DxO Optics Pro 9 released

[Krob78]

I tried the latest version of this today and I think I may actually buy it. Not sure why but I just do not light room for anything but importing my photos and putting them into the correct directories, but I think I may actually like this one and the interface now as well.

I picked up the Elite trial... I'll see how I like it, so far the little I played around with it, it seems pretty seamless, solid.

I wish I didn't need the Elite version, it's likely I'll end up with it too! I have some images that were way to noisy that I've held on to for several years, hoping for a day that technology would save them! I'll find out soon enough!

 

[Pi]

I tested the new "PRIME" NR on a ISO 6400 image from my 5d2. I do not get anything that I cannot do with LR, for a few seconds. The trick in LR is to keep the chroma NR low, and apply tons of lumina NR. The overall look of the LR image - color, etc., is still better.

 

[privatebydesign]

Anybody got Topaz DeNoise that they can compare DxO to?

I have never liked LR's noise reduction for troublesome images, works great for standard low iso well exposed stuff but more than that and Topaz comes out.

 

[Krob78]

I tested the new "PRIME" NR on a ISO 6400 image from my 5d2. I do not get anything that I cannot do with LR, for a few seconds. The trick in LR is to keep the chroma NR low, and apply tons of lumina NR. The overall look of the LR image - color, etc., is still better.

I tested the same image in both LR5 and Optics 9 Elite. Side by side, I liked the Optics 9 slightly better, the transitioned image seemed just a bit smoother, butteryer... (have fun with that one all you lingual aficionados). The LR5 image still looked a little on the posturized side, not quite has smooth, not quite satisfying for me...

That being said, I think none of my critics, fans or clients would see any difference, somehow they just don't notice the noise as much as I do... I'm not always pleased with the way my 5d3 handles noise, though I'm thrilled with the ISO levels that I can use and dare to go too.

I just took some really severely noisy images last week and I'm looking forward to seeing if DxO can do anything more than LR can with them. With LR, there are no keepers. It'll be interesting.

One thing I'm interested in trying is to hit an image lightly with LR NR and then move it into Optics 9 to see if I can get a better finish on the NR in an image that way...

The only thing I don't like so far is that DxO automatically gives it's own interpretation of the newly uploaded image immediately. I'd rather it just accept the image the way I've already processed it and just let me work with NR only, not all the other options. I'm sure it can be set up not to auto process the photos, I just haven't had a chance to dig further into it yet...

So far, I like it. Not sure I like $199 worth...

 

[mackguyver]

The only thing I don't like so far is that DxO automatically gives it's own interpretation of the newly uploaded image immediately. I'd rather it just accept the image the way I've already processed it and just let me work with NR only, not all the other options. I'm sure it can be set up not to auto process the photos, I just haven't had a chance to dig further into it yet...

So far, I like it. Not sure I like $199 worth...

Choose the "No correction" preset - the "Preset" button is at the top right of the screen. Also, the price isn't cheap, but they've had me hooked since their early versions, so the upgrades aren't bad - this one was $60 or $70 - but I'm scared to think about how much I've spent.

Also, some random DxO tips:

• Set white balance first
• Use the Curves tool to set black & white points
• If you expose to the right (ETTR), best results are generally obtained by using Highlight Priority Medium or Strong followed by a boost to the Shadow slider (or Curves)
• Use the HSL sliders to correct color casts - vs. auto white balance and other tools in ACR
• Use the dust eraser like you would use the healing tool in PS
• If you have more than 2 cores/processors, change the Preferences to match - it sets it to 2 by default
• Shutdown any other Adobe products (especially PS and Premiere) while using it to make sure it has plenty of GPU and system RAM
• The DxO Perspective correction is amazing but make sure you leave plenty or room around the building/object as the correction will shrink the image considerably
• The best way to use the horizon and perspective correction is to draw the initial line / parallel lines / rectangle at "Zoom to Fit" and then zoom in to 50-100% to adjust it perfectly. Eyeballing at "Zoom to Fit" isn't very accurate.

 

[Krob78]

The only thing I don't like so far is that DxO automatically gives it's own interpretation of the newly uploaded image immediately. I'd rather it just accept the image the way I've already processed it and just let me work with NR only, not all the other options. I'm sure it can be set up not to auto process the photos, I just haven't had a chance to dig further into it yet...

So far, I like it. Not sure I like $199 worth...

Choose the "No correction" preset - the "Preset" button is at the top right of the screen. Also, the price isn't cheap, but they've had me hooked since their early versions, so the upgrades aren't bad - this one was $60 or $70 - but I'm scared to think about how much I've spent.

Also, some random DxO tips:

• Set white balance first
• Use the Curves tool to set black & white points
• If you expose to the right (ETTR), best results are generally obtained by using Highlight Priority Medium or Strong followed by a boost to the Shadow slider (or Curves)
• Use the HSL sliders to correct color casts - vs. auto white balance and other tools in ACR
• Use the dust eraser like you would use the healing tool in PS
• If you have more than 2 cores/processors, change the Preferences to match - it sets it to 2 by default
• Shutdown any other Adobe products (especially PS and Premiere) while using it to make sure it has plenty of GPU and system RAM
• The DxO Perspective correction is amazing but make sure you leave plenty or room around the building/object as the correction will shrink the image considerably
• The best way to use the horizon and perspective correction is to draw the initial line / parallel lines / rectangle at "Zoom to Fit" and then zoom in to 50-100% to adjust it perfectly. Eyeballing at "Zoom to Fit" isn't very accurate.

Thanks for the great tips Mack! I appreciate your help. I do have DxO ViewPoint and I like it a lot. The new LR5 corrections aren't bad but I think ViewPoint is a bit better. I wish they would give me the upgrade fee from the ViewPoint purchase toward the Optics Pro 9 Elite vers... That won't happen though! ha ha!

Anyway, I really appreciate you telling me those items above, it will definitely speed up my learning curve and shorten my workflow, thank you!

I'll likely end up with it after the trial expires. As I mentioned, clients don't seem to pick up on the noise at all but it makes a big difference to me and I like the final results so far with the couple of images I processed... Just kind of stinks that the one version doesn't work for crop and FF... Seems like they could make it so it did! But they are a profit center, not a charity and I get that!

All the best!

 

[Marsu42]

• The DxO Perspective correction is amazing but make sure you leave plenty or room around the building/object as the correction will shrink the image considerably

Is there any difference between DxO Optics and Viewpoint? I tried Viewpoint (79$) and this is indeed amazing, beats Adobe's new "Upright" hands down, of course an as usual and unfortunate at the loss of the ACR raw workflow.

 

[Krob78]

• The DxO Perspective correction is amazing but make sure you leave plenty or room around the building/object as the correction will shrink the image considerably

Is there any difference between DxO Optics and Viewpoint? I tried Viewpoint (79$) and this is indeed amazing, beats Adobe's new "Upright" hands down, of course an as usual and unfortunate at the loss of the ACR raw workflow.

Yes, I have ViewPoint too. Optics can process the photo start to finish, ViewPoint does not. Not from my viewpoint anyway! lol...

I don't find the wait time for the NR processing to be that much of an issue. It's quicker than I expected, after reading comments from others...

 

[mackguyver]

Just kind of stinks that the one version doesn't work for crop and FF... Seems like they could make it so it did! But they are a profit center, not a charity and I get that!

All the best!

They explain it as the difference between pro (FF) and amateur (crop) users, but I agree it's painful. If you go back to the start, though, they used to charge for the software and EACH module was another was another $99 with a discount for multiple modules! You can read about it here:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/optics-pro.shtml

 

[wsgroves]

Just wanted to post a edit I did in the new dxo. Just imported this and did the standard preset, then the new noise reduction and outputted to jpg. Downsampled to 50% size.
This was at iso 10k, which in this lighting...looks bad.

 

[wsgroves]

Here is another one processed with new DXO and the other one ACR. Both resampled to 50%.
Again just std preset in DXO and auto with ACR - some exposure that it wanted to auto.
Not scientific I know but better then nothing.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Is there any difference between DxO Optics and Viewpoint? I tried Viewpoint (79$) and this is indeed amazing, beats Adobe's new "Upright" hands down, of course an as usual and unfortunate at the loss of the ACR raw workflow.

Optics Pro is a full RAW converter, Viewpoint is only for correction of perspective-related distortions. The corrections in Viewpoint are available in Optics Pro, but the implementation is different (easier and in some ways more powerful) in Viewpoint. Apparently, the coding engines are different enough that they can't (won't) incorporate Viewpoint-like tools (particularly the Loupe) in Optics Pro v9, but perhaps v10 - it was decsribed as a 'major undertaking'.

Just kind of stinks that the one version doesn't work for crop and FF... Seems like they could make it so it did! But they are a profit center, not a charity and I get that!

The Elite version does work for FF, APS-H and APS-C bodies, the Standard works only for APS-C. Other than the sensor-specific correction modules, they are exactly the same.

 

[mackguyver]

Here is another one processed with new DXO and the other one ACR. Both resampled to 50%.
Again just std preset in DXO and auto with ACR - some exposure that it wanted to auto.
Not scientific I know but better then nothing.

I think it would be interesting to see 100% crops of the area around the (very tired and cute) baby's ear. The skin texture, hair (midtone and shadow) detail, & blanket texture and detail would be a good comparison.

 

[wsgroves]

Ok i'll try again.
Here is an original raw, one dxo converted with regular preset and the new noise reduction, and one with ACR auto - some exposure compensation with neat image noise reduction.
Again not perfect I know. Sorry for that.

Maybe I should of did them with no correction only neatimage vs new dxo noise reducer.
Let me know. lol

Scott

 

[mackguyver]

Ok i'll try again.
Here is an original raw, one dxo converted with regular preset and the new noise reduction, and one with ACR auto - some exposure compensation with neat image noise reduction.
Again not perfect I know. Sorry for that.

Maybe I should of did them with no correction only neatimage vs new dxo noise reducer.
Let me know. lol

Scott

Interesting comparison - thanks. I'll see if I can post some tonight, too.

 

[wsgroves]

NP. Im not really sure what to make of any of them. Not sure which NR I like better. I will say that for some reason I do like the application DXO v 9. Never really liked lightroom for whatever but I am enjoying the trial, even if it does take longer to do things.

 

[lol]

Finally got round to installing it. Did a very quick look so far, comparing:
1: Output image with normal NR
2: Output image with Prime
3: #1 ran through Neat image at 50% luminance reduction

1 is obviously noisier, with 2 and 3 looking very similar, so I was thinking, is Prime really worth 2m23s processing time compared to 9s with normal process? As I looked further, there really wasn't anything of note in detail retention or excessive smoothing. However there was a slight benefit to Prime, in that I saw less local bursts of colour noise. These are rather large scale and I guess missed by normal NR, but Prime is able to deal with it. Also colour retention in darker areas seemed better with Prime, were other NR would start killing real colour as if it were noise. If I have time later I could do some crops to demonstrate the above.

Since I'm already a DxO user I'll upgrade to keep things going. But I wouldn't rate this as a game changer if you already use something else. Maybe I'll change my mind after more testing, but I doubt it.

 

[mackguyver]

Finally got round to installing it. Did a very quick look so far, comparing:
1: Output image with normal NR
2: Output image with Prime
3: #1 ran through Neat image at 50% luminance reduction

1 is obviously noisier, with 2 and 3 looking very similar, so I was thinking, is Prime really worth 2m23s processing time compared to 9s with normal process? As I looked further, there really wasn't anything of note in detail retention or excessive smoothing. However there was a slight benefit to Prime, in that I saw less local bursts of colour noise. These are rather large scale and I guess missed by normal NR, but Prime is able to deal with it. Also colour retention in darker areas seemed better with Prime, were other NR would start killing real colour as if it were noise. If I have time later I could do some crops to demonstrate the above.

Since I'm already a DxO user I'll upgrade to keep things going. But I wouldn't rate this as a game changer if you already use something else. Maybe I'll change my mind after more testing, but I doubt it.

I'm not surprised by your results with NeatImage. I worked with Vladimir from ABSoft (one of the original NeatImage coders) back when they first started to help them write their manuals in English. Those guys are all a bunch of math and programming geniuses and they truly know how to get blood out of a turnip when it comes to using computer resources. I'm happy, but not shocked, to see that their software still holds up so well.

 

[Krob78]

Is there any difference between DxO Optics and Viewpoint? I tried Viewpoint (79$) and this is indeed amazing, beats Adobe's new "Upright" hands down, of course an as usual and unfortunate at the loss of the ACR raw workflow.

Optics Pro is a full RAW converter, Viewpoint is only for correction of perspective-related distortions. The corrections in Viewpoint are available in Optics Pro, but the implementation is different (easier and in some ways more powerful) in Viewpoint. Apparently, the coding engines are different enough that they can't (won't) incorporate Viewpoint-like tools (particularly the Loupe) in Optics Pro v9, but perhaps v10 - it was decsribed as a 'major undertaking'.

Just kind of stinks that the one version doesn't work for crop and FF... Seems like they could make it so it did! But they are a profit center, not a charity and I get that!

The Elite version does work for FF, APS-H and APS-C bodies, the Standard works only for APS-C. Other than the sensor-specific correction modules, they are exactly the same.

The Elite version does work for FF, APS-H and APS-C bodies, the Standard works only for APS-C. Other than the sensor-specific correction modules, they are exactly the same.

Well, you're certainly right about that! One version does handle all! I like it quite a bit so far. Not having a crop camera anymore, I'll be opting for the Elite version. Thanks for the original post mentioning it!

 

[mackguyver]

It was Christmas photo time at my house last night so still no time to play with v9 for the CR forum, but I can report 2 things:

1. The new Portrait preset is pretty amazing in terms of getting you very close to ideal settings in one click
2. DON'T try PRIME on ISO 100 photos! I thought DxO was going to have a heart attack as it spent 3:34 processing one photo! Most of my PRIME shots have processed in less than 30s, but my "experiment" at ISO 100 was a hilarious failure. Yes, I had to try...