DxO OpticsPro 11

Mar 25, 2011
16,847
1,835
OK, I'm a sucker, so I installed it and loaded 1060 images, mostly from a shoot recently at a theater in low light.

The images loaded reasonably fast, faster than I could process them. Then when I selected a image, it only took about the same time as LR, 2-3 seconds to apply the prime NR and auto corrections.

The result, to me, was awful. All the images were over processed, detail was lots that was there in LR. The reason was primarily the heavy handed NR that was being applied. I prefer slightly noisy images in order to retain detail. When the NR blurs fine strands of hair, and does not need to, I think its over processed. Sure, the noise was removed from the black background, but it will print black in any event.

I did a export to LR, it seemed to process one image in a few seconds, so I did a 8.5 X 11 print to my color laser. It took close to 30 seconds to process! This is totally unacceptable to me, if I want to print even 50 photos, it could take forever. Those functions were so slow on the previous version that they were unusable. The print function is still the same, for my easy test.

I'd say that as others have said, for a few images, DXO can do a good job, but if you want to process large numbers, I am dubious, particularly for the automatic processing functions which need major tweaking after processing.

OK, I picked up the photo off my printer to see how good it looked.

Judge this quick snapshot for yourself. It defies explanation.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1203.JPG
    IMG_1203.JPG
    198.8 KB · Views: 167
Upvote 0
Mar 25, 2011
16,847
1,835
OK, to be fair, I restarted DXO, and was surprised that I had to wait a few seconds for the images to appear. I selected a different photo, and times the print process. 40 seconds to process and send to the printer. That does not include processing and printing time that the printer takes.

The results were the same. Obviously, it does not like the Xerox printer driver. I'm not going to play with it any longer.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1204.JPG
    IMG_1204.JPG
    228.6 KB · Views: 167
Upvote 0

JMZawodny

1Dx2, 7D2 and lots of wonderful glass!
Sep 19, 2014
382
11
Virginia
Joe.Zawodny.com
Mt Spokane Photography said:
OK, I'm a sucker, so I installed it and loaded 1060 images, mostly from a shoot recently at a theater in low light.

The images loaded reasonably fast, faster than I could process them. Then when I selected a image, it only took about the same time as LR, 2-3 seconds to apply the prime NR and auto corrections.

The result, to me, was awful. All the images were over processed, detail was lots that was there in LR. The reason was primarily the heavy handed NR that was being applied. I prefer slightly noisy images in order to retain detail. When the NR blurs fine strands of hair, and does not need to, I think its over processed. Sure, the noise was removed from the black background, but it will print black in any event.

I did a export to LR, it seemed to process one image in a few seconds, so I did a 8.5 X 11 print to my color laser. It took close to 30 seconds to process! This is totally unacceptable to me, if I want to print even 50 photos, it could take forever. Those functions were so slow on the previous version that they were unusable. The print function is still the same, for my easy test.

I'd say that as others have said, for a few images, DXO can do a good job, but if you want to process large numbers, I am dubious, particularly for the automatic processing functions which need major tweaking after processing.

OK, I picked up the photo off my printer to see how good it looked.

Judge this quick snapshot for yourself. It defies explanation.

I have no idea what caused the issues illustrated by your posted images.
I also know that DxO OP noise filtering does not like jpegs. It was not clear form your post whether or not you started with RAW images.
Like most things, there are lots of personal preferences and products that cater to those. If OP does not meet your personal desires there are other products that might. I'm happy with it.
 
Upvote 0
Mar 25, 2011
16,847
1,835
neuroanatomist said:
Mt Spokane Photography said:
Obviously, it does not like the Xerox printer driver.

Clearly. :eek:

I've decided its a issue with the Xerox Global Print Driver for Windows 10. I use the PCL driver. The PS driver produces a nice image, but prints two extra pages, another known issue.

I may yet need to install Windows 7 on my new computer, or get a new printer. I have two Xerox phaser 6200's that are probably going to run forever, I generally do not use them to print photos, but when I printed a long color pdf file of photos last night, it printed beautifully. Since I use Adobe Acrobat, they obviously know how to send images to that printer, but light room images printed on it don't look right even though they do not have the same issue as DXO.

I tried printing to a pdf file, then printed it, and it came out fine.

Strange!
 
Upvote 0