![]() ![]() I know that this post does not solve your current question, sorry for that. Software progresses and PhotoLab 3 does some things better than PhotoLab 2 (which you mention in your posts) and PhotoLab 8 will be much better still - whenever it may be available…Īll you can do is see what you can do with both apps in regard to noise (and all the other features) and I suppose that the number of tests you need to do is rather above 100 than below 10. If money does not matter to you, use them both and see which tool serves which purpose best. Also, the Photography Plan lets you use Photoshop which I use from time. I realize that, generally speaking, there's more features on Lightroom, like the slideshow windows, etc. Also, Lightroom has more cataloging features, like more colors to tag your pictures. ![]() Have you compared noise on images that you exported or on screen? What are the differences? Do you lose detail or does everything look like it was made from plastic? What is the quality you’re after and what are the criteria that define this quality?Ĭomparing NR of Lightroom and PhotoLab feels like picking cherries out of two baskets filled with many delicacies… PhotoLab and Lightroom can do marvellous things in capable hands and both products offer things that make life easier - or more complicated, because each basket has a set of goodies, but neither has them all. For instance, I use the 'white' slider a lot on LR and can't seem to find it on DXO. Anyone here use DXO Photolab 2 and found it on a par or better than LightRoom? I’m just not seeing it though., at least with my equipment. The PhotoLab version was blotchy with that classic color noise look, and this is after the auto or max correction was applied.ĭXO’s PhotoLab 2 is promoted as being really special for noise reduction. 12800 is never going to give you an excellent outcome, but the result was mote than reasonable considering. The LightRoom edits looked very reasonable. I then developed the same shot in LightRoom, and compared the exported jpegs from each side by side. I went with Prime NR on DXO with different settings, plus auto. I kept the edits to a minimum outside of lens correction and noise reduction. I watched another demo on YouTube tonight and it looked great, so I downloaded a trial again, shot ISO 12800 RAW on my Canon R, and then processed it in PhotoLab 2 and LightRoom. I’ve moved on since to Canon full frame bodies and I recently received a “special offer” email from DXO for PhotoLab 2 Elite edition. When I tested the trial version with some of my RAWs however, it was not any better than LightRoom, and in some cases seemed worse. If you liked this post, subscribe to my weekly newsletter and receive deals and discounts on DxO PureRaw 3 and other photography software and gear.I took a look at a demo of DXO PhotoLab some time ago when I shot with a four thirds body, because I was getting frustrated with the noise at high ISOs and the YouTube demos looked amazing with the Prime noise reduction. ![]() Furthermore, unlike PureRaw 3, both alternatives denoise Raw and JPEG.īut if you don’t care about JPEG and want the fastest, laziest route towards a spectacularly enhanced and denoised image, DxO PureRaw 3 is without equal. Judged solely as a noise reduction application, PureRaw 3 is considerably more expensive than equally effective denoisers such as ON1 NoNoise AI and Topaz Denoise AI. And second, DxO PureRaw 3’s Optics Modules transcend its DeepPrime noise reduction resulting in an image beyond the reach of a standalone noise reduction application. First, its automated workflow produces reliably excellent results with minimal effort on my part. Regarding noise reduction, DxO PureRaw 3 is extremely impressive and at least as good as the best.īut what makes DxO PureRaw 3 my new favorite noise reduction application is two-fold. DxO PureRaw 3 is the best raw conversion application I have tested. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |