DxO OpticsPro 11

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,818
3,336
DxO has just released DxO OpticsPro 11. It claims:
"With a newly-optimized algorithm, the DxO PRIME 2016 technology processes your RAW files up 4 times faster than before: in fact, the higher the sensitivity, the bigger the benefit of processing time."

Just downloaded and tested it. On a typical RAW file on MacPro: OpticsPro 10, 1 minute 25 seconds to process; OpticsPro 11; 1 minute 29 seconds.
 

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,641
756
Southeastern USA
AlanF said:
DxO has just released DxO OpticsPro 11. It claims:
"With a newly-optimized algorithm, the DxO PRIME 2016 technology processes your RAW files up 4 times faster than before: in fact, the higher the sensitivity, the bigger the benefit of processing time."

Just downloaded and tested it. On a typical RAW file on MacPro: OpticsPro 10, 1 minute 25 seconds to process; OpticsPro 11; 1 minute 29 seconds.
What does processing entail for the test?
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,818
3,336
Exporting 5DS R file from RAW with PRIME denoising to jpeg, and no other processing.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,619
2,105
I recall from an earlier version (not sure how far back) there was a settings tick box for GPU acceleration.

Also, the stated improvement might be in threading behavior, have you tried processing a small batch of RAWs vs. one? Side note – many years ago I had a deconvolution microscopy system that came with an SGI Octane and took ~8 hours to process an image stack. While the Octane was a powerful workstation for in its pre-cluster day, we decided to try running the analysis on our Cray Y-MP...and it took ~8.5 hours to process a stack. The difference was that the Cray could process up to a hundred stacks at once, vs. one at a time on the Octane.

Finally, I'll pedantically point out that 0.96x faster still fits the definition of "up to 4x faster." ;)
 

JMZawodny

1Dx2, 7D2 and lots of wonderful glass!
Sep 19, 2014
380
1
Virginia
Joe.Zawodny.com
neuroanatomist said:
I recall from an earlier version (not sure how far back) there was a settings tick box for GPU acceleration.

Also, the stated improvement might be in threading behavior, have you tried processing a small batch of RAWs vs. one? Side note – many years ago I had a deconvolution microscopy system that came with an SGI Octane and took ~8 hours to process an image stack. While the Octane was a powerful workstation for in its pre-cluster day, we decided to try running the analysis on our Cray Y-MP...and it took ~8.5 hours to process a stack. The difference was that the Cray could process up to a hundred stacks at once, vs. one at a time on the Octane.

Finally, I'll pedantically point out that 0.96x faster still fits the definition of "up to 4x faster." ;)
Batch processing makes a huge difference. In addition to the "use GPU" tick-box, you can select the number of concurrent images to process. On my Mac I can run 8 images in parallel and it takes the same amount of time to run 8 as it does one.

From the OP, it appears that version 11 was actually slower than version 10.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,818
3,336
Dis another test, just converting RAW with PRIME from 5DS R: DxO 10, 1 min 37 sec; DxO 11, 1 min 42 sec.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
Jul 21, 2010
24,619
2,105
Alan, you omitted a key piece of information - at what ISO were those images captured?

My own results, image(s) from 1D X, 17" MacBook Pro:

Single image, ISO 3200
• v10, standard NR took 0:26, PRIME NR took 2:05
• v11, standard NR took 0:26, PRIME NR took 1:52

Single image, ISO 25600
• v10, standard NR took 0:23, PRIME NR took 2:25
• v11, standard NR took 0:24, PRIME NR took 1:24

3 images, ISO 3200
• v10, standard NR took 1:09, PRIME NR took 5:26
• v11, standard NR took 1:12, PRIME NR took 5:16

3 images, ISO 25600
• v10, standard NR took 1:03, PRIME NR took 6:56
• v11, standard NR took 1:07, PRIME NR took 3:36

So, at 'low' ISO (low for when I'd choose to use PRIME NR, usually at ISO 3200 and up on FF, ISO 800 and up on APS-C), v11 is not slower for me, but only very slightly faster. However, at high ISO v11 is significantly faster.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,818
3,336
iso 640. My camera goes up only to iso 6,400, so 25,600 doesn't come into it. Perhaps, you should get a Nikon D5 so you can use v11 at 3,280,000 and get the full benefit of up to 4x faster.
 

AlanF

Canon 5DSR II
Aug 16, 2012
5,818
3,336
neuroanatomist said:
AlanF said:
Why would you use PRIME NR at ISO 640 on a FF body?
For my bird photography, the image is the same size on FF and crop, and the 5DS R has the same size pixels as the 7DII and similar, although slightly better, noise. I crop a lot and DxO PRIME does a fantastic job of removing noise. I am just disappointed that DxO 11 seems only incrementally better than v 10 as I do like the software.
 

JMZawodny

1Dx2, 7D2 and lots of wonderful glass!
Sep 19, 2014
380
1
Virginia
Joe.Zawodny.com
neuroanatomist said:
Alan, you omitted a key piece of information - at what ISO were those images captured?

My own results, image(s) from 1D X, 17" MacBook Pro:

Single image, ISO 3200
• v10, standard NR took 0:26, PRIME NR took 2:05
• v11, standard NR took 0:26, PRIME NR took 1:52

Single image, ISO 25600
• v10, standard NR took 0:23, PRIME NR took 2:25
• v11, standard NR took 0:24, PRIME NR took 1:24

3 images, ISO 3200
• v10, standard NR took 1:09, PRIME NR took 5:26
• v11, standard NR took 1:12, PRIME NR took 5:16

3 images, ISO 25600
• v10, standard NR took 1:03, PRIME NR took 6:56
• v11, standard NR took 1:07, PRIME NR took 3:36

So, at 'low' ISO (low for when I'd choose to use PRIME NR, usually at ISO 3200 and up on FF, ISO 800 and up on APS-C), v11 is not slower for me, but only very slightly faster. However, at high ISO v11 is significantly faster.
Interesting results at the higher ISO values. How did they compare visually?
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,557
774
I gave DXO a try several times, but when I think of trying to edit 2000-2500 images, I give up after a few. I've tried most of the raw processors, but having used LR now since V2, I am proficient enough to be able to process large numbers of images in a short time. If I have 100 images taken in the same light and general composition, I edit the first, and sync the edit settings to the others. Then, I sort thru them making minor adjustments, crops, etc. If I work hard at it, I can process 1000 images in 3 or 4 hours. By then, I am thru for the day! I have issues with tendons in my right wrist and arm, if I set that off, I can be slowed way down for weeks, I've had surgery and rehab, but resting that hand and arm works best.

I've considered just shooting jpg, but I usually still have to crop and straighten, and if lighting is off, raws edit much cleaner.
 

niels123

EOS RP
Jan 27, 2015
278
0
Mt Spokane Photography said:
I gave DXO a try several times, but when I think of trying to edit 2000-2500 images, I give up after a few. I've tried most of the raw processors, but having used LR now since V2, I am proficient enough to be able to process large numbers of images in a short time. If I have 100 images taken in the same light and general composition, I edit the first, and sync the edit settings to the others. Then, I sort thru them making minor adjustments, crops, etc. If I work hard at it, I can process 1000 images in 3 or 4 hours. By then, I am thru for the day! I have issues with tendons in my right wrist and arm, if I set that off, I can be slowed way down for weeks, I've had surgery and rehab, but resting that hand and arm works best.

I've considered just shooting jpg, but I usually still have to crop and straighten, and if lighting is off, raws edit much cleaner.
I agree with you, but I think DxO can be wonderfull if used occasionally on the very best images only.
 

jwilbern

EOS 60D, G5X
Aug 8, 2012
142
0
www.flickr.com
I upgraded to v10 a few weeks ago so I could use my G5X, and I was able to upgrade to v11 for free. Worth checking out if you went to v10 recently. It was nice of them to do that, although on my old iMac I am not expecting a speed boost.
 

JMZawodny

1Dx2, 7D2 and lots of wonderful glass!
Sep 19, 2014
380
1
Virginia
Joe.Zawodny.com
Mt Spokane Photography said:
I gave DXO a try several times, but when I think of trying to edit 2000-2500 images, I give up after a few. I've tried most of the raw processors, but having used LR now since V2, I am proficient enough to be able to process large numbers of images in a short time. If I have 100 images taken in the same light and general composition, I edit the first, and sync the edit settings to the others. Then, I sort thru them making minor adjustments, crops, etc. If I work hard at it, I can process 1000 images in 3 or 4 hours. By then, I am thru for the day! I have issues with tendons in my right wrist and arm, if I set that off, I can be slowed way down for weeks, I've had surgery and rehab, but resting that hand and arm works best.

I've considered just shooting jpg, but I usually still have to crop and straighten, and if lighting is off, raws edit much cleaner.
You can, and I do, work in a similar manner with OP. I'll make initial adjustments on one image, copy them, and then apply those to a larger batch. Then I'll go through them individually to make final tweaks (crops and the occasional rotation). Often times I'll copy and paste the crop box if appropriate. 1000 photos in 3-4 hours is easily doable. In the end though it comes down to personal preference. If the High ISO Prime denoising is the same or better quality and a lot faster that will be sufficient reason for me to upgrade.

I just wished that OP could do integer math properly so that a crop with 1:1 aspect ratio always had the dimensions in pixels equal (the same goes for other ratios). I really want my images to be 3000x3000 (or whatever) instead of 3000x2999. This will be the first thing I test in the new version, and the first bit of feedback I give them if they have not fixed it.

I just did an inquiry on upgrade pricing from OP10 and will pass along that info when they respond.
 

Zv

EOR R
Sep 23, 2012
1,766
0
www.flickr.com
I got v10 during the Xmas sale in December. I checked to see how much the upgrade would be for me and it's around $60 (¥6800 or something like that). I think I'll pass seeing these comments. Thanks for the data, I don't shoot that high ISO that I would see much benefit from it.

I've barely used OP10 since I got it. Feels like a waste of money for me as I can do just fine with LR. Takes flippin ages and creates extra DXO files all over the place. No thanks.

Good for denoising one or two must salvage shots. For bulk just make a few NR presets on LR.
 
Nov 18, 2012
1,413
0
Virginia
I gave up on LR ages ago. Not just because there were better products out there for what I needed, but I grew tired of their cloud model, didn't want to get stuck migrating to a subscription model in the future. I moved to OP for most of my editing. If you spend some time with it, you can get much better results than you can with LR.

If I need speed and quick editing I usually just run them through DNG converter and use my old PS CS5 which is quicker at reviewing cropping rotating and few other minor tweaks but I rarely us it anymore. DXO OP is my go to tool for denoise and sharpening. Upgrade was 69.00 and worth it.

I assume 1dx mark ii support will only be added in v11. They did that before with the 7d mark ii. Needed to go to v10 to get the plugin.
 

CaiLeDao

5D Mark III
Aug 6, 2013
32
0
I am finding the performance on a Mac Pro much improved. The file window is refreshing more quickly and I don't find the wait time for images to appear too bad now, was quite frustrating before in larger folders.
Images to TIFF has speeded up a lot as well, never actually timed it before just waited, in V11 a typical 5D MarkIII file takes 10 Seconds and a 5D SR takes 23Seconds so I think the up to 4 times faster is probably correct - subjectively for me at least. Realise it will be different for JPEG's but thats not my workflow.
 

JMZawodny

1Dx2, 7D2 and lots of wonderful glass!
Sep 19, 2014
380
1
Virginia
Joe.Zawodny.com
I upgraded to OP 11 and had a chance to check out the changes and improvements. I was particularly interested in the claimed speed increase of the Prime noise reduction. Wow! Using some photos from my 7D2, it processed photos in 12 seconds. So, I processed the same photos with OP 10 and those took 30 seconds. That is a nice improvement.