DxO Optics Pro

Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
edited April 19, 2006 in Finishing School
When I shoot raw DxO is the program I use for conversion. It is most useful for those who shoot a lot of wide shots, since it is the only raw converter that corrects for lens defects and distortions.

Alain Briot has written an essay on this topic that I found to be very straight forward and interesting: DxO

Comments

  • jfriendjfriend Registered Users Posts: 8,097 Major grins
    edited February 5, 2006
    Anyone using DxO + ACR via DNG format
    Ric Grupe wrote:
    When I shoot raw DxO is the program I use for conversion. It is most useful for those who shoot a lot of wide shots, since it is the only raw converter that corrects for lens defects and distortions.

    Alain Briot has written an essay on this topic that I found to be very straight forward and interesting: DxO

    Anyone out there who uses DxO as a front end converter to fix lens issues only, then using the DNG format brings it into ACR for regular RAW processing? I don't want to give up ACR's workflow integration with Bridge/CS2, but have been occasionally interested in the lens corrections that DxO can do.
    --John
    Homepage • Popular
    JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
     Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • dandilldandill Registered Users Posts: 102 Major grins
    edited February 5, 2006
    jfriend wrote:
    Anyone out there who uses DxO as a front end converter to fix lens issues only, then using the DNG format brings it into ACR for regular RAW processing? I don't want to give up ACR's workflow integration with Bridge/CS2, but have been occasionally interested in the lens corrections that DxO can do.
    John, I have been wondering the same thing and so downloaded it last night to give it a try. One thing that struck me is how non-standard the user interace is; not Mac, not PC. Anyhow, Michael Reichmann describes how he uses it just as you describe, at

    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/optics-pro-raw.shtml
    Dan Dill

    "It is a magical time. I am reluctant to leave. Yet the shooting becomes more difficult, the path back grows black as it is without this last light. I don't do it anymore unless my husband is with me, as I am still afraid of the dark, smile.

    This was truly last light, my legs were tired, my husband could no longer read and was anxious to leave, but the magic and I, we lingered........"
    Ginger Jones
  • jfriendjfriend Registered Users Posts: 8,097 Major grins
    edited February 5, 2006
    Thanks for the reference
    dandill wrote:
    John, I have been wondering the same thing and so downloaded it last night to give it a try. One thing that struck me is how non-standard the user interace is; not Mac, not PC. Anyhow, Michael Reichmann describes how he uses it just as you describe, at

    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/optics-pro-raw.shtml

    Thanks. It sounds like, except for distortion, he doesn't think it's much better than ACR on other lens corrections. What I've wanted an improvement over ACR is on fringing (yes, even my 70-200VR pro Nikkor exhibits some fringing on really difficult subjects) and Michael's example doesn't show anything better than ACR on fringing. Oh well. I may try out PTLens sometime too.
    --John
    Homepage • Popular
    JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
     Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
    edited February 5, 2006
    jfriend wrote:
    Thanks. It sounds like, except for distortion, he doesn't think it's much better than ACR on other lens corrections. What I've wanted an improvement over ACR is on fringing (yes, even my 70-200VR pro Nikkor exhibits some fringing on really difficult subjects) and Michael's example doesn't show anything better than ACR on fringing. Oh well. I may try out PTLens sometime too.

    Note that M.R.'s review is of an outdated version of DxO. The new version 3.5 is much better in all aspects including removal of fringing. I suggest you try it.:D
  • gluwatergluwater Registered Users Posts: 3,599 Major grins
    edited February 6, 2006
    You may want to get Lynnsite to chime in here. She uses the program and was included in the [thread=20787]DxO IMAGE MASTERS SHOWCASE[/thread].
    Nick
    SmugMug Technical Account Manager
    Travel = good. Woo, shooting!
    nickwphoto
  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2006
    So it's $300 for the version that supports my camera body. Pretty darn pricey for correcting barrel distortion. Any users here who are wild about it?
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2006
    wxwax wrote:
    So it's $300 for the version that supports my camera body. Pretty darn pricey for correcting barrel distortion. Any users here who are wild about it?


    It's not just barrel distortion. It's really quite remarkable what it does in the RAW conversion, I think.

    I also can't justify the money or the extra step in my workflow.

    BUT I do recommend that you at least give the demo a shot...
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2006
    DavidTO wrote:
    It's not just barrel distortion. It's really quite remarkable what it does in the RAW conversion, I think.

    I also can't justify the money or the extra step in my workflow.

    BUT I do recommend that you at least give the demo a shot...

    The RAW converter sounds pretty crude compared to Photoshop, so I simply wouldn't use it. I rarely have enough shots worth saving to be worried about workflow.

    I'd export a DNG file and go about my Photoshop RAW bidness as usual. I like shooting wide angle, and wouldn't mind simple and highly competent lens correction software. I've tried correcting barrel distortion manually in PS and I'm ham fisted about it.

    So this program sounds attractive, but dang it's expensive.
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2006
    wxwax wrote:
    The RAW converter sounds pretty crude compared to Photoshop, so I simply wouldn't use it.


    Try it and compare the results.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2006
    DavidTO wrote:
    Try it and compare the results.
    No saturation, no shadow/highlight, amongst the other missing basic tools? Too limited.
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2006
    wxwax wrote:
    No saturation, no shadow/highlight, amongst the other missing basic tools? Too limited.


    Dude, try it. I was impressed with the results that I got. All on autopilot.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2006
    wxwax wrote:
    No saturation, no shadow/highlight, amongst the other missing basic tools? Too limited.

    Better take a good look! :D Try expert modes.mwink.gif

    Demo is here.
  • Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
    edited February 27, 2006
    DavidTO wrote:
    Dude, try it. I was impressed with the results that I got. All on autopilot.

    Amazing! Ain't it!?! thumb.gif
  • Ric GrupeRic Grupe Registered Users Posts: 9,522 Major grins
    edited April 19, 2006
    TIPA Awards 2006
    Technical Image Press Association

    Best Photo Software: DxO Optics Pro 3.5
    DxO Optics Pro 3.5 automatically enhances images produced by D-SLRs or compacts. The software is camera-lens specific with 200 modules available. DxO Optics Pro v3.5 incorporates DxO Optics Engine, extending the capabilities for automatically removing unwanted colour fringes in digital images.The DxO Labs demosaicing algorithm reduces artefacts while keeping manufacturer's choice and settings for colour rendering. The DxO Raw Engine enables the full DxO Optics Pro corrections to operate in 16-bit, providing high image quality while preserving the potential to retouch images.
Sign In or Register to comment.