# DxO



## wblink (Mar 23, 2008)

Hi,

I "stumbled" accross DxO. They sell a program which will correct my RAW and JPEG files for my camera and lenses.

From their website I got a good impression, but that is "sales-talk".

Is anyone using or has been using this software?

To me it sounds all very good, almost "too good to be true".


----------



## MikeCaine (Mar 24, 2008)

I've used it on and off for a year or more now (version 4). I find I do get good results with it and will probably upgrade to V5 once it's available for the Mac as my current version doesn't support the D3''.

Some people seem to use it as their main RAW processor, I just used it when I felt the photo would benefit from it


----------



## wblink (Mar 24, 2008)

Thanks for your input Mike.

The MAC beta will be out soon, the release is expected in april.

DxO takle a lot of cpu-power and time! While I write this the trial version is running on some 45 files (nef), exports them to dng and it take somewhere around 3' secs for each file (it depends on what DxO thinks it has to do I asume. But it is an unattended batch poces, so  ...

When I get my monitor calibrated (another issue, but that will be solved in short time) and my icc profile for my printer, (will take some study) I can see the result on monitor oand on paper.

Anyone that wnats to try: http://www.dxo.com/intl/photo


----------



## MikeCaine (Mar 24, 2008)

wblink said:


> DxO takle a lot of cpu-power and time



Don't I know it 

On my G5 iMac it would take ages to process a batch of photos, which is why I just used it on selected photos that I thought would benefit from it.

I'm hoping it will be a lot faster on my recently purchased 8 core Mac

Mike


----------



## Halfje-Bruin (Mar 24, 2008)

Stay away from the v5 version until at least v5.2 or later. Just read the DxO forums about all the promises made by DxO but not delivered. I have played with v5 and I'm still waiting on my credit card statement to see if I received my refund.

Version 4.5 is a different matter and you should be able to use this without any problems.


----------



## wblink (Mar 24, 2008)

Halfje-Bruin said:


> Stay away from the v5 version until at least v5.2 or later. Just read the DxO forums about all the promises made by DxO but not delivered. I have played with v5 and I'm still waiting on my credit card statement to see if I received my refund.
> 
> Version 4.5 is a different matter and you should be able to use this without any problems.


 

Hey, thank you for this warning. I was about to buy this software (at the end of the trial period: 14 days).

What's up with v5? Is it worse than v4.5 or did they just didn't do what they promised?

I am telling that because I haven't the faintest idea what v 4.5 could do, I only have v 5 and it does a nice job I think. What should I be aware of?

(It isn't that I don't beleive you!)


----------



## Halfje-Bruin (Mar 25, 2008)

Just go to the DxO website and read the various forum threads there. In summary I had the following problems with the 5.' to 5.'.2 versions:

- program would not install
- program would not run
- multiple crashes after just a single adjustment
- crashes in the project management stuff
- no highlight clipping indication etc
- undo problems

I didn't bother with the 5.'.3 and 5.'.4 updates and just requested for a refund.


----------



## gkanitz (Mar 31, 2008)

*4.x Yes - 5.x No*

I used DXO 4.x for more than a year.  It’s a solid, well thought out, effective program.  If your camera/lens combination is supported, it's very good for automatically (no user intervention required) correcting fringing and distortion.  It also allows you to manually adjust the geometry of the image.  Color correction and adjustment is very good too but very similar to LR (though the results will be different).  I now use LR most of the time. DXO was previously my main RAW processor.  But my experience with V5.x was awful and judging by what appears in their forums, I’m not alone.  Since my D3'' is only supported by V5, LR has become my main post-processing tool.


----------



## wblink (Mar 31, 2008)

*DXOut*

Thanks for your input.

Seems (to me from your answers) thatDxO is potentially a good 1. We see it later then.


----------



## Aleksiej (Jun 17, 2008)

Stay away. Program code is not optimized.


----------



## wblink (Jun 22, 2008)

*Preprocessing with Bible Pro?*



			
				Aleksiej;1587' said:
			
		

> Stay away. Program code is not optimized.


 I did. Switched to Bible Pro. Seems ok, not sure what is the best way to integrate with LR, anybody any idea?


----------



## Halfje-Bruin (Jun 22, 2008)

wblink;161'2 said:
			
		

> I did. Switched to Bible Pro. Seems ok, not sure what is the best way to integrate with LR, anybody any idea?



The main problem with any combination of RAW processing is that you cannot really combine them because they don't understand each others changes.

I'm now evaluating the new NX2 and really like the results I get but I do miss the library part of Lightroom. I'm working with Photo Mechanic but this has no real search capabilities on Windows but can use Spotlight on the Mac.

In general, integration is only possible when one tool converts the RAW to TIFF (16 bits with huge files) and the TIFF file is managed by Lightroom.


----------



## wblink (Jun 23, 2008)

Halfje-Bruin said:


> The main problem with any combination of RAW processing is that you cannot really combine them because they don't understand each others changes.
> 
> I'm now evaluating the new NX2 and really like the results I get but I do miss the library part of Lightroom. I'm working with Photo Mechanic but this has no real search capabilities on Windows but can use Spotlight on the Mac.
> 
> In general, integration is only possible when one tool converts the RAW to TIFF (16 bits with huge files) and the TIFF file is managed by Lightroom.


 
Same thing here. PhotoMechanic is not a good choice I think, best next to LR (what I could find) is EXIFPRO.

Victoria (hi there  promised me a far better print module and more goodies in the release of LR2 (like better RAW converting). I wil wait for that. For the time being I will us LR141 for organizing and try to do the work in NX2 in TIFF just for the (few) photot's I like to work on (hobby for me, not profession so I can do that).


----------

