Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
p.2 #1Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
BigBabyMoses06 wrote:
9 months in and still no camera matching profile in LR for the A7V. I didn't realize it takes so damn long, that pretty crazy. Are we to really expect camera profiles one year after release? Who should I be mad at? Sony, right? Does it take the same time for Canon and Nikon?
Canon DXO support was failry quick for the R5 II, IIRC. Since the 2000s Canon had a lossless compressed format that did not slow down the camera operation, but of course larger files reached the buffer capacity sooner.
I never had any issues with the a7RV always used in the lossy compression MS mode, so I foolishly assumed the a7RVI would also be usable. I can live without 30FPS, but somehow only single frame works in 14 bites.
EBH
9 months in and still no camera matching profile in LR for the A7V. I didn't realize it takes so damn long, that pretty crazy. Are we to really expect camera profiles one year after release? Who should I be mad at? Sony, right? Does it take the same time for Canon and Nikon?
Canon DXO support was failry quick for the R5 II, IIRC. Since the 2000s Canon had a lossless compressed format that did not slow down the camera operation, but of course larger files reached the buffer capacity sooner.
I never had any issues with the a7RV always used in the lossy compression MS mode, so I foolishly assumed the a7RVI would also be usable. I can live without 30FPS, but somehow only single frame works in 14 bites.
EBH
Sep 20, 2026 at 10:46 AM
p.2 #2Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Knut. wrote:
In the honour of DXO it must be pointed out that standard raw processing (colour, tint, contrast, shading etc.) is no problem for processing with DXO. It is just that their deep prime algorithms NEED part of the information that Sony has thrown away with their lossy compression and DXO is not willing to call a denoising process that is not full and up to their standards „deep prime“. (Other, weaker denoising algorithms of DXO do work, as they do on any jpg).
This is simply untrue...
In the honour of DXO it must be pointed out that standard raw processing (colour, tint, contrast, shading etc.) is no problem for processing with DXO. It is just that their deep prime algorithms NEED part of the information that Sony has thrown away with their lossy compression and DXO is not willing to call a denoising process that is not full and up to their standards „deep prime“. (Other, weaker denoising algorithms of DXO do work, as they do on any jpg).
This is simply untrue...
Sep 20, 2026 at 10:54 AM
p.2 #3Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
j4nu wrote:
This is simply untrue...
Oh, well. I went through this discussion with DXO three years ago with a different body and they confirmed it again this year. In principle, what they said at that time is what they say now:
1) L, M and S raw-formats, that are crops of the full frame sensor output (e.g. APSC-crops or smaller) and NOT compressed, are full quality raw files and can be processed by their engine.
2) LOSSLESS compressed formats can be processed as well.
(There was a delay: lossless compressed processing was not available at launch for the A7R6 and is promised to come/ has come?)
3) Lossy compressed formats (reduced bit depth etc.) are not considered full raw files and will not be able to take full advantage of a lot of DXO features including deep noise reduction algorithms.
A lot of confusion arises because what Sony calls mRaw and sRaw is not always clear:
- Some mRaw files are APSC-crops out of a full depth file (just cropped) and
- some other mRaw files are lossy „in-camera“ compressed files.
The former can be developed by DXO‘s raw processor PureRaw, the latter not.
Reference:
https://support.dxo.com/hc/de/articles/6940709955229-Werden-auch-zus%C3%A4tzliche-RAW-Formate-wie-sRAW-mRAW-RAW-S-etc-unterst%C3%BCtzt-wenn-die-Standard-RAW-Bilder-einer-Kamera-kompatibel-sind
Sorry for the German, this is the language they respond to me. As stated these principles are applied to Canon, Nikon and Sony equally.
I hope this helps shed some light on this somewhat complicated and controversal issue.
Knut. wrote
In the honour of DXO it must be pointed out that standard raw processing (colour, tint, contrast, shading etc.) is no problem for processing with DXO. It is just that their deep prime algorithms NEED part of the information that Sony has thrown away with their lossy compression and DXO is not willing to call a denoising process that is not full and up to their standards „deep prime“. (Other, weaker denoising algorithms of DXO do work, as they do on any jpg).Oh, well. I went through this discussion with DXO three years ago with a different body and they confirmed it again this year. In principle, what they said at that time is what they say now:
1) L, M and S raw-formats, that are crops of the full frame sensor output (e.g. APSC-crops or smaller) and NOT compressed, are full quality raw files and can be processed by their engine.
2) LOSSLESS compressed formats can be processed as well.
(There was a delay: lossless compressed processing was not available at launch for the A7R6 and is promised to come/ has come?)
3) Lossy compressed formats (reduced bit depth etc.) are not considered full raw files and will not be able to take full advantage of a lot of DXO features including deep noise reduction algorithms.
A lot of confusion arises because what Sony calls mRaw and sRaw is not always clear:
- Some mRaw files are APSC-crops out of a full depth file (just cropped) and
- some other mRaw files are lossy „in-camera“ compressed files.
The former can be developed by DXO‘s raw processor PureRaw, the latter not.
Reference:
https://support.dxo.com/hc/de/articles/6940709955229-Werden-auch-zus%C3%A4tzliche-RAW-Formate-wie-sRAW-mRAW-RAW-S-etc-unterst%C3%BCtzt-wenn-die-Standard-RAW-Bilder-einer-Kamera-kompatibel-sind
Sorry for the German, this is the language they respond to me. As stated these principles are applied to Canon, Nikon and Sony equally.
I hope this helps shed some light on this somewhat complicated and controversal issue.
Sep 20, 2026 at 11:55 AM
p.2 #4Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Some observations I noted with my A1:
When birding, I often use a very high frame rate AND an APSC crop. Sony calls these files „mRaw“ in their menu. They are NOT compressed in camera.
=> Files can be processed by DXO Photolab and PureRaw
When doing event photography, I use full frame captures at a high frame rate and utilize in camera compression. Sony also calls this mRaw.
=> These raw files can NOT be processed by DXO Photolab or PureRaw (not 3 years ago, not now)
Maybe this can explain the differences.
Edited on Sep 20, 2026 at 12:18 PM · View previous versions
When birding, I often use a very high frame rate AND an APSC crop. Sony calls these files „mRaw“ in their menu. They are NOT compressed in camera.
=> Files can be processed by DXO Photolab and PureRaw
When doing event photography, I use full frame captures at a high frame rate and utilize in camera compression. Sony also calls this mRaw.
=> These raw files can NOT be processed by DXO Photolab or PureRaw (not 3 years ago, not now)
Maybe this can explain the differences.
Edited on Sep 20, 2026 at 12:18 PM · View previous versions
Sep 20, 2026 at 12:06 PM
p.2 #5Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Knut. wrote:
This is simply untrue...Oh, well. I went through this discussion with DXO three years ago with a different body and they confirmed it again this year. In principle, what they said at that time is what they say now:
1) L, M and S raw-formats, that are crops of the full frame sensor output (e.g. APSC-crops or smaller) and NOT compressed, are full quality raw files and can be processed by their engine.
2) LOSSLESS compressed formats can be processed as well.
(There was a delay: lossless compressed processing was not available at launch for the A7R6 and is promised to come/ has come?)
3) Lossy...Show more →
But this thread is about Compressed RAW (present on Sony cameras for a long time) and Compressed RAW HQ (a more recent format, introduced with A7V I think).
The former is most definitely supported by DXO DeepPRIME 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on previous Sony cameras because I have used it multiple times and have it currently on my screen as you got me second guessing my memory
...
j4nu wrote
Knut. wrote
In the honour of DXO it must be pointed out that standard raw processing (colour, tint, contrast, shading etc.) is no problem for processing with DXO. It is just that their deep prime algorithms NEED part of the information that Sony has thrown away with their lossy compression and DXO is not willing to call a denoising process that is not full and up to their standards „deep prime“. (Other, weaker denoising algorithms of DXO do work, as they do on any jpg).1) L, M and S raw-formats, that are crops of the full frame sensor output (e.g. APSC-crops or smaller) and NOT compressed, are full quality raw files and can be processed by their engine.
2) LOSSLESS compressed formats can be processed as well.
(There was a delay: lossless compressed processing was not available at launch for the A7R6 and is promised to come/ has come?)
3) Lossy...Show more →
But this thread is about Compressed RAW (present on Sony cameras for a long time) and Compressed RAW HQ (a more recent format, introduced with A7V I think).
The former is most definitely supported by DXO DeepPRIME 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on previous Sony cameras because I have used it multiple times and have it currently on my screen as you got me second guessing my memory
... Sep 20, 2026 at 12:07 PM
p.2 #6Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
I believe the difference is, if the compressed raw is compressed losslessly or if there is a lossy compression. The later (lossy compression) does throw away some data and I have no idea how much is too much for their more evolved algorithms to work properly.
Sep 20, 2026 at 12:13 PM
p.2 #7Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Knut. wrote:
I believe the difference is, if the compressed raw is compressed losslessly or if there is a lossy compression. The later (lossy compression) does throw away some data and I have no idea how much is too much for their more evolved algorithms to work properly.
No, I'm using the same terminology Sony uses, so:
* Compressed RAW = lossy compressed
* Lossless Compressed RAW = lossless compressed.
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.
I believe the difference is, if the compressed raw is compressed losslessly or if there is a lossy compression. The later (lossy compression) does throw away some data and I have no idea how much is too much for their more evolved algorithms to work properly.
No, I'm using the same terminology Sony uses, so:
* Compressed RAW = lossy compressed
* Lossless Compressed RAW = lossless compressed.
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.
Sep 20, 2026 at 12:19 PM
p.2 #8Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
j4nu wrote:
No, I'm using the same terminology Sony uses, so:
* Compressed RAW = lossy compressed
* Lossless Compressed RAW = lossless compressed.
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.
I use PhotoLab 6 (6.23.0)
- I cannot replicate your claim.
Can you state which camera and which version of Photolab/PureRaw you use?
- Possibly with increased sophistication of Photolab, DXO dropped support of every new lossy compressed raw format camera makers came up with (DXO clearly states their approach is not restricted to Sony).
In addition this is definitely not something new or something that crept in with the A7R6. These discussions were on this board three years ago when people noticed it with the A1 (that‘s when I was affected).
DXO states:
NOT supported: Sony compressed files: compressed mRAW, compressed sRAW, Compressed HQ
(As I understand this applies to lossy compression)
https://support.dxo.com/hc/de/articles/34187395021341-Werden-auch-zus%C3%A4tzliche-RAW-Formate-wie-sRAW-mRAW-RAW-S-etc-unterst%C3%BCtzt-wenn-die-Standard-RAW-Bilder-einer-Kamera-kompatibel-sind
Knut. wrote
I believe the difference is, if the compressed raw is compressed losslessly or if there is a lossy compression. The later (lossy compression) does throw away some data and I have no idea how much is too much for their more evolved algorithms to work properly.* Compressed RAW = lossy compressed
* Lossless Compressed RAW = lossless compressed.
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.
I use PhotoLab 6 (6.23.0)
- I cannot replicate your claim.
Can you state which camera and which version of Photolab/PureRaw you use?
- Possibly with increased sophistication of Photolab, DXO dropped support of every new lossy compressed raw format camera makers came up with (DXO clearly states their approach is not restricted to Sony).
In addition this is definitely not something new or something that crept in with the A7R6. These discussions were on this board three years ago when people noticed it with the A1 (that‘s when I was affected).
DXO states:
NOT supported: Sony compressed files: compressed mRAW, compressed sRAW, Compressed HQ
(As I understand this applies to lossy compression)
https://support.dxo.com/hc/de/articles/34187395021341-Werden-auch-zus%C3%A4tzliche-RAW-Formate-wie-sRAW-mRAW-RAW-S-etc-unterst%C3%BCtzt-wenn-die-Standard-RAW-Bilder-einer-Kamera-kompatibel-sind
Sep 20, 2026 at 12:57 PM
p.2 #9Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Knut. wrote:
No, I'm using the same terminology Sony uses, so:
* Compressed RAW = lossy compressed
* Lossless Compressed RAW = lossless compressed.
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.I use PhotoLab 6 (6.23.0)
- I cannot replicate your claim.
Can you state which camera and which version of Photolab/PureRaw you use?
- Possibly with increased sophistication of Photolab, DXO dropped support of every new lossy compressed raw format camera makers came up with (DXO clearly states their approach is not restricted to Sony).
In addition this is definitely not something new or something that crept in with the A7R6. These discussions were on this board three years ago when people noticed it with the A1 (that‘s when I was affected).
DXO states:
NOT supported: Sony compressed files: compressed mRAW, compressed sRAW, Compressed...Show more →
I'm using DXO PhotoLab 9.7.0 Build 643 (which is not the latest one) on Sony A1 files (full frame).
I'm afraid you can confuse others even more, as this issue is confusing enough already, with such statements.
This thread is solely about A7RVI, as explained by @snapsy@ .
What you quote DXO states is also correct:
NOT supported: Sony compressed files: compressed mRAW, compressed sRAW, Compressed HQ
(As I understand this applies to lossy compression)
These formats are not supported, but basic Compressed RAW is.
j4nu wrote
Knut. wrote
I believe the difference is, if the compressed raw is compressed losslessly or if there is a lossy compression. The later (lossy compression) does throw away some data and I have no idea how much is too much for their more evolved algorithms to work properly.* Compressed RAW = lossy compressed
* Lossless Compressed RAW = lossless compressed.
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.
- I cannot replicate your claim.
Can you state which camera and which version of Photolab/PureRaw you use?
- Possibly with increased sophistication of Photolab, DXO dropped support of every new lossy compressed raw format camera makers came up with (DXO clearly states their approach is not restricted to Sony).
In addition this is definitely not something new or something that crept in with the A7R6. These discussions were on this board three years ago when people noticed it with the A1 (that‘s when I was affected).
DXO states:
NOT supported: Sony compressed files: compressed mRAW, compressed sRAW, Compressed...Show more →
I'm using DXO PhotoLab 9.7.0 Build 643 (which is not the latest one) on Sony A1 files (full frame).
I'm afraid you can confuse others even more, as this issue is confusing enough already, with such statements.
This thread is solely about A7RVI, as explained by @snapsy@ .
What you quote DXO states is also correct:
NOT supported: Sony compressed files: compressed mRAW, compressed sRAW, Compressed HQ
(As I understand this applies to lossy compression)
These formats are not supported, but basic Compressed RAW is.
Sep 20, 2026 at 01:05 PM
p.2 #10Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
j4nu wrote:
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.
When stating, I can process lossy compressed files with DXO, it is very important to clarify which Sony camera worked with what DXO version:
On older Sony models (e.g. A7R II/III, A7 III, A9, etc.), the Compressed RAW option in the menu was effectively always lossy (typically an 11+7‑bit delta compression). A true lossless compressed format did not exist on those bodies. DXO worked and works with these formats since there were no alternatives to lossy compressed raw files at the time.
On newer models (from around 2021/2022 onward, e.g. A1, A7 IV, A7R V, A7C II, A9 III, A7S III with relevant firmware), Sony adds Lossless Compressed RAW as a separate option. There you have:
• Compressed → still lossy
• Lossless Compressed → lossless
• Uncompressed → uncompressed
My impression is that most users of the newer models moved on to the lossless compressed raw options and DXO dropped support for some lossy formats that persisted in newer models.
At least I can find mails in which I addressed this issue with DXO in 2022/23. I modified my workflow and DXO retracted their complete blockage of mRaw files, mRaw files that were full depth crops could be processed again.
Since then I am not aware that current versions of DXO Photolab/PureRaw process any LOSSY compressed files of recent Sony camera models.
DXO themselves explicitly state since around Photolab 6/7 and later that they do not support lossy compressed files (so nothing new).
Now with the A7R76 Sony has come up with just another proprietary lossy compressed format, now named HQ because they believe it performs better (it allows them to achieve higher frame rates without investing in similar hardware as in the A1 or A1II). Complicating things HQ can have different bit depths.
I have no idea what DXO will do with HQ.
Edited on Sep 20, 2026 at 02:03 PM · View previous versions
Knut. wrote
I believe the difference is, if the compressed raw is compressed losslessly or if there is a lossy compression. The later (lossy compression) does throw away some data and I have no idea how much is too much for their more evolved algorithms to work properly.When stating, I can process lossy compressed files with DXO, it is very important to clarify which Sony camera worked with what DXO version:
On older Sony models (e.g. A7R II/III, A7 III, A9, etc.), the Compressed RAW option in the menu was effectively always lossy (typically an 11+7‑bit delta compression). A true lossless compressed format did not exist on those bodies. DXO worked and works with these formats since there were no alternatives to lossy compressed raw files at the time.
On newer models (from around 2021/2022 onward, e.g. A1, A7 IV, A7R V, A7C II, A9 III, A7S III with relevant firmware), Sony adds Lossless Compressed RAW as a separate option. There you have:
• Compressed → still lossy
• Lossless Compressed → lossless
• Uncompressed → uncompressed
My impression is that most users of the newer models moved on to the lossless compressed raw options and DXO dropped support for some lossy formats that persisted in newer models.
At least I can find mails in which I addressed this issue with DXO in 2022/23. I modified my workflow and DXO retracted their complete blockage of mRaw files, mRaw files that were full depth crops could be processed again.
Since then I am not aware that current versions of DXO Photolab/PureRaw process any LOSSY compressed files of recent Sony camera models.
DXO themselves explicitly state since around Photolab 6/7 and later that they do not support lossy compressed files (so nothing new).
Now with the A7R76 Sony has come up with just another proprietary lossy compressed format, now named HQ because they believe it performs better (it allows them to achieve higher frame rates without investing in similar hardware as in the A1 or A1II). Complicating things HQ can have different bit depths.
I have no idea what DXO will do with HQ.
Edited on Sep 20, 2026 at 02:03 PM · View previous versions
Sep 20, 2026 at 01:31 PM
|
p.2 #11Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Knut. wrote:
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.Since then I am not aware that current versions of DXO Photolab/PureRaw process any LOSSY compressed files of recent Sony camera models.
DXO themselves explicitly state since around Photolab 6/7 and later that they do not support lossy compressed files (so nothing new).
Now with the A7R76 Sony has come up with just another proprietary lossy compressed format, now named HQ because they believe it performs better (it allows them to achieve higher frame rates without investing in similar hardware as in the A1II).
- It is a question if it will make software developers invest in a niche and proprietary (lossy...Show more →
First off, recent DXO Photolab releases (9.x at least) support "Compressed RAW" (lossy) files from older Sony cameras, this is not debatable because it's a fact
. Please download a trial and check for yourself if you don't believe me.
Secondly, not all users moved from Compressed (lossy) to Lossless because even on A1 II it limits the fps from 30 (lossy) to 20 (lossless).
Thirdly, Compressed HQ format has been introduced with A7V and according to the DXO response you quoted it's not supported.
Fourthly, read this post by @snapsy@ to see what this thread is about:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1957027/0#17109241
j4nu wrote
Knut. wrote
I believe the difference is, if the compressed raw is compressed losslessly or if there is a lossy compression. The later (lossy compression) does throw away some data and I have no idea how much is too much for their more evolved algorithms to work properly.DXO themselves explicitly state since around Photolab 6/7 and later that they do not support lossy compressed files (so nothing new).
Now with the A7R76 Sony has come up with just another proprietary lossy compressed format, now named HQ because they believe it performs better (it allows them to achieve higher frame rates without investing in similar hardware as in the A1II).
- It is a question if it will make software developers invest in a niche and proprietary (lossy...Show more →
First off, recent DXO Photolab releases (9.x at least) support "Compressed RAW" (lossy) files from older Sony cameras, this is not debatable because it's a fact
. Please download a trial and check for yourself if you don't believe me.Secondly, not all users moved from Compressed (lossy) to Lossless because even on A1 II it limits the fps from 30 (lossy) to 20 (lossless).
Thirdly, Compressed HQ format has been introduced with A7V and according to the DXO response you quoted it's not supported.
Fourthly, read this post by @snapsy@ to see what this thread is about:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1957027/0#17109241
Sep 20, 2026 at 01:44 PM
p.2 #12Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Knut. wrote:
On newer models (from around 2021/2022 onward, e.g. A1, A7 IV, A7R V, A7C II, A9 III, A7S III with relevant firmware), Sony adds Lossless Compressed RAW as a separate option. There you have:
• Compressed → still lossy
• Lossless Compressed → lossless
• Uncompressed → uncompressed
My impression is that most users of the newer models moved on to the lossless compressed raw options and DXO dropped support for some lossy formats that persisted in newer models.
All types of a7RV files worked fully in DXO versions that supported the camera, I think from PL6 or at least 7 onward.
I have always used what you call "• Compressed → still lossy" since it's the only way to get 10FPS MS.
So it is not clear what happened from a7rV to a7rVI. If it is the 12 vs 14 bit thing, that could indicate that the a7rV compressed was 14 bits. But it is not solving any problems. I hope enough people complain that they take action.
EBH
On newer models (from around 2021/2022 onward, e.g. A1, A7 IV, A7R V, A7C II, A9 III, A7S III with relevant firmware), Sony adds Lossless Compressed RAW as a separate option. There you have:
• Compressed → still lossy
• Lossless Compressed → lossless
• Uncompressed → uncompressed
My impression is that most users of the newer models moved on to the lossless compressed raw options and DXO dropped support for some lossy formats that persisted in newer models.
All types of a7RV files worked fully in DXO versions that supported the camera, I think from PL6 or at least 7 onward.
I have always used what you call "• Compressed → still lossy" since it's the only way to get 10FPS MS.
So it is not clear what happened from a7rV to a7rVI. If it is the 12 vs 14 bit thing, that could indicate that the a7rV compressed was 14 bits. But it is not solving any problems. I hope enough people complain that they take action.
EBH
Sep 20, 2026 at 02:39 PM
p.2 #13Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
j4nu wrote:
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.Since then I am not aware that current versions of DXO Photolab/PureRaw process any LOSSY compressed files of recent Sony camera models.
DXO themselves explicitly state since around Photolab 6/7 and later that they do not support lossy compressed files (so nothing new).
Now with the A7R76 Sony has come up with just another proprietary lossy compressed format, now named HQ because they believe it performs better (it allows them to achieve higher frame rates without investing in similar hardware as in the A1II).
- It is a question if it will make software developers invest in a niche and proprietary (lossy and compressed) format with reduced possibilities of extracting image imformation compared to losslessly compressed formats.First off, recent DXO Photolab releases (9.x at least) support "Compressed RAW" (lossy) files from older Sony cameras, this is not debatable because it's a fact . Please download a trial and check for yourself if you don't believe me.
….
Thirdly, Compressed HQ format has been introduced with A7V and according to the DXO response you quoted it's not supported.
Fourthly, read this post by @snapsy@@ to see what this thread is about:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1957027/0#17109241
@1) Well that is exactly what I explained above: Before 2021/22 ALL compressed Sony raw formats were lossy. DXO developed Sony’s lossy raw formats of that time.
Proving that DXO develops lossy raw formats on cameras 4+ years old (when only LOSSY was available) says nothing about their policy since then, which changed around 4 years ago.
DXO does not appear to process LOSSY compressed raw files on any newer Sony camera model after +/- 2022 when lossless compressed became available. You want to be specific to the A7R6. But this is the situation with ANY newer camera as far as I can see and definitely with my A1.
Noticing this after 4 years and screaming in the title „Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab“ is somewhat slow.
Concerning your citation of @snapsy@: I see that he muses about the handling of A7R6 files by DXO, but there is nothing that limits this discussion to this camera and refutes putting DXOs handling of A7R6 files into the bigger context of DXO handling of lossy compressed files.
For the casual reader this discussion must be put into a larger context:
- People who are happy with frame rates up to 15 or 20 frames per second depending on model (A7R6 or A1/A1ii) should have no problems with DXO if they shoot uncompressed raw or LOSSLESSLY compressed raw.
- Faster shoot rates 20-30 may divert the camera to saving the data as LOSSY compressed, which throws away some data and thus impedes DXOs amazing noise reduction.
- Some people are in a discussion with DXO if some sort of high quality noise reduction is nevertheless possible. Results open.
- Obviously such high frame rates are a niche application for most users. Sports photographers would move to an A9 if they need it.
- No one knows if Adobe‘s alternative programs really do deep processing on these truncated and lossily compressed files.
- Capture One also has limitations on these lossy raw files.
To my mind, screaming: „Time toGIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab“ because of this selective problem is very much over the top. But so be it, if this is your niche, just move on to a different developer. If there is nothing else that holds you with DXO, I’m really suprised as I have a completely different view on what really matters.
I have said all of this to avoid a casual user becoming confused. DXO is a very amazing program, it obviously has limitations in niche high frame-rate lossy captures. Most other things it does amazingly well.
I for myself will move on and no longer respond to this thread.
Edited on Sep 24, 2026 at 01:32 PM · View previous versions
Knut. wrote
j4nu wrote
Knut. wrote
I believe the difference is, if the compressed raw is compressed losslessly or if there is a lossy compression. The later (lossy compression) does throw away some data and I have no idea how much is too much for their more evolved algorithms to work properly.DXO themselves explicitly state since around Photolab 6/7 and later that they do not support lossy compressed files (so nothing new).
Now with the A7R76 Sony has come up with just another proprietary lossy compressed format, now named HQ because they believe it performs better (it allows them to achieve higher frame rates without investing in similar hardware as in the A1II).
- It is a question if it will make software developers invest in a niche and proprietary (lossy and compressed) format with reduced possibilities of extracting image imformation compared to losslessly compressed formats.
. Please download a trial and check for yourself if you don't believe me.….
Thirdly, Compressed HQ format has been introduced with A7V and according to the DXO response you quoted it's not supported.
Fourthly, read this post by @snapsy@@ to see what this thread is about:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1957027/0#17109241
@1) Well that is exactly what I explained above: Before 2021/22 ALL compressed Sony raw formats were lossy. DXO developed Sony’s lossy raw formats of that time.
Proving that DXO develops lossy raw formats on cameras 4+ years old (when only LOSSY was available) says nothing about their policy since then, which changed around 4 years ago.
DXO does not appear to process LOSSY compressed raw files on any newer Sony camera model after +/- 2022 when lossless compressed became available. You want to be specific to the A7R6. But this is the situation with ANY newer camera as far as I can see and definitely with my A1.
Noticing this after 4 years and screaming in the title „Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab“ is somewhat slow.
Concerning your citation of @snapsy@: I see that he muses about the handling of A7R6 files by DXO, but there is nothing that limits this discussion to this camera and refutes putting DXOs handling of A7R6 files into the bigger context of DXO handling of lossy compressed files.
For the casual reader this discussion must be put into a larger context:
- People who are happy with frame rates up to 15 or 20 frames per second depending on model (A7R6 or A1/A1ii) should have no problems with DXO if they shoot uncompressed raw or LOSSLESSLY compressed raw.
- Faster shoot rates 20-30 may divert the camera to saving the data as LOSSY compressed, which throws away some data and thus impedes DXOs amazing noise reduction.
- Some people are in a discussion with DXO if some sort of high quality noise reduction is nevertheless possible. Results open.
- Obviously such high frame rates are a niche application for most users. Sports photographers would move to an A9 if they need it.
- No one knows if Adobe‘s alternative programs really do deep processing on these truncated and lossily compressed files.
- Capture One also has limitations on these lossy raw files.
To my mind, screaming: „Time toGIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab“ because of this selective problem is very much over the top. But so be it, if this is your niche, just move on to a different developer. If there is nothing else that holds you with DXO, I’m really suprised as I have a completely different view on what really matters.
I have said all of this to avoid a casual user becoming confused. DXO is a very amazing program, it obviously has limitations in niche high frame-rate lossy captures. Most other things it does amazingly well.
I for myself will move on and no longer respond to this thread.
Edited on Sep 24, 2026 at 01:32 PM · View previous versions
Sep 20, 2026 at 02:59 PM
p.2 #14Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Knut. wrote:
Compressed RAW (lossy) does work with DXO DeepPrime 3 and DeepPRIME XD3 on older Sony bodies.Since then I am not aware that current versions of DXO Photolab/PureRaw process any LOSSY compressed files of recent Sony camera models.
DXO themselves explicitly state since around Photolab 6/7 and later that they do not support lossy compressed files (so nothing new).
Now with the A7R76 Sony has come up with just another proprietary lossy compressed format, now named HQ because they believe it performs better (it allows them to achieve higher frame rates without investing in similar hardware as in the A1II).
- It is a question if it will make software developers invest in a niche and proprietary (lossy and compressed) format with reduced possibilities of extracting image imformation compared to losslessly compressed formats.First off, recent DXO Photolab releases (9.x at least) support "Compressed RAW" (lossy) files from older Sony cameras, this is not debatable because it's a fact . Please download a trial and check for yourself if you don't believe me.
….
Thirdly, Compressed HQ format has been introduced with A7V and according to the DXO response you quoted it's not supported.
Fourthly, read this post by @snapsy@@@ to see what this thread is about:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1957027/0#17109241@1) Well that is exactly what I explained above: Before 2021/22 ALL Sony raw formats were lossy. DXO developed Sony’s lossy raw formats of that time.
Proving that DXO develops lossy raw formats on cameras 4+ years old (when only LOSSY was available) says nothing about their policy since then, which changed around 4 years ago.
DXO does not appear to process LOSSY compressed raw files on any newer Sony camera model after +/- 2022 when lossless compressed became available. You want to be specific to the A7R6. But this is the situation with ANY newer camera as far as I...Show more →
So, just to make it clear to anyone else ever reading this debate:
DXO supports Compressed RAW (lossy, full frame / resolution, no crop nor reduced resolution - to make it completely clear) format from A1 and other Sony cameras, except A7RVI (where there are caveats explained by @snapsy@ ).
Thank you for your patience .
j4nu wrote
Knut. wrote
j4nu wrote
Knut. wrote
I believe the difference is, if the compressed raw is compressed losslessly or if there is a lossy compression. The later (lossy compression) does throw away some data and I have no idea how much is too much for their more evolved algorithms to work properly.DXO themselves explicitly state since around Photolab 6/7 and later that they do not support lossy compressed files (so nothing new).
Now with the A7R76 Sony has come up with just another proprietary lossy compressed format, now named HQ because they believe it performs better (it allows them to achieve higher frame rates without investing in similar hardware as in the A1II).
- It is a question if it will make software developers invest in a niche and proprietary (lossy and compressed) format with reduced possibilities of extracting image imformation compared to losslessly compressed formats.
. Please download a trial and check for yourself if you don't believe me.….
Thirdly, Compressed HQ format has been introduced with A7V and according to the DXO response you quoted it's not supported.
Fourthly, read this post by @snapsy@@@ to see what this thread is about:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1957027/0#17109241
Proving that DXO develops lossy raw formats on cameras 4+ years old (when only LOSSY was available) says nothing about their policy since then, which changed around 4 years ago.
DXO does not appear to process LOSSY compressed raw files on any newer Sony camera model after +/- 2022 when lossless compressed became available. You want to be specific to the A7R6. But this is the situation with ANY newer camera as far as I...Show more →
So, just to make it clear to anyone else ever reading this debate:
DXO supports Compressed RAW (lossy, full frame / resolution, no crop nor reduced resolution - to make it completely clear) format from A1 and other Sony cameras, except A7RVI (where there are caveats explained by @snapsy@ ).
Thank you for your patience
.Sep 20, 2026 at 03:18 PM
p.2 #15Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
I'm not a DXO user; I use Capture One. However, I believe when Sony released their new processor with the A7v, they released new file formats. These formats only apply to the A7v and A7Rvi, though I suspect they'll apply to the A1iii and any other camera that gets the new processor (the RX10v, even though it was released after the A7v and A7Rvi does not have the new processor as far as I can tell). I believe it's these new formats that RAW processors are struggling with (all I know other than Adobe).
Sep 20, 2026 at 05:50 PM
p.2 #16Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Did you intend to say "All Sony COMPRESSED raw formats......" ?
Knut. wrote:
@1) Well that is exactly what I explained above: Before 2021/22 ALL Sony raw formats were lossy. DXO developed Sony’s lossy raw formats of that time.
Knut. wrote:
@1) Well that is exactly what I explained above: Before 2021/22 ALL Sony raw formats were lossy. DXO developed Sony’s lossy raw formats of that time.
Sep 20, 2026 at 06:50 PM
p.2 #17Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
j4nu wrote:
Unfortunately Sony keep gravitating back to this kind of file compression when speed is paramount. Makes it really hard for any provider of raw development software. Sort of a business decision how niche a camera may be and still get a full raw developer for every type of compression Sony invents for such a camera.
In the honour of DXO it must be pointed out that standard raw processing (colour, tint, contrast, shading etc.) is no problem for processing with DXO. It is just that their deep prime algorithms NEED part of the information that Sony has thrown away with their lossy compression and DXO is not willing to call a denoising process that is not full and up to their standards „deep prime“. (Other, weaker denoising algorithms of DXO do work, as they do on any jpg).
It is really up to the decision of a photographer to shoot in uncompressed or lossless compressed formats if they want the full power of deep prime or, if it is not neccessary and high frame rates are paramount, go for a lossy compressed raw and take it‘s limits.Doesn't DXO Prime support compressed RAW on older Sony cameras?
I really think this one response from some unknown support hire is spinning out of control here...
Older compressed RAW on Sony cameras are still mosaiced RAWs. They were not demosaiced. The newer ones are partially demosaiced so they are not really raws anymore.
Normal uncompressed raws:
Just black and white data, uncompressed.
Normal losslessly compressed raws:
Just black and white data compressed losslessly. Artefacts can happen at high contrast edges.
Old lossy compression raws:
Just black and white data lossy-compressed and often colour depth reduced.
New lossy compression raws:
Partially demosaiced data converted into a different colour space, better than old lossy compression raws but not technically raw anymore.
Knut. wrote
Hasn‘t Sony lossy compressed raw been an issue before?Unfortunately Sony keep gravitating back to this kind of file compression when speed is paramount. Makes it really hard for any provider of raw development software. Sort of a business decision how niche a camera may be and still get a full raw developer for every type of compression Sony invents for such a camera.
In the honour of DXO it must be pointed out that standard raw processing (colour, tint, contrast, shading etc.) is no problem for processing with DXO. It is just that their deep prime algorithms NEED part of the information that Sony has thrown away with their lossy compression and DXO is not willing to call a denoising process that is not full and up to their standards „deep prime“. (Other, weaker denoising algorithms of DXO do work, as they do on any jpg).
It is really up to the decision of a photographer to shoot in uncompressed or lossless compressed formats if they want the full power of deep prime or, if it is not neccessary and high frame rates are paramount, go for a lossy compressed raw and take it‘s limits.
I really think this one response from some unknown support hire is spinning out of control here...
Older compressed RAW on Sony cameras are still mosaiced RAWs. They were not demosaiced. The newer ones are partially demosaiced so they are not really raws anymore.
Normal uncompressed raws:
Just black and white data, uncompressed.
Normal losslessly compressed raws:
Just black and white data compressed losslessly. Artefacts can happen at high contrast edges.
Old lossy compression raws:
Just black and white data lossy-compressed and often colour depth reduced.
New lossy compression raws:
Partially demosaiced data converted into a different colour space, better than old lossy compression raws but not technically raw anymore.
Sep 20, 2026 at 10:05 PM
p.2 #18Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
hotellonely wrote:
Unfortunately Sony keep gravitating back to this kind of file compression when speed is paramount. Makes it really hard for any provider of raw development software. Sort of a business decision how niche a camera may be and still get a full raw developer for every type of compression Sony invents for such a camera.
In the honour of DXO it must be pointed out that standard raw processing (colour, tint, contrast, shading etc.) is no problem for processing with DXO. It is just that their deep prime algorithms NEED part of the information that Sony has thrown away with their lossy compression and DXO is not willing to call a denoising process that is not full and up to their standards „deep prime“. (Other, weaker denoising algorithms of DXO do work, as they do on any jpg).
It is really up to the decision of a photographer to shoot in uncompressed or lossless compressed formats if they want the full power of deep prime or, if it is not neccessary and high frame rates are paramount, go for a lossy compressed raw and take it‘s limits.Doesn't DXO Prime support compressed RAW on older Sony cameras?
I really think this one response from some unknown support hire is spinning out of control here...Older compressed RAW on Sony cameras are still mosaiced RAWs. They were not demosaiced. The newer ones are partially demosaiced so they are not really raws anymore.
Normal uncompressed raws:
Just black and white data, uncompressed.
Normal losslessly compressed raws:
Just black and white data compressed losslessly. Artefacts can happen at high contrast edges.
Old lossy compression raws:
Just black and white data lossy-compressed and often colour depth reduced.
New lossy compression raws:
Partially demosaiced data converted into a different colour space, better than old lossy compression raws but not technically raw anymore.
Hmm, I'll agree that the "reduced" size formats introduced sometime ago are indeed demosaiced already and as such, not truly RAW. The rest is not entirely correct (lossless is lossless - no different after "decompressing" than uncompressed), but I don't want to side track this topic any more ...
My only point was really only to clarify that DXO definitely supports regular Compressed RAWs from Sony cameras, except for A7RVI (which has some caveats).
j4nu wrote
Knut. wrote
Hasn‘t Sony lossy compressed raw been an issue before?Unfortunately Sony keep gravitating back to this kind of file compression when speed is paramount. Makes it really hard for any provider of raw development software. Sort of a business decision how niche a camera may be and still get a full raw developer for every type of compression Sony invents for such a camera.
In the honour of DXO it must be pointed out that standard raw processing (colour, tint, contrast, shading etc.) is no problem for processing with DXO. It is just that their deep prime algorithms NEED part of the information that Sony has thrown away with their lossy compression and DXO is not willing to call a denoising process that is not full and up to their standards „deep prime“. (Other, weaker denoising algorithms of DXO do work, as they do on any jpg).
It is really up to the decision of a photographer to shoot in uncompressed or lossless compressed formats if they want the full power of deep prime or, if it is not neccessary and high frame rates are paramount, go for a lossy compressed raw and take it‘s limits.
I really think this one response from some unknown support hire is spinning out of control here...
Normal uncompressed raws:
Just black and white data, uncompressed.
Normal losslessly compressed raws:
Just black and white data compressed losslessly. Artefacts can happen at high contrast edges.
Old lossy compression raws:
Just black and white data lossy-compressed and often colour depth reduced.
New lossy compression raws:
Partially demosaiced data converted into a different colour space, better than old lossy compression raws but not technically raw anymore.
Hmm, I'll agree that the "reduced" size formats introduced sometime ago are indeed demosaiced already and as such, not truly RAW. The rest is not entirely correct (lossless is lossless - no different after "decompressing" than uncompressed), but I don't want to side track this topic any more
...My only point was really only to clarify that DXO definitely supports regular Compressed RAWs from Sony cameras, except for A7RVI (which has some caveats).
Sep 20, 2026 at 11:16 PM
p.2 #19Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
If Adobe can support 12-bit compressed RAW, I see no reason why DxO couldn't support it as well.
Or are we talking about somehow slighting a French company by "complaining" about their software?
I would say that the new ability to use the electronic shutter on the A7R6 opens up a new use case compared to its predecessor.
Consequently, 12-bit compressed RAW will be used frequently by many users, and their needs will dictate which software they "have to" use to process the images.
Or are we talking about somehow slighting a French company by "complaining" about their software?
I would say that the new ability to use the electronic shutter on the A7R6 opens up a new use case compared to its predecessor.
Consequently, 12-bit compressed RAW will be used frequently by many users, and their needs will dictate which software they "have to" use to process the images.
Sep 21, 2026 at 04:37 AM
p.2 #20Time to GIVE UP ON DxO PhotoLab
Ltgk20 wrote:
I'm not a DXO user; I use Capture One. However, I believe when Sony released their new processor with the A7v, they released new file formats. These formats only apply to the A7v and A7Rvi, though I suspect they'll apply to the A1iii and any other camera that gets the new processor (the RX10v, even though it was released after the A7v and A7Rvi does not have the new processor as far as I can tell). I believe it's these new formats that RAW processors are struggling with (all I know other than Adobe).
Incorrect - Dxo PL9.12 and pl10 do support all Compressed HQ files and Compressed RAW taken in Single Shot mode (14bit).
So I think it is just the 12bit files they are having difficulty with. What is puzzling is why they are struggling and Apple and Adobe apparently are not.
This whole 'not really raw' is a nonsense since if the files are converted to DNG by Adobe DNG converted PL can handle them just fine. I guess DNG Converted may be converting 'not really raw' to RAW somehow.
I'm not a DXO user; I use Capture One. However, I believe when Sony released their new processor with the A7v, they released new file formats. These formats only apply to the A7v and A7Rvi, though I suspect they'll apply to the A1iii and any other camera that gets the new processor (the RX10v, even though it was released after the A7v and A7Rvi does not have the new processor as far as I can tell). I believe it's these new formats that RAW processors are struggling with (all I know other than Adobe).
Incorrect - Dxo PL9.12 and pl10 do support all Compressed HQ files and Compressed RAW taken in Single Shot mode (14bit).
So I think it is just the 12bit files they are having difficulty with. What is puzzling is why they are struggling and Apple and Adobe apparently are not.
This whole 'not really raw' is a nonsense since if the files are converted to DNG by Adobe DNG converted PL can handle them just fine. I guess DNG Converted may be converting 'not really raw' to RAW somehow.
Sep 21, 2026 at 04:48 AM