Just downloaded DXOPureRaw 2 when I start processing the first photoo is ok the remainder are black. Any Idea how to fix. I have a support ticket but they have not answered yet.
Hi Elizabeth and welcome,
What platform and OS are you using? Also what camera?
Welcome. Unfortunately, this has been reported by multiple users in this forum:
Search results for âpureraw black fileâ - DxO Forums
Fortunately, someone just figured out a solution:
Might that work for you, too?
Windows 11 Canon r5 but have used DXO PureRaw on this computer for 2 years without issue. My computer is a Razer Gamng Laptop nvidia GE Force RTX. The problem is happening since PureRaw 2.
I have been able to get it to work by switching to CPU under preferences. But it is way too slow und really unusable. Thanks
Although my workaround of just forcing the saver executable to use the CPU (leaving the main process to use the GPU) worked, I have since resolved the problem fully and no longer need to do that. That came about because another problem left me with no choice but to reset of Windows. Having done that, DXO-PR runs without any special setting. Not only that, but it runs slightly faster than before! I therefore have to assume that there was an underlying device driver and/or registry problem, despite checks reporting the GPU drivers as being up to date. Hopefully the workaround of forcing just the saver executable to restrict its working to the CPU will solve your problem, as I would not advocate a Windows reset without very good reason (you have to reinstall all non MS software). Good luck!
I tried his fix but it didnât work for me. I have read the black files comments only 2 came up with solutions I changed to the CPU and its like watching grass grow. DXO dont seem to be coming up with any solutions. I will have to ask for a refund. It has now stopped the first version I had from working also. It seems this has been a problem for some time
Two things.
-
I spoke too soon! When I tested 100 RW2 (Lumix) files this morning all ran OK following my windows reset and re-install of DXO_PR. However, I have just updated to the latest version that was released a few days ago and Iâm back to a black file on the second image. The workaround I gave before solved that (although I need to do a larger sample - also it was different camera this afternoon - Olympus).
-
My workaround does not slow things down as the main processing software can still use the CPU. It is only the file called âPureRAWv2_saver.exeâ that needs to be set to âPowerSavingâ in the advanced graphics setup. The time consumer is âPureRAWv2.exeâ and you can leave that set to âLet Windows Decideâ.
Hope that clarifies things.
Typo - for CPU read GPU in line 1 of my point 2.
Thank you so much Ian it did fix the black files but is so slow it is not really usable. My original pure raw was so much faster I have a support ticket I will see if I can go back to the original software. I really appreciate your comments DXO have not helped me at all.
I tried everything to get a bit more processing speed I finally removed PureRaw2.exe from the graphics area. I inserted The PureRaw2_saver.exe and set it to High Performance. Now goes very fast and no black files. Delete all reference to previous sentence after processing some file successfully got the black files again. Used Ianâs settings once again each file now takes 2min 30 secs. This is inacceptable when they declare it is 4 times faster than the original software. I put in a support docket on Sat it is now Tuesday night in Australia and no reply whatsoever from the support team. Very angry at this point.
Excellent!
I now have a proper âfixâ for this on my laptop rather than a mere âworkaroundâ.
The standard advice is to update the GPU drivers. Mine (for RTX 3060) said driver 27.21.14.6262 dated 11/05/2021, and that it was up to date. It appears that the word of Device Manager canât be relied on.
The NVIDIA web site provided an update to driver 31.0.15.2849 dated 02/02/2023 (having first set a restore point in case of need).
I did a test of 100 files (all 20MP Lumix RAW RW2 files from two cameras and a mix of lenses) - 4.5 seconds per file none came out black.
1 Like
Thanks Ian I found an obscure post saying to update GPU drivers I have RTX 3080 I did that not long ago and it is now fully functional. I also did a test of files it works really fast now. Its a pity we had to do all the homework to get this program working I appreciate everyone who tried to help.
Thanks for the update. Glad you got it sorted too.
Of course, you canât really blame DXO for PureRAW not working properly with out of date drivers.
Mark
1 Like
@mwsilvers sadly that is not entirely true
-
As soon as the issue raised its ugly head someone in DxO might have put two and two together and started making the right noises to users directly and via this forum. The users in this forum are fairly smart but we are working blindfolded and with one hand tied behind our back compared to the DxO software engineers. Recently issues I believed had long since vanished from PCs etc have reared their ugly heads, driver issues and clashes with anti-virus software. It has been many years since they were the first thing a PC users would suspect when weird things started happening.
-
Has DxO actually seen these problems on their own kit during development and testing!?
The response on the phone for this and some other problems that have appeared in the forum actually appears to have been worse than anything that you would expect in this forum let alone from the developers own support line.
I am glad it has been resolved, all my testing proved was that I could not reproduce the problem with DxPL or DxPR because I lacked one key ingredient on my systems, namely, old drivers.
You may be second-guessing DXOâs response to this issue including what staff members knew and what staff members may have been doing about it. Comments about the quality of DxOâs response seem anecdotal and may be mostly conjecture.
One-off issues related to a userâs hardware environment can be especially difficult to analyze and resolve by a remote support staff who do not have direct access to the userâs machine. The claim that the most current drivers graphic card drivers had been installed may also have confused the issue.
In recent months, all too frequently I have seen frustrated and sometimes angry posts from users having problems with DxOâs offerings only read later that the problems were a result of user error, confused expectations, hardware issues, or more recently third party software issues, like those caused by Avast. It seems people love to bash DxO software whether it deserves it or not.
Mark
I donât âlikeâ to bash DxO but I expect more than we have been getting lately, albeit I understand the push to get bugs resolved and to prepare the PL7 Beta test program and product. There has been a welcome, almost immediate response to Forum posts by DxO Support personnel lately but we still lack a pro-active involvement by DxO with this forum, leaving users to help rescue other users.
Almost all that I know about the working of DxPL has come from empirical evaluation, that sounds so professional for âplayingâ.
I have been on the receiving end of support calls for the 36 years I supported Burroughs/Unisys âLarge Systemsâ mainframes and that included 24/7 support of 24/7 systems, where customer expectations are understandably high (an understatement).
I donât expect that level of support from DxO but some of the reports of support calls are deeply worrying.
I consider the product to be one of the best that I have access to but that doesnât excuse sloppy support or inadequate documentation (and there is now a lot more good documentation online than there ever was).
To silence me only one thing has to happen, other than the plague, and that is a pro-active involvement from DxO with the users, not reactive not retro-active but honest and pro-active then they will deserve the users that frequent this forum and, just possibly, silence my criticism.
Regards
Bryan
Agreed but what else can you do in a vacuum?
Most of what I do is directly related to investigation and experimentation but that could be so much easier and more productive with any input from the designers and developers, currently we are getting none and your comment implied that DxO could not be blamed for the issue that occurred and that might be true when the first report came in, i.e. at that point they are blameless but thereafter �
2 Likes
I wasnât referring to you at all when I made that statement. I apologize if I gave you that impression.
For what it is worth, I was also in IT for 35 years as a programmer, analyst, and software development manager for a major bank corp on Wall Street. It also included a stint providing user desktop support for the bankâs trading floor software we developed. Most of those years I was on call 24/7/365 providing support for time critical applications at branches around the world. I canât count all the dinners, movies, shows, vacations and sleep that were interrupted by support calls over the years as a result.
Mark
@mwsilvers I am sorry if I overreacted but your statement straight after mine and I put 2 & 2 together and made 6.
On a more serious note we see the issues other users have if we monitor the forum and it is used sufficiently that if DxO wanted to âshareâ information pro-actively it is an obvious medium for that purpose, that might include a response to a forum post or from a support call or from a support submission.
When users experienced issues as a consequence of the way that Affinity 2 was installed, Serif representatives were active in their user forum almost immediately.
I would like to see that with DxO in this forum, even before the release of PL6 that form of involvement was scarce but DxO representatives were at least active in the forum but since the release of PL6 there âappearsâ to be a change in policy (conjecture but I am speaking as I find) and virtually any and all forms of interaction have been absent and the forum has been poorer for that lack of involvement.
But life is way too short, so goodnight.
Regards
Bryan
3 Likes