Please remove the Nix Collection button 'advert' from PhotoLab

Reverting the UI is entirely trivial. Five minutes to change it plus an automated build and regression tests.


Having been a professional software developer for 35 years I can say with lots of personal knowledge that you are trivializing the number of tasks and the amount of effort involved to modify, test and implement software even with small changes, on two different platforms. Regardless of the effort it is highly unlikely they would even consider doing it.

This feature rightly should have been added as an additional choice to the Export To drop down menu. However, since DXO is now marketing PhototLab Essential as an integral part of the Nik Collection they obviously wanted to demonstrate that integration by having a dedicated and highly visible button that new users of the PhotoLab Essential and Nik Collection combo package would not have to search for.

There are many much more important issues that should be addressed. This one is hardly worth the effort to discuss it.



Hi John,
welcome on board.

Well the « problem » is when you do NOT have Nik Collection, the button is still there (and useless).

Since I am sure the integration of NIK with PL will evolve over time I am not bothered with this disabled button.
Surely if it is important for the ones that do not buy NIK Collection, the button can be hidden in a future release.
Now everybody is aware where the « send to NIK Collection » button is located and that will prevent people to ask in the future, hopefully :grin:

Dieser Button ist unnötige Werbung, für unmögliche Nik Filter, was es soll erschließt sich mir nicht!
Wer Nik Filter einsetzt sollte wieder zur Konventionellen Fotografie wechseln (zum Beispiel Color Efex), denn Digitalfotografie wie Konventionelle Fotografie aus sehen zu lassen ist Unsinn!

1 Like

Nik collection und DPL werden mehr und mehr verschmelzen und daher ist es meiner Ansicht nach keine unnötige Werbung. Der nächste Satz erschliesst sich mir nicht. Digitale Fotos aussehen zu lassen wie konventionelle Fotografie ist kein Unsinn sondern Geschmacksache und wer hat das Recht jemand anderen vorzuschreiben welchen “Geschmack” er hat. Weiters ist dieser Aspekt nur ein kleines Spektrum was man mit den Nik Filtern machen kann.

Mark, you and I often agree, but in this case, what you’ve written is quite simply balderdash. Hiding the Nik buttons is a couple of lines of code and an extremely trivial single preference checkbox.

I’m horrified to see you and @Sigi giving DxO a free pass on what is very bad behaviour – in-application advertising. It’s quite simple for DxO to go through the interface and give users checkboxes for parts of the interface they want hidden and out of sight, whether it’s Nik plugins, Flickr or Facebook.

Why is this such appalling behaviour and a rejection of what have been the core values of DxO PhotoLab design to date? There have been no unnecessary buttons or interface or distractions in the PhotoLab interface. It has been tightly tuned to show only the essentials and encourage users to cut back even further.

At any time, the artist or craftsman should only see the tools s/he needs for the job at hand. Anything else is a distraction and reduces the purity of focus.

As a (light) user of Nik, I want those buttons available personally. But if I were to stop using Nik I don’t want to see that logo, not even greyed out.

If DxO won’t fix this small but important issue, I will seriously consider refunding my own upgrade to Nik v2 and my second PhotoLab Elite license. I am not going to pay DxO to sabotage what is one of my most important applications.

If DxO values have changed and busy crowded interface with in application advertising is the way of the future, I will be stepping off the train now.


Writing the code is often the smallest part of a development effort. One does not just write code for commercial software and put it into production the next day. I’m not going to get into a discussion of multiple test beds, version control, regression testing and a host of other tasks that have to be duplicated for two separate platforms. I never implied it was a large effort, but those who think it only will take 5 minutes don’t understand the process.


Hello Alec,

you do not to be horrified:) - it is just not as important to me as it is for user users. For example I do not use Flickr or any other services which are right now listed under Export to Application. Do I want a checkbox in preferences to tick all the stuff on/off - Hell no, I do not want that check-box, it would be an overkill. I have not seen anyone complaining about these options either.

I just don’t see the problem. If you use NIK - cool, click on the button. If you do not use NIk - ALSO cool, and then do not click on the button. And for those who really can not stand this button and hate that option from the bottom of their heart. There are many other nice raw-converters out there but they might also have buttons one does not like.

Overall guys - life is too short to worry about these minor details. Let’s enjoy taking pictures, using a wonderful raw converter, enjoy life and not worry about a button:)


No, it’s in-application advertising. DxO PhotoLab is expensive enough that burdening its users with in-application advertising is totally unacceptable. In a freemium version, but not in paid software. This is a hard line in the sand for me Mark. I spend my whole day in software and I will not put up with in-application advertising.

If you do have any pull at DxO, I suggest now is a good time to use it as there’s a good contingent of us who would be very unhappy to be confronted with these buttons day and night. Telling us good night stories that it’s okay won’t work on this issue.

PS. Flickr doesn’t appear in my copy of PhotoLab Elite 2.3. It is possible to disable Flickr export in Mac preferences fortunately. That’s the right way to do things and the way DxO operated up until now. Again, allowing the Nik button there as a default is fine but the ability to hide it must be added back to preferences if DxO is to maintain their integrity as a software publisher.

1 Like


I am not a professional software developer for many years :wink:
30 posts for this button. Are you serious ?

I think major software brands are doing even worse to toxic your mind.
Have your ever read about anything “Open the raw in Lr” ?
Arghhh I scream in front of my screen :nauseated_face::face_vomiting::hot_face:

1 Like

Give me a break. I’ve been doing this for 20 years. If in the year of our lord 2019 you can’t revert a trivial UI change and kick off all the necessary builds and regression tests in 5 minutes, then you’re in the wrong line of work.


Have you ever worked for a commercial software company? Have you ever been responsible for overseeing the planning and prioritization of enhancements, the analysis of the changes to be performed, the prioritization of resources, the scheduling, coding, testing, implementation and distribution of an updated version of a software package into production? It boggles the mind that so many think you just stop what you’re doing, have someone throw in a few lines of code and a minimal test on the fly and poof, somehow magically 25000 users on two platforms have upgraded software available for download.

Given DXO’s difficulties adding a lot of functionality to each new release, they would probably have to release a separate version with just this change, unless those most vocal about it would be willing to wait 6 months for PL 3 at the end if the year.

I hope you comments were intended as hyperbole, because if you are a programmer and you really think you can just jump in and code, test, install and distribute an updated version of a complex commercial software package with only 5 minutes work, I sure wouldn’t want you working for me.


I wouldn’t distribute a new build to customers just for this, but yes: the change should take about 5 minutes in any reasonable environment. Make the change then kick off the build and tests. Ship it with the next update. A change like this really is trivial with modern version control, continuous integration, etc.

1 Like

But your statement about the 5 minutes of coding and testing, which let’s face it, will be much longer, gives the impression to the uninitiated that is all the effort it takes from start to finish to get an update delivered to their computer. How about the analysis time required to determine whether the button should be greyed out, or disappear altogether, or moved to the Export To drop-down menu, depending upon the availability of the Nik collection, and the determination of which of these options would be best approach from a usability perspective. That must be decided before any coding actually begins. And you really believe there are no other tasks in the mix have have to be considered just for this update? Still think its 5 minutes from end to end? That was my whole point.

I would like to know if DXO could implement a button for FILMPACK and VIEWPOINT as well. Instead of the current implementation in Photolab that seems somewhat confusing in regards to the stand alone versions

Oh for heaven’s sake, Mark, give it up. Yes, adding complex new features to the export module or reworking the user interface for export is a lot of work. Hiding a button which wasn’t there in the very last version is trivial, adding a checkbox in preferences to control it is trivial. Both birdpictures and I are building software now, with modern development tools and this is really simple stuff.

DxO does not get a free pass to do nasty things to their users or their user interface due to financial difficulties of their own making. Please stop creating excuses for bad behaviour.

1 Like

Your not a developer and you may not understand development standards. Coding a small change may only take a short time and testing it not much more than that, but actually implementing it and distributing it is not a 5 minute activity. DXO can either do it in a special release with that change alone which is a lot of work for very little gain, they could do it as part of a point update with other features if they choose to go that route, or they can wait and put it in the next version release, but in no way can they make a decision to make the change, code it today and put it right into production. That has been my point and argument from the beginning, that you don’t just code it and test it and immediately go live. Some of the posters who say its a five minute effort are implying exactly that. That is just not how it works


You could always put a piece of tape over it!:blush:


John, you are my man. I like this proposal. You have my vote😃

If DxO can’t add a checkbox to hide the Nik button (which they’ve just added) and get the release out within a day (at least in beta), it’s time they left the development business altogether.

This prancing around like you are the only developer in the world is getting really tired. I release four to six production versions of a video player every month with either new features or fixes for OS changes. And I’m not running around crying about how difficult it is to release versions: I’m busy adding features and fixing issues instead.

DxO if you’re listening, I’m very close to hard refunding Nik 2 and the PhotoLab Elite just to protest this kind of in-app advertising.

This is not supposed to be a DxO compassion club but a group of passionate photographers who use DxO tools to create better work. Seeing you, Sigi and Pascal circle the wagons and mock those of who actually care about our tools and work environment with the help of John Worsham is highly unappealing. Brown-nosing better behooves geeky losers in high school not grown-up photographers.

In-app adverts which can’t be turned off is a bridge too far. If I’m pushed to hard refund, I will never buy a second seat for anyone, will never recommend the software to anyone and will not hesitate to share my opinion about how DxO treats their customers: according to the four gentlemen above as chattel on whom to push in-app advertising. I didn’t spend €300 to look at in-app ads. And no one else did either.