If NIK is used, DXO PL creates a Tiff that gets moved to NIK. When needed I access NIK Collection 5 directly from DXO-PL. Right now I am using DXO-PL 6.2.0.103 Elite as my RAW processor for my Nikon NEF images. I have been using DXO PhotoLab Elite edition for about three years. But also the ability to define your white and black points are immensely useful, as the other sliders will act based on those "limits", which other raw converter usually lack.ĭon't get me wrong, photolab is my primary step no matter what just for the noise reduction and lens profiles (in this regard, if some people feeling the Nikon 400/2.8G+1.7TCII should get a profile from DxO, please join me in the request ). But well, long story short, I find ACR/LR's "tonemapping" (after all it maps 14 bit tones down to 8, it's not like 32 to 8 but that's still tone mapping) is vastly superior in the sense that it considers the picture globally when raising shadows and lowering highlights (for example). Local clearly sucks unless you fine-tune it carefully until it. When I used to work mostly in the 3D area, we've used everything from pre-made tone-mappers to in-house ones and there is a very clear difference in how "pleasing" an image is when the tone-mapper is global or local. I also occasionally take an image into Affinity Photo for further processing.Ĭlick to expand.Don't get me wrong, photolab is my primary step no matter what just for the noise reduction and lens profiles (in this regard, if some people feeling the Nikon 400/2.8G+1.7TCII should get a profile from DxO, please join me in the request ).
I still - very occasionally - use Topaz Sharpen as I can mask and sharpen but a portion of an image, which I can't do with DxO. The Spot Weighted mode of DxO Smart Lighting is quite useful for adjusting the light weighting of an image as well. DxO is very good for sharpening/lens correction and I prefer it's DeepPrime noise reduction to Topaz, which I'd used previously for about 3 years. I've been processing images this way for slightly over a year now and like what this combination can do. I still feel more comfortable with the adjustment filters and brush in LRC, so am sticking to it for now. I make any further adjustments if needed, then export the file as a dng with all adjustments to LRC where I do further processing if required.
In my workflow, I start with Photolab and employ presets which I've created which change the camera profile to linear, add a slight brightening tone curve, some lens sharpening/correction, incorporate DxO Smart Lighting in the Spot Weighted mode, and add one of the Denoise functions - HQ, Prime, DeepPrime or DeepPrime XD. I started with Photolab5 a year ago and have just upgraded to Photolab6. I've got to admit that it's a bit weird for a Canadian to type color rather than colour
I'll try your method of applying a preset, going into LR and processing, saving the result as a jpg then going back to PL and switching the color space and going back to LR.tho' I suspect that I will have to reset my various LR settings to default values and process from scratch, which is what I did before to try to get the most pleasing result to my eye. I choose to give it an alternate name, so as to have a dng file saved for each working color space. I've been taking some of my PL5 processed raw files into PL6, applying the same presets, but changing the working color space to DxO wide Gamut, then sending them as dng files to LR for further processing. After updating from PL5 to PL6, I've started to look at the ability - in the Color tab in Customize - to choose either the Classic (Legacy) working color space as used in PL5 (Adobe RGB) or the DxO Wide Gamut newly introduced in PL6. I've taken a raw file that has been previously processed in PL and sent for further processing in LR and finally saved as a jpg file.
0 kommentar(er)
