Just done the check: same image, went through PhotoLab with A7 III profile, then re-imported as DNG in Lightroom.
Original ARW with Cobalt profile, and DNG with Cobalt profile are virtually indistinguishable. Very entriguing!
Thank you for doing the initial test: I was left very much baffled at Pure Raw. For an extra 40€ now compared to its denoising sibling, PhotoLab is just a no brainer.
ilnonno wrote:
Perhaps it is PhotoLab vs Pure Raw?
PhotoLab (which I am testing now) allows the selection of the "proper" body profile (in my case A7 III), which "might" be similar enough to the Cobalt profile?
Glad that it worked ! You're right about DPL5 vs PureRaw, it worth the extra money spent*. It's very curious that there are some color cast with PureRaw that doesn't exist with DPL5... I hope that they will fix that soon, because it kind of destroy the purpose of PureRaw, which is being a transparent denoising software.
And frankly no, it doesn't matter which color profile you use in DPL 5, as long as you export in DNG using "optical corrections and denoising only", or whatever it's called in english.
The DNG files that you get has no color profile and you can use it in LR (or C1) and choose your color profile as you would do with a "real" raw, like you said in your second message.
*I'm french, as is the DXO company. I go sometimes on one of the biggest french forum about photography (chassimages). DXO PureRaw has been not well received there. Some people are complaining that it's just an overpriced cash machine and that DPL 5 is way more interesting. Without being that harsh, well, there is truth in it. They must have realized that some people (like me) were mostly using their software as a super denoiser, and they decided to release PureRaw. But it's not cheap for what it is compared to DPL.
And of course fuzzykeys, you can do everyting in DPL 5 that you can do in Pure Raw.
LCPete wrote:
Yes agree I went to DXO to get away from the pay monthly model at the moment we have several choices wouldn’t want Adobe to buy these companies up
They've purchased competition in the past and not sure we got the suggested tech advances shared but the competitive pressure went away, too.
Zenon Char wrote:
Jeez I wait a year for Canon profiles, use Color Fidelity in the meantime and now another option.
I like the Canon profile from DXO. With a few tweaks it looks, let's say, canonesque.
It's not totally camera specific, it's one profile (or more probably LUT on top of their neutral profile) for a generation of cameras.
There is just one profile to mimic all this cameras : 250D, 850D, M50, M50 MkII, M200, R, R5, Ra RP for instance. There are other profiles for older cameras.
It's not overambitious, like trying to mimic every specific rendering of every camera, but the results are pleasing to my eyes.
The good thing is, you can use it with every camera recognized by DXO because they are LUT on top of their neutral profiles. It can lead to a few differences between cameras, especially if you compare a very old camera to a modern one, but you can more or less match easily modern cameras calibrated by DXO during the last few years.
I think that I like their Canon profile more than Cobalt Canon profiles. DNG versions for LR are let's say ok for my taste, but I bought ICC versions for C1 because I use it more than LR, and I was very disappointed. Greens are very blue, the yellow patch on a colorchecker is very bright and tends to green. The general profile is very saturated. It doesn't look very canonesque for my taste.
But color rendering is off topic. For reducing noise, I strongly encourage everyone to try DXO PL5 as a super plug in for LR or C1 instead of PureRaw. And maybe try it as a standalone product for a few pictures.
Ayoul wrote:
I like the Canon profile from DXO. With a few tweaks it looks, let's say, canonesque.
It's not totally camera specific, it's one profile (or more probably LUT on top of their neutral profile) for a generation of cameras.
There is just one profile to mimic all this cameras : 250D, 850D, M50, M50 MkII, M200, R, R5, Ra RP for instance. There are other profiles for older cameras.
It's not overambitious, like trying to mimic every specific rendering of every camera, but the results are pleasing to my eyes.
The good thing is, you can use it with every camera recognized by DXO because they are LUT on top of their neutral profiles. It can lead to a few differences between cameras, especially if you compare a very old camera to a modern one, but you can more or less match easily modern cameras calibrated by DXO during the last few years.
I think that I like their Canon profile more than Cobalt Canon profiles. DNG versions for LR are let's say ok for my taste, but I bought ICC versions for C1 because I use it more than LR, and I was very disappointed. Greens are very blue, the yellow patch on a colorchecker is very bright and tends to green. The general profile is very saturated. It doesn't look very canonesque for my taste.
But color rendering is off topic. For reducing noise, I strongly encourage everyone to try DXO PL5 as a super plug in for LR or C1 instead of PureRaw. And maybe try it as a standalone product for a few pictures.
Ayoul wrote:
For reducing noise, I strongly encourage everyone to try DXO PL5 as a super plug in for LR or C1 instead of PureRaw. And maybe try it as a standalone product for a few pictures.
Is there a difference in results plug-in vs stand-alone??
We are talking about the same software, so no difference in reality.
By "using it as a plugin", I mean using DPL5 to denoise and sharpen pictures if that the only thing you're interested it for now, by exporting the DNG file into LR or C1.
By "using it as a standalone", I refer to the "traditional" use of this software, which means to export a final jpeg or tiff.
Ayoul wrote:
We are talking about the same software, so no difference in reality.
By "using it as a plugin", I mean using DPL5 to denoise and sharpen pictures if that the only thing you're interested it for now, by exporting the DNG file into LR or C1.
By "using it as a standalone", I refer to the "traditional" use of this software, which means to export a final jpeg or tiff.
Thanks.
That's what I thought but something in your wording made me wonder if I was missing something.
DaveFP wrote:
Aha ! That's a distinction worth noting as I like to be able to use my profiles.
At everyone's suggestion I bought Photolab5 but have yet to play with it. Does this hold true for it too? Thanks.
I have PL3 but I can't use it for the R5. When I did I used the LrC "plugin extras" method. I was not aware that I could drag it in. It doesn't give you a choice with PureRaw as far as I can see. As Chris said it works.
