Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: DXO Optics pro 6.5  (Read 15482 times)
FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 551


WWW
« on: November 08, 2010, 05:14:20 PM »
ReplyReply

DXO has just released a new update of version 6, namely 6.5

It is supposed to have an improved RAW converter and better noise reduction

I havenīt tested it yet.


Logged

Mike Raub
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61


« Reply #1 on: November 12, 2010, 03:04:50 PM »
ReplyReply

I downloaded 6.5 last night a played with it a bit. Using the new lighting controls (including single shot HDR), I was able to process images that produced an impressive degree of "pop" with sometimes an almost 3D look. On screen, it did not look like excessive noise built up in the shadows. The real test will be to see if these attributes hold up when I try a 20X30" print.

6.5 is not a speed demon, though. Processing Canon 5DII raw images took an average of 1 minute 15 seconds on a i7 quadcore iMac with 8 GB of RAM. I don't have any software to tell how many cores 6.5 uses, but I'd guess only one.
Logged
marcmccalmont
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724



« Reply #2 on: November 12, 2010, 04:13:56 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm guessing one core per file so 4 files should be processed in parallel?
Marc
Logged

Marc McCalmont
Mike Raub
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 61


« Reply #3 on: November 13, 2010, 01:50:18 PM »
ReplyReply

I made a few 20"X30" prints last night and what I saw on the screen held up on the print. DXO 6.5 does a great job of bring out detail in the shadows without adding excessive noise in the process.

Photography is just a hobby for me and I just process one image at a time, so assigning batch processing to multiple cores does help me at all.

I haven't run into any bugs in this release. In the past it generally took a couple of maintenance releases before DXO had a stable Mac program.

Nice work DXO!
Logged
giantKillerRobots
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #4 on: November 17, 2010, 08:08:28 AM »
ReplyReply

it is very good, and the high ISO noise reduction is supurb - definitely better at removing blotchy noise, and keeps the fine grained noise and good colour saturation it always had

just note, don't use the moire remover as a matter of course. In fact i haven't found many situations its good for - it will remove moire but will also destroy a lot of detail it mistakes for moire

DXO will process 2 images by default you can crank it up to 4 and it will use all your 4 cores + HT virtual cores
Logged
sniper29a
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #5 on: January 24, 2011, 04:45:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Does anyone do further processing of DxO output files? I need to output TIFF 16b with ProPhoto RGB for further local adjustments in Photoshop. I have been told that it is not possble at the moment. You can choose color rendering and output profile. Once you open file in Photoshop, it never matches. I wonder if someone has got similar issue.

DxO DNG is basically TIFF. I cannot match DxO output with PS. It looks like Optics Pro somehoe screws up color conversions or I have set something wrong.
Logged
FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 551


WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 24, 2011, 05:16:16 PM »
ReplyReply

You can output 16 bit TIFF with ProphotoRGB, even in previous versions. I'm not sure what you mean that never matches photoshop, at least it is not my experience

About DxO DNG being basically TIFF: They are linear DNG, not RAW DNG. This means that demosaicing and interpolation has been done. Anyway, they are still not color space encoded. If you open them in LR or ACR you could still apply a DNG profile and adjust color temperature.

I assume you are starting with a RAW file. If you use a TIFF or JPEG as the input file then DxO is very limited in terms of color management, and basically works only in sRGB.
Logged

sniper29a
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #7 on: January 24, 2011, 05:35:04 PM »
ReplyReply

thanks for reply.

DxO gave me following answer:

"DxO Optics Pro converts to AdobeRGB as the output color space. So converting to ProPhotoRGB for Output does not provide any gain.  ProPhotoRGB RGB is about 50 percent bigger than AdobeRGB. ProPhotoRGB contains colors outside the AdobeRGB color space, namely in the orange and yellows. ProPhotoRGB covers all of these colors, and also some that are not even visible, let alone printable.
Making 16-bit ProPhotoRGB TIFFs can, however give you issues later. The color space is so big that even in 16 bit mode, you risk banding and artifacts due to the "gaps" between the colors. If you were making 32-bit TIFFs and DxO converted to ProPhotoRGB as an output color space, and also editing in 32-bits in Photoshop this might be feasible, but we do not recommend it for 16-bit color operations.

Presently you cannot do what you are asking. Thre are no workarounds. DxO's working color space is preset and you do not have access to change it. If you were to make output files in ProPhotoRGB, 16-bit being the maximum bit depth available to you. You would very likely have the problems cited above using them afterwards.  You are fooling yourself by attempting this and believing you have gained something."

I have set ProPhotoRGB.icm in "color rendering" and TIFF 16b ProPhotoRGB.icm as well. Result is weird once you open it in PS. It suppose to match in both programs.

DxO DNG looks like unprocessed RAW once I open it ACR. Still size of DxO DNG is exactly same like TIFF output. I guess it needs further adjustments to be made.
Logged
MichaelWorley
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 67


« Reply #8 on: March 27, 2011, 04:44:41 PM »
ReplyReply

A poster over at the dpreview D3-D1/D700 forum is finding that DXO Elite can't process D3x files in 32-bit:

"I just upgraded to a D3x and DXO Elite... now

"I find it can't process FX images (DX crop are OK).

"DXO is suggesting that a 64 bit OS is required "due to the size of the files",. I find this surprising. Lightroom seems to have no problem (Yes, I know DXO is probably doing a lot more manipulation of the data, but there are ways of addressing that with memory management)"

Surprises me, too. I don't have DXO, but I would think processor speed would affect processing time. Lack of memory could certainly cause something not to work at all.

I have a brain-dead 4GB laptop running Windows Vista [can't upgrade to 7] that is literally ten times slower than my desktop, but it will run Adobe CS5 Bridge, then ACR, and ultimately Photoshop CS5 on a D3x image. The OP in that dpreview thread said that DXO Elite does things that ACR can't. Well, as I said there, not if it won't run.

Mike
Logged
kikashi
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4058



« Reply #9 on: March 27, 2011, 04:47:25 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't have any software to tell how many cores 6.5 uses, but I'd guess only one.
Try MenuMeters from Raging Menace. It displays, in the menu bar, percentage usage for each core. It will also display network throughput as a graph. I find it very useful indeed.

Jeremy
Logged
sniper29a
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #10 on: March 27, 2011, 06:01:23 PM »
ReplyReply

MichaelWorley: they suggest 64b OS, but it would run anyway. I think they "suggest" 64b for large raw files like from my Canon 5D.2. each file about 25-30MB. DxO Optics Pro is not MT SW, but it can run simultaneously many pictures at once (i guess, 8 cores = 8 pictures at once). It takes some memory, lets say 1.5GB per 2 processed files. if you run Win Vista/7, it takes at least 1.5GB of memory. Few more programs running...here you are...you "need" 64b OS.

What is problem with your files from D3x?
Logged
MichaelWorley
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 67


« Reply #11 on: March 27, 2011, 08:06:55 PM »
ReplyReply

What is problem with your files from D3x?

I don't have any problem, it's someone on dpreview who is.

That poster on dpreview is saying DXO Elite will not open D3x images on his 32-bit system. DXO has told him that he needs a 64-bit system to open such "large" files. [DXO has apparently not yet heard of digital MF.]

My point, if any, was that this sounded strange. In the scheme of things, D3x images aren't *that* large. I've had RAM limitations stop a program, but not a too slow processor. I've always been able to open D3x files - even stitched panoramas from D3x images - with Nikon, Nik, or Adobe software. Even on a 32-bit system.

Mike
Logged
john cox
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 15



WWW
« Reply #12 on: March 31, 2011, 09:49:44 PM »
ReplyReply

It could also be the bit rate of the image, I think Dx0 supports 48 bit images and resampling an image that complex is incredibly taxing on your cpu. If you have a 64 bit OS this gets easier.
Logged

Michael West
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 341



« Reply #13 on: April 05, 2011, 08:59:46 PM »
ReplyReply

Five minutes to process one image. Im not certain I will continue to take advantage of the trial, much less put the application into regular use.

I'm hoping that five minutes wont be the average processing time on my"quadcore" Mac Pro
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad