1. Reminder: Please use our affiliate links for holiday shopping!

DXO Optics Pro 9.1.2 updateHi

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by tomO2013, Jan 15, 2014.

  1. tomO2013

    tomO2013 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    799
    Oct 28, 2013
    Hi Guys,

    There is an update for DXO Optics Pro 9 to version 9.1.2

    Release Notes here :
    http://download-center.dxo.com/Support/release-notes/Release_Notes_DxO_OpticsPro_9_1_2-EN.pdf

    Enhancements since version 9.1.1

    •Support for 3 new cameras:

    o Panasonic Lumix GM-1
    o Nikon 1 AW1
    o Apple iPhone 5S

    •Pentax K-3 DNG files are now supported
    •The left and right keyboard arrow keys now let you go to the n
    ext or previous image, even when the
    image browser is not focused
    •When deleting an image, the selection now goes to the next image
    •The magnifier in the “Noise reduction” subpalette is now also available for JPEG and TIFF images
    •EXIF data can now be removed when exporting images to Flickr
    •The frame, light leak and texture selection dropdowns now feature previews
    •Minor bug fixes.



    No mention of Olympus colour profile updates. Supposedly they were going to be releasing updates to fix the red tint issue with E-M1 in DXO Optics Pro Elite.

    I'm on a slow connection at the moment. Can anybody try and and see if there has been any body color profiles added for the E-M1 / or improvements to the Olympus profiles provided ???

    --Tom.
     
  2. Ranger Rick

    Ranger Rick Mu-43 Veteran

    228
    Apr 11, 2009
    Tempe, AZ
    Rick
    Module for iphone 5S won't install- apparently something wrong with it.
     
  3. tomO2013

    tomO2013 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    799
    Oct 28, 2013
    Ok. No improvement in red tint issue. :/

    I'm going to get back onto DXO and see when we can expect the camera body colour profile for the E-M1
     
  4. tosvus

    tosvus Mu-43 Top Veteran

    632
    Jan 4, 2014
    I wish it was quicker to load a folder when I start it up. If you have a few hundred pictures in a folder, it takes a while.... (I have one folder per month)
     
  5. tomO2013

    tomO2013 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    799
    Oct 28, 2013
    I wrote to DXO (again!) to point out that the promised E-M1 colour profiles were not included in the latest build.
    I got this in response :

     
  6. homerusan

    homerusan Mu-43 Regular

    130
    Dec 25, 2012
    izmir, TURKEY
    do you suggest dxo optics 9 over LR 5.3?
     
  7. tomO2013

    tomO2013 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    799
    Oct 28, 2013
    They are entirely different animals. DXO is a pure raw processor - I use this when I care about absolute image quality. DXO has a great demosaicing engine (probably the best after the Olympus Viewer 3 itself) and it has the best noise reduction engine in 'Prime' bar none. However Prime is super slow.
    The downsides is that it does not have selective adjustment brushes.
    On the upside, it's default profiles and ability to mimic other cameras color profiles are very useful. Typically I use DXO for images that I really care about and want the best quality and then use LR5.4 as a digital asset manager and for other images that I don't care to work on too much.
    If the choice is one or the other, you would be best starting with lightroom given that it does asset management really well too :)

    --T.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Why does DXO say it has support for lots of µ4/3 lenses (and cameras), when we are told the lens corrections are built into the equipment itself?

    I'm thinking of getting DXO, but not sure whether to discount the lens correction capabilities as irrelevant. Is there any point to them?
     
  9. Matero

    Matero Mu-43 Veteran

    455
    Jun 22, 2013
    Finland
    RAW, the effect is very visible. And BTW, DxO is the tool I can see my E-M10 RAW files in Mac.... Ok, maybe OV3 but you know what I mean :)


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
     
  10. Matero

    Matero Mu-43 Veteran

    455
    Jun 22, 2013
    Finland
    Heh, cryptic message. I think something is missing there :)

    But again, in RAW you can see very well the difference between eg. Apple Aperture and DxO. As far as I've understood correctly Aperture corrects Olympus RAW based on metadata in RAW. And similar happens with LightRoom etc. DxO does the magic based on their own testing and measurements. That's why the result differs significantly. Which one is better, I don't take a stand.

    DxO can also "develop" some old RGB aka JPEG images for example Canon EOS 350D (European notation for Rebel). After tweaking with DxO those old pics of mine didn't look so bad either :) And again in RAW, the difference was even more significant. So at least for me, for my taste, DxO does its thing and is worth every euro.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    OK that's very interesting thanks -- and strange!

    I am trying to think of a reason why the lens metadata in RAW could be improved upon?

    Is the DXO lens correction adjustable? That might be an advantage -- if for example, the RAW image's metadata distortion correction was slightly reducing sharpness in corners, and I needed the corners sharp.
     
  12. Matero

    Matero Mu-43 Veteran

    455
    Jun 22, 2013
    Finland
    Actually, I was thinking that too but didn't find explanation, yet. I'm trying to figure out and if I find the answer I'll share.
     
  13. Matero

    Matero Mu-43 Veteran

    455
    Jun 22, 2013
    Finland
    This started to interest me and I browsed few sources (provided by Google :smile: )

    How I understood this is that m43 standard metadata provided by RAW files doesn't utilize full potential of corrections, in other words, corrections are somewhat conservative. One link for one source, almost in the bottom of the page http://feedback.photoshop.com/photo..._e_system_lens_profiles_needed_for_acr?page=1

    On the other hand, DxO is based on reverse engineering, at least partially, and their extensive testing and database of lenses, camera bodies and sensors. So they can apply more radical corrections based on their data and vision of the good image quality. And actually this same applies to all RAW developers. All of those are cooking little bit by themselves.

    I remember reading somewhere that Adobe is using correction data they get from manufacturers and then use their own software algorithms to fix things. They don't have resources or don't want to use their resources for extensive lens/sensor testing. And Apple Aperture is on the same boat, strictly following standard correction metadata, I believe.

    Disclaimer: This is just my own understanding from limited web browsing, not real knowledge from manufacturers or like
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. T N Args

    T N Args Agent Photocateur

    Dec 3, 2013
    Adelaide, Australia
    call me Arg
    Thanks for your efforts, Matero.

    Maybe my confusion is because I don't really understand what is this lens data embedded in the RAW files coming out of µ4/3 cameras.

    If it is coming from the lens maker, how is DXO going to know more about a lens than its maker?

    OTOH if it has a few adjustable parameters, that might be an advantage.
     
  15. tomO2013

    tomO2013 Mu-43 Top Veteran

    799
    Oct 28, 2013
    I may be completely off track on this one, but my understanding is that the lens makers provide generic corrections for the lens itself. However DXO profile the lens against each specific body (and in the case of zooms) at each specific focal length on that body.
    They can then measure and correct how each camera and lens interact together specifically. Their distortion correction is specific to a camera/lens combo and not the lens solely. They may well use the lens data as a starting point and correct further from there.
    In terms of their sharpening algorithms my understanding is that they use a form of deconvolusion sharpening or pre-sharpening of the raw file that is again specific to the lens/camera combo detected. This sharpening is entirely adaptive such that from their lab tests they will know that certain lenses tend to be softer in the left corner than the top right, and so will apply more agressive sharpening in the bottom left corner (by way of a crude example).
     
    • Like Like x 1