1. Welcome to Mu-43.com—a friendly Micro 4/3 camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

E-M5, Lightroom and DxO

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by OldRadioGuy, Feb 5, 2013.

  1. OldRadioGuy

    OldRadioGuy Enthusiast Amateur Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2012
    Austin, Texas USA
    I'm using Lightroom for its excellent digital asset management capabilities but find it does a lousy job with lens correction for files from my Oly.

    So, I usually open the ORF files first with DxO, then export the TIFs to Lightroom. DxO handles the lens correction automatically because DxO Optics has a big batch of m43 lens profiles.

    Is anyone else using both DxO and Lightroom with their m43 cameras?

  2. robbie36

    robbie36 Mu-43 All-Pro

    Sep 25, 2010
    rob collins
    Yes, I use DXO a lot. I like the way it sharpens photos for lens softness, its geometric corrections amongst other things. Mind you, while I love Lightroom as a program I have never been particularly fond of it as a RAW converter.

    Having said that, I also really like a new RAW converter called Photo Ninja. I run into blown highlights a lot in Asia because of the bright contrasty light. Its ability to bring back blown highlights is pretty impressive.

    Here is Lightroom highlights -100

    Photo Ninja highlights -50

    Incidentally do you use DXO on Windows or a Mac?
    • Like Like x 1
  3. OldRadioGuy

    OldRadioGuy Enthusiast Amateur Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2012
    Austin, Texas USA
    I use DxO on Windows.

    I, too, own Photo Ninja, having taken advantage of an introductory discount for licensees of Noise Ninja. I use it occasionally.

  4. Kpfeifle

    Kpfeifle Mu-43 Regular

    As a long time LR user, I'm using the beta 5 version. Just started playing with DXO. I really like it and will probably buy it. Many shots are perfect with the DXO auto corrections and if I need LR...or the NIK plugins, I export a DNG file from DXO to LR. I'm also enjoying my trial of the film simulation package from DXO as well.
  5. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    I usually use DxO for serious processing. Have LR as well, which has NIK integration and better local adjustments, and DAM. Bother have a place, and DxO's website describes several ways to integrate DxO into your RAW workflow.

    I've been using DxO since version 5, and while the processing is a little slow (improving with each version though) I find the results are worth it.
  6. homerusan

    homerusan Mu-43 Regular

    Dec 25, 2012
    izmir, TURKEY
    do you suggest DXO Optics 9 over LR 5.3?
  7. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    Different beasts. I prefer DxO's output, but it's a bit slower, has no asset management (ie way to build an image library) and lacks local adjustments (ie poor mans masking, though NIK's stuff takes care of most of that). I own both, and use both. But from a pure image quality perspective, with supported lens/body combinations, I really love what I get out of DxO's software.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. jsusilo

    jsusilo Mu-43 Veteran

    Aug 28, 2012
    Rob, any chance you can compare highlight recovery of photo ninja versus photoshop CS6? I'm curious if photo ninja really do better recovery or simply a more selective recovery of the blown highlight area? Thanks
  9. tomO2013

    tomO2013 Mu-43 Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Oct 28, 2013
    PhotoNinja is a funny one. It can be amazing and the demosaicing engine is right up there with DXO. It's highlight recovery engine is great when it works, but sometimes I've found situations where it gets confused by explicitly white backgrounds.

    I'm interested to hear what most of you guys use when sharpening your DXO images. Typically I just use the DXO lens softness tab - by default (irrespective of camera) this is set to -50 by DXO, so I usually bump this to +.88 and leave the unsharp mask disabled.
    DXO recommend to use either lens softness if available or unsharp mask if no module for your lens is available.
    However I was wondering if some of you guys use both ?

  10. mattia

    mattia Mu-43 Hall of Famer

    May 3, 2012
    The Netherlands
    I only use DxO's lens softness data for available combinations, unsharp mask if there's no combo and I want a 'quick and dirty' sharpening option. I prefer using Nik's Sharpener Pro if I'm prepping for print/specific size, otherwise DxO's options are more than enough for web use. Stuff I prep for print often looks 'over sharpened' on screen, but great in print.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.