DxO OpticsPro advice.

[rebby]

I was playing with DxO today... one thing I couldn't figure out is how to reset a photo back to the original RAW (undo all adjustments)... How do you do that?

In the Customize tab under "PRESET EDITOR" there is a Preset called "4 - No correction". Apply that preset and you're back to your RAW file. If you want to revert to the default starting point (assuming that you haven't modified your default preset) apply the "1 - DxO Standard" preset.

Also, although there is no history tab like in Lightroom, you can step back one adjustment at a time using the Undo function (Command-Z).

 

[HantaYo]

Thanks to some recent threads and posts, I decided to take a closer look at DX0 OpticsPro.

Gee Thanks, now I am reevaluating DXO OpticsPro

 

[VirtualRain]

In the Customize tab under "PRESET EDITOR" there is a Preset called "4 - No correction". Apply that preset and you're back to your RAW file. If you want to revert to the default starting point (assuming that you haven't modified your default preset) apply the "1 - DxO Standard" preset.

Also, although there is no history tab like in Lightroom, you can step back one adjustment at a time using the Undo function (Command-Z).

Thanks... that's what I was looking for. Would be nice to have a right click option or something to just revert the image to default.

I have to say my first impressions of DxO haven't been great... their RAW conversion is a bit over saturated, their tools are difficult to use (not updating the histogram in real-time), an absence of local adjustments, and the reliance on the file system for organization.

I'm not trying to be obnoxious, but what are people seeing in DxO that makes it worth the money? Is the lens correction that much better than Lightroom? Or is there something else?

----------

I'm really liking what DXO does for RAW processing.

Can you elaborate?

----------

As you use it more, you'll see how it benefits some stuff more than others, which means you'll probably run fewer images through it.

If I were to have one addition to LR for RAW processing, DxO would be it. Just their haze Clearview tool is worth it. There was a thread where we compared that with some other tools in other applications, and it kicked them to the curb (sorry, can't remember where it was). And so many other cool things, like perspective tools, that they download only the lens corrections and info you need, the dust tool, the layout and graphics, and support.

I saw you popped into my thread on the Haze removal comparison I did, do you think I properly represented DxO in that evaluation? I know you mentioned the type of image may have an impact... perhaps there's something to that.

 

[maflynn]

Can you elaborate?

Not much to elaborate, I am liking how DXO is rendering my RAW images.

 

[VirtualRain]

Not much to elaborate, I am liking how DXO is rendering my RAW images.

In comparison to Lightroom, C1, both?

 

[rebby]

I'm not trying to be obnoxious, but what are people seeing in DxO that makes it worth the money? Is the lens correction that much better than Lightroom? Or is there something else?.

For me, it's high ISO noise reduction. NR w/DxO Prime is phenomenal and worth the price of admission. With DxO I don't need to be concerned with ISO. Sure, I still try to keep my ISO down but if I do need to push the issue, I know that DxO can help save the photo.

 

[VirtualRain]

For me, it's high ISO noise reduction. NR w/DxO Prime is phenomenal and worth the price of admission. With DxO I don't need to be concerned with ISO. Sure, I still try to keep my ISO down but if I do need to push the issue, I know that DxO can help save the photo.

Interesting, I'll look at that... have you compared it to Lightroom?

 

[FieldingMellish]

I decided to leapfrog version 10. 9 does what I need.

 

[maflynn]

In comparison to Lightroom, C1, both?

In comparison to Aperture, and Lightoom, my images seemed to be better. Nothing scientific or as well thought out as others which is why I didn't want to produce any sort of examples. I think C1 pulled out a bit more detail in low light situations and I thought the saturation was a bit richer in C1 compared to DXO.

The saturation cuts both ways, I thought it was a little to vibrant in some images, but spot on to what I experienced in real life in others.

 

[Wahlstrm]

I import my memory cards to Bridge, delete the stuff I don't want then I go in to DXO and work on the files. Export to jpegs if that´s all I need or tiffs if I need to photoshop something..

I would love if DXO sliders would work with the arrow-keys like they do in Lightroom.. But maybe that´s fixed in DXO10?

 

[rebby]

Interesting, I'll look at that... have you compared it to Lightroom?

Not in the manner that you have done w/some of your review threads. I have compared it to Aperture, extensively, and needless to say DxO is significantly better. I just made the switch to LR though so I'm still trying to get fully migrated over to my new library and plan to do some LR vs DxO tests in the near future. I've been waiting on LR6 though since it's release appears to be right around the corner. I'd rather do comparisons w/LR6 since that's what I'll most likely be using.

 

[VirtualRain]

Not in the manner that you have done w/some of your review threads. I have compared it to Aperture, extensively, and needless to say DxO is significantly better. I just made the switch to LR though so I'm still trying to get fully migrated over to my new library and plan to do some LR vs DxO tests in the near future. I've been waiting on LR6 though since it's release appears to be right around the corner. I'd rather do comparisons w/LR6 since that's what I'll most likely be using.

Yeah same here (waiting in LR6)... When I looked at NR a couple of years ago, LR was king. When LR6 lands, I'll have a go at doing some comparisons with it, DxO and C1.