Would be great if there is a way in the organiser to fast check the RAW files and do some culling.
Many of us here do not find PhotoLab a good tool to use for calling for more than one reason. Those who do not use a dedicated asset manager for that purpose often use Fast Raw Viewer or Faststone Image Viewer. Both of them allow you to view multiple images at the same time and you can compare the unedited raw files without the in-camera settings.
Even if one could quickly view the jpeg previews, PhotoLab would still not be a terribly good tool to use for culling images.
Most image viewers, or even file explorers like macOS Finder actually display the embedded jpeg preview.
FRV and Fastone can be used to view the embedded jpegs, but they can also be used to view unedited raw files, which is my preference. Although FRV is faster when viewing raw files, I still prefer using Faststone.
I might be an oddball for liking to cull in PL. I usually need to zoom in to compare similar images and so like to see how they look with basic corrections and enhancements. I tag rejects and when I’m ready it’s easy to filter and remove them. Not quick, but neither am I so it suits me.
I now use Fast stone, and it is working great for this purpose, but…
I really hate it to switch between multiple programs.
Once again: Why not give users a choice?
Probably for you, yes.
But other (many?) users could find it very well adapted to their workflow.
Actually, when opening a new folder (around 200 files) sorted by content creation date, it takes ages to finish working on thumbnails and then be able to start culling.
I would appreciate also to have only one tool and do that inside PL.
And it may convince users previously reluctant to do that in PL that finally it may be well for them also…
Something like metadata, there are still a lot of users who don’t want to do it inside PL for multiple good reasons, but for me it is well adapted to my needs.
I was previously using Photo Supreme, and I"m now happy to get rid of it and use only PL to add metadata. And in older posts about such request to add metadata before they start working on it, I was reluctant to add that function in PL, but have been convinced after trying it.
And I know it’s not perfect (lack of data presets, managing of keywords,…) but I hope it will come sometime.
So yes, there are other tools which to do that better, but it’s not a reason to not having a better solution inside PL.
When I’m working on my RAWs, I prefer to use only one app to do the things I need to do. I now know the audience of DxO is used to workarounds and having multiple other apps involved in their workflow. For me, a flow is better if I don’t have to change rivers and creeks.
It depends on the quantities one deals with. I like to cull down to all four and five star images and then do the last triage in PhotoLab with the ability to test corrections agains the RAW image.
In my case I’m shooting sports with huge numbers of incoming images. Triage in PhotoLab would be akin to waterboarding.
I couldn’t agree more… on large folders I tend to need to leave DXO chugging away for a while before even attempting to look.
I want to keep my RAW files intact in their folders and generate TIFFs for the ones I want to use for edits. Occasionally, I may also want to generate JPGs too for some which are good images but not the top.
Different people want different workflows. I would like to keep it to DXO and Photoshop. If others want a more complex workflow, that is fine by me… but I would like a simpler one.
Why on earth would you generate TIFFs before editing? What’s wrong with working on the original RAW files? After all, they are never going to be changed - the adjustments simply get saved to a DOP sidecar. Then you can create as many TIFF or JPEG copies as you want from the edited image.
What do you need Photoshop for when you have end-to-end processing within PhotoLab? It really is the simplest workflow out there.
Photoshop has a few features that PhotoLab hasn’t.
Like “content aware fill”, to just name one.
I understand that. It’s just that @Sithrandil seemed to be saying he keeps his RAW files intact, as if he wasn’t editing them at all until he exported them.
Changing settings in DXO does not affect the RAW, only the sidecar and database. I will sometimes use DeepPrime, but the true value for me is the optical corrections which I have traditionally preferred in DXO.
As to “why on Earth I would use Photoshop”… I do find it amusing to express such strong feelings without knowing the purpose of my editing
DXO does not do multiple alpha channels on multiple layers to merge multiple images together. Similarly, as others have mentioned, the healing / content fill tools in Photoshop are excellent. DXO should it try to do these things. DXO excels as a RAW processor, Photoshop excels as a creative photo manipulation tool.
To date, I prefer the output of DXO to Adobe Camera RAW… so I do have two steps in my process. As I did before discovering DXO, when using the native Canon or Nikon software.
Although I would like a simpler workflow, I do like the standalone RAW batch processing which can just be let running overnight to give me the TIFFs for editing the next day.
So I use two packages to do the whole job. DXO is fine for my culling needs… it is just that it is so slow on folder changes. That is why it would be nice for it to make more use of the embedded JPGs more when viewing thumbnails and not show the beachball
I am not suggesting using them exclusively… just enough to allow scrolling without the program freezing
Now I understand.
However, PhotoLab was never intended for culling and I’m surprised that you don’t do that in something like Finder (Mac), which shows the JPEG previews as a matter of course.
BTW, extracting embedded JPEG previews is a bit faster but not that much faster - DxO’s rendering engine actually does show the preview whilst the full version is loading, so you don’t have to wait for the full demosaïcing to happen.
I don’t cull in Finder because I prefer to keep the RAW folders intact… I do not want to delete any images until I archive the folder. I like to do one single pass of the images and assign numbers for later batch processing. This involves checks at 100% to ensure low-light images aren’t blurred or to find the sharpest image in a chosen burst. The finder doesn’t seem too good at that, but DXO does it well.
The only problem with this approach, is that DXO locks up for ages (eg 1hr+) when it switches to a newly downloaded folder. Once the cache is built, it is a lot faster. Anything to allow photo selection before the cache is fully built would be nice
I voted for this because I thought it might help
Of course, an obvious option is a new Mac… that will probably come in the next 12 months. In the meantime I am really pleased with DXO’s ability to work on older hardware. It may be slow, but it works!