs Apple are corporate rats engaged in share buyback to pump up their options, while doing the maximum amount of damage to the environment. Butterfly keyboards break with a single crumb: outside of Apple care you may as well throw away your computer. Only the top and bottom of an Apple laptop are now replaceable (gifted third parties can work around this somewhat with scavenged parts), making a battery or a keyboard replacement an âŹ1100 fix.
Apple is doing untold damage to the environment and robbing their users with their repair and upgrade unfriendly policies. Itâs all for the sake of executivesâ share options. I really donât think DxO should be adding and abetting such a destructive mission.
@Lucas Thanks for your detailed reply.
I just wanted to make clear that DxO doesnât drop older OS versions just for stupid reasonsâŚDeepPRIME on macOS uses a technology called Core ML. This is what runs our DeepPRIME algorithms either on GPU or on CPU. Machine Learning is a rapidly evolving area, as such Core ML already existed in macOS 10.13 but was a lot more limited than it is in macOS 10.14. As of today, DeepPRIME cannot work on macOS 10.13 without writing workarounds for these limitations.
I really appreciate you taking the time to explain the specific issue. In this case, if DeepPrime canât run on High Sierra without a lot of trouble, it would be fine to have DeepPrime disabled/invisible on High Sierra. Youâd say DeepPrime is the core feature of Photolab 4. Sort of. The core feature of Photolab 4 is Photolab 4 itself. By allowing Photolab 4 to run on High Sierra but with Prime instead of DeepPrime, youâd allow full cross-compatibility for users like me who have their two of their main computers stuck on High Sierra due to Apple policies but do have access to a machine with Mojave.
FYI, my MacPro 5,1 is EOLâd at 10.14, Mojave. I will not be replacing it for another three to five years. There are lots of us out there. I highly suggest DxO maintain Mojave support as long as possible.
This computer is 12 x 3.1 GHz (was 3.33 GHz but runs quieter at 3.1), Radeon VII with 3 x 4 TB SSD, 2 x 2 TB SSD, ultra fast ACHI 1 TB drive, 1 x 10 TB spinning drive. And thatâs counting only internal drives and I still have three slots open. Appleâs only comparable computer in terms of flexibility and expandability would cost me about âŹ15000 in a similar configuration.
In any case, a new build which would run on High Sierra but without DeepPrime would be much appreciated by many in the photographic community. I donât even mind if that build is not officially supported.
Iâm sorry but I have to disagree strongly on this point.
Some would call it progress, and youâre free to run Windows if you choose. Itâs certainly a much cheaper proposition these days, though I would find it a chore personally.
The âadvances in the OSâ that you speak of are not the same as in the Windows world (in fact, are there any major advances in Windows lately?) Apple produce âthe whole widgetâ which means they build their hardware to support the software, so yes, some new features will require new hardware in some instances.