If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
DxO's Luc Marin is in town next week and I have a meeting booked with him so he can show me Optics Pro v.5.0.
If anyone has any questions I can ask him on your behalf, please let me know!
Ian
Personally, the main question I have for him would be "when does he expect DxO to have a stable release of v5 for windows?"
It's not meant to be a sarcastic question by any means, I know they will get there in the end, it's just a bit frustrating knowing we'll probably have a couple of months of regular maintenance releases to install before the majority of users are happy. (This is a similar scenario to v4 I'm reminded by several posters on the DxO forum). It could be that we're seeing more negative than positive posts on their forum and that this is not representative of the satisfaction of the actual user base. I guess happy users don't normally post "this software is great" type messages on forums!
There's a post on their forum from (allegedly) one of their beta testers who was really surprised they went to production when they did - he blamed it on "the suits" over-riding the "techies" at DxO. Be interested to hear his view on that - although I'm not sure which camp Luc is in .
Other questions would be:
"What happened to multi-core processor support in v5?"
"What's the ratio of Mac to Windows users of DxO Pro?" Another conspiracy theory is that Mac users represent the majority of the user-base and get a corresponding level of commitment to quality (which could explain why the Mac version hasn't been released yet )
Anyway, I managed to knock out a few more last night before a crash - be interested to see if you think it's all worth the fuss!
The following image is a pair of crops taken from the same RAW image displayed on-screen at 100%. One processed using CS3 only and the other as delivered by DxO (no other post-processing).
Well the right one for me Stuart, though I don't doubt the equivalent could be achieved in the left one with an extra tweak
Just my thoughts Stephen, both are very good the one on the right has just a touch more contrast, it also appears just slightly larger in the frame, any reason for that Stuart. To compare properly the full file would be needed.
Stuart
I must ask why you are so loyal to DxO when it is giving you so much grief?
If its the the lens correction options, I can't see that to be much of an advantage, I have rarely used the limited facility in ARC or Lightroom, the odd wide angle shot perhaps. I doubt in most cases any weaknesses in the lenses you are using will show, unless really big enlargements are called for.
Just my thoughts Stephen, both are very good the one on the right has just a touch more contrast, it also appears just slightly larger in the frame, any reason for that Stuart. To compare properly the full file would be needed.
Stuart
I must ask why you are so loyal to DxO when it is giving you so much grief?
If its the the lens correction options, I can't see that to be much of an advantage, I have rarely used the limited facility in ARC or Lightroom, the odd wide angle shot perhaps. I doubt in most cases any weaknesses in the lenses you are using will show, unless really big enlargements are called for.
Patrick
Although I'm not a dyed in the wool user of Optics Pro like Stuart, I'm familiar with what it can do and although the latest version has teething problems, I'm pretty sure Stuart will say that the previous version worked reasonably reliably and did what was claimed on the packet. Basically it can knock image into a very good state without spending a lot of time on them. It's a lot more than optical distortion correction; it will intercept fringing, adjust various colour values and perform noise reduction, dynamic range enhancement and more all automatically and based on the measured characteristics of the camera body and lens combination. It may not produce a perfect result every time, but the idea is that it should get close so the finishing off work will be relatively simple.
Just my thoughts Stephen, both are very good the one on the right has just a touch more contrast, it also appears just slightly larger in the frame, any reason for that Stuart. To compare properly the full file would be needed.
Stuart
I must ask why you are so loyal to DxO when it is giving you so much grief?
If its the the lens correction options, I can't see that to be much of an advantage, I have rarely used the limited facility in ARC or Lightroom, the odd wide angle shot perhaps. I doubt in most cases any weaknesses in the lenses you are using will show, unless really big enlargements are called for.
Met with Luc this afternoon and had a comprehensive demo of DXO Optics Pro 5.
To answer Stuart's questions:
The current release 5.02 is pretty stable.
DXO released 5.0 initially with multi processor support disabled because there was an elusive bug. This has now been fixed and MP support is back in.
The performance issues with the initial release are down to missing Intel libraries that accelerate some image processing functions. Beta testing failed to detect this because the testers had the libraries already installed. The fault was in the installer. These issues have now been solved.
The break down of sales for Optics Pro are: 75% Windows, 25% Mac.
I am extremely impressed with the new RAW converter and low level noise reduction. If the comparisons I was shown are to be believed, DXO have clearly raised the bar on high ISO noise management and fine detail accuracy thanks to the new RAW converter.
Integration with Lightroom has been further improved, though Luc admits it can be improved further.
Met with Luc this afternoon and had a comprehensive demo of DXO Optics Pro 5.
To answer Stuart's questions:
The current release 5.02 is pretty stable.
DXO released 5.0 initially with multi processor support disabled because there was an elusive bug. This has now been fixed and MP support is back in.
The performance issues with the initial release are down to missing Intel libraries that accelerate some image processing functions. Beta testing failed to detect this because the testers had the libraries already installed. The fault was in the installer. These issues have now been solved.
The break down of sales for Optics Pro are: 75% Windows, 25% Mac.
I am extremely impressed with the new RAW converter and low level noise reduction. If the comparisons I was shown are to be believed, DXO have clearly raised the bar on high ISO noise management and fine detail accuracy thanks to the new RAW converter.
Integration with Lightroom has been further improved, though Luc admits it can be improved further.
Overall, I was very impressed.
Ian
Hi Ian,
I'd agree that 5.0.2 is pretty stable but there's still complaints about it on the DO forum and I still get the occasional unexplained crash or a picture that just "disappears" from the project you're working on - a bit unsettling to say the least.
I think it would have saved DxO a lot of grief if they'd been upfront & honest about the multi-processor bug.
I guess the Intel libraries problem makes sense although a beta program that included a few voluntary testers in the user community would probably have identified it sooner.
The Windows / MAC split will certainly shoot down the conspiracy theories on the DxO forum
I'm quite happy with the results I'm getting although I've been of off ill (yes again!) and I've not spent much time with it since 5.0.2 came out. Hopefully I'll be back to normal (whatever that is) soon and I'll do some 4.5 <> 5.0.2 comparisons with some 350D RAWs.
I don't use Lightroom as I can't quite see why I need it in my workflow. I'm probably wrong and perhaps I'll revisit it, I know there are some on here who really find it useful.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalise advertising, and to analyse site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
.
Comment