Not really posting for critique, I am sure you have all seen these images on this perch enough now
Part of my job involves assessing various software options and I was asked to beta DxO optics Pro 4, we had in the past avoided this software because of its slowness and the fact that the 'workflow' was not very streamlined but it had interesting possibilities...
Any way the beta version of 4 is a huge step forward, still a few issues to be sorted out, I'm not going to give a full report on it yet but if you are interested in trying it out there is a public beta available on the DxO website that you can download that expires on the 15th Sept (when I believe they intend to release a final version...
Hi Phil,
First up.....Wonderful detailed capture, a real class shot.
For a while now I've been playing around with various RAW software options (not heard of DxO though) and have found them to be mostly similar in the end result....getting to the end result is what differentiates between them, or so I'm finding.
I can open one image in ACR, Lightroom Beta, C1Pro and Aperture 1.1.2. Without applying any saturation, levels or anything all the results look similar but not the same....ACR tends to oversaturate the reds for my taste as does Lightroom (no surprise there), C1 pro gives probably the most neutral saturation and Aperture is pretty close to halfway between the lot of them.
I have used C1 for a good few years now and although I don't like everything about it I do like the fact that I don't need to adjust saturation or mess around with colours to get the image as true to life as possible.
Aperture is what I'm using at the moment and I find it to be very very good at what C1 isn't so good at.....resizing, sharpening,removing dust spots sorting and publishing, all these things I would normally do in PS but now find that I'm doing them intuitively in Aperture. Biggest draw back is that it is a pretty slow program.......my Macbook Pro laptop runs it faster than my old Dell ran C1, but my G5 quad with 8Mb RAM doesn't come close to how fast C1 ran with the old Athlon based PC I had that (with only 2 Mb RAM). C1 on the G5 moves like the wind, but when you add in the time that I spend in PS it takes it to about the same time as Aperture.
I'm gonna stick with Aperture for now and see how it develops, but I think I'll have a look at this DxO software you're talking about too, assuming it's compatible with Macs.
Cheers. Couldn't agree more on the various RAW converters around, they are generally very much of a muchness, for my part I look at the 'workflow' and the quality of the fine detail that the converter is able to extract (important for my job), I too have used C1 for a number of years and we use it extensively with our Phase One backs, prior to pixmantec being purchased by Adobe we had found the 'micro detail' that RSP was able to 'extract' was superior to the competitors, so we invested in that route (the minor colour problems didn't detract as we are able to obtain accurate colour via gretag macbeth charts and profiles), since the purchase we have been looking for alternatives (RSP will only last untill we have to eventually upgrade our camera equipment and I don't really hold much hope for RSP technology being incorporated into Lightroom which incidently seems to have the same huge cache problem as bridge)
So far the nearest I have found to equal the detail from RSP is the upcoming new version of DxO, I am told that the interface is very much influenced by Aperture (wish we had Macs sometimes so I could test it) and will be available for the Mac platform. It has a 'workflow' that I am comfortable with, not the fastest at the moment but it is still public beta software (like lightroom).
IMO it is well worth a download of the beta (windows only at present) just to try.
Discussion
4 repliesHi,
Not really posting for critique, I am sure you have all seen these images on this perch enough now
Part of my job involves assessing various software options and I was asked to beta DxO optics Pro 4, we had in the past avoided this software because of its slowness and the fact that the 'workflow' was not very streamlined but it had interesting possibilities...
Any way the beta version of 4 is a huge step forward, still a few issues to be sorted out, I'm not going to give a full report on it yet but if you are interested in trying it out there is a public beta available on the DxO website that you can download that expires on the 15th Sept (when I believe they intend to release a final version...
All the best
Phil
Never heard of that one.It'll be interesting to see how it shapes up to it's competition.
Fine shot too,
New one to me as well but it appears to have processed your image well, especially with the sun so high!
David
First up.....Wonderful detailed capture, a real class shot.
For a while now I've been playing around with various RAW software options (not heard of DxO though) and have found them to be mostly similar in the end result....getting to the end result is what differentiates between them, or so I'm finding.
I can open one image in ACR, Lightroom Beta, C1Pro and Aperture 1.1.2. Without applying any saturation, levels or anything all the results look similar but not the same....ACR tends to oversaturate the reds for my taste as does Lightroom (no surprise there), C1 pro gives probably the most neutral saturation and Aperture is pretty close to halfway between the lot of them.
I have used C1 for a good few years now and although I don't like everything about it I do like the fact that I don't need to adjust saturation or mess around with colours to get the image as true to life as possible.
Aperture is what I'm using at the moment and I find it to be very very good at what C1 isn't so good at.....resizing, sharpening,removing dust spots sorting and publishing, all these things I would normally do in PS but now find that I'm doing them intuitively in Aperture. Biggest draw back is that it is a pretty slow program.......my Macbook Pro laptop runs it faster than my old Dell ran C1, but my G5 quad with 8Mb RAM doesn't come close to how fast C1 ran with the old Athlon based PC I had that (with only 2 Mb RAM). C1 on the G5 moves like the wind, but when you add in the time that I spend in PS it takes it to about the same time as Aperture.
I'm gonna stick with Aperture for now and see how it develops, but I think I'll have a look at this DxO software you're talking about too, assuming it's compatible with Macs.
John
Cheers. Couldn't agree more on the various RAW converters around, they are generally very much of a muchness, for my part I look at the 'workflow' and the quality of the fine detail that the converter is able to extract (important for my job), I too have used C1 for a number of years and we use it extensively with our Phase One backs, prior to pixmantec being purchased by Adobe we had found the 'micro detail' that RSP was able to 'extract' was superior to the competitors, so we invested in that route (the minor colour problems didn't detract as we are able to obtain accurate colour via gretag macbeth charts and profiles), since the purchase we have been looking for alternatives (RSP will only last untill we have to eventually upgrade our camera equipment and I don't really hold much hope for RSP technology being incorporated into Lightroom which incidently seems to have the same huge cache problem as bridge)
So far the nearest I have found to equal the detail from RSP is the upcoming new version of DxO, I am told that the interface is very much influenced by Aperture (wish we had Macs sometimes so I could test it) and will be available for the Mac platform. It has a 'workflow' that I am comfortable with, not the fastest at the moment but it is still public beta software (like lightroom).
IMO it is well worth a download of the beta (windows only at present) just to try.
Speak soon
Phil