DxO's competitors have been closing in on the champion pre-processor. As they release the latest version of PureRAW - we find out if they've done enough to keep themselves in the game.
Great review. I have found that DxO is consistently "top of the heap" in denoising. Plus, you get the lens corrections as well. I have the Topaz suite, and they are quite good, but still not up to DxO standards. Not sure I'll upgrade past version 4, but that's just because it's SO good. BTW, the Euro and Dollar costs are the same. =)
Thanks. I think they've improved it sufficiently to make the upgrade a sensible choice for most folks and I look forward to being able to process my X-T4's shots with it. :)
Hi@@Andyhutchinson I'm a new fuji-er with my XT5. May I know your workflow for that? I read some information told that some people use DXO pure raw -> Light room to handle Fuji raw but I'm still not clear detail for that
As a Fuji user who just went for a PL7 package for its handling of RAF files, I hope that DeepPrimeXD2 is ported over sooner than later. They would gain more Fuji users for PL7 Ultra immediately.
Credit is due to DXO for adding the new XD2s denoising feature to PureRaw 4, as of the current version 4.6. I am writing in November 2024. I own a copy of PureRaw 4, and had expected the new XD2s to become available with a future PureRaw 5 release. Curiously, there is no "check for software updates" option in PureRaw 4, so in order to check you are using the latest version you need to log into your DXO account and download the latest version from there.
I use Capture One and my main frustration with PR3 is that it’s not integrated with C1. I have to either run every file through PR3 on import (it will export directly into C1) regardless of whether the image needed that level of pre-processing or, instead, import directly into C1 work on the files and when I come across one that I like but needs more work, export the unedited raw file to a folder, run it through PR3, which then automatically sends it to C1. This is a nightmare workflow. Could PR4 improve on that?
There's a few options demonstrated by DxO in this support video - th-cam.com/video/P-knqqSWYzI/w-d-xo.html Personally speaking I import into LR Classic, rate and then select my preferred shots and then output only my picks to PureRAW.
Excellent review. As a happy amateur I still use dpp4 for my canon raw files. I would like to hear your opnion whether these modern denoising tools are on a completely next level, or if dpp4 does a decent job.
Thank-you. I've never used DPP4 so couldn't comment as to its denoising capabilties, but I would say that, yes, these AI tools are on an entirely different level. If you're comparing standard old-school denoising tools with something like PureRAW 4, it would be akin to going from a Toyota Yaris to a Lamborghini Aventador.
Thanks for this quality review, Andy. Is it possible to pre-process in PureRaw 4, then to send the image to Apple Photos as TIFF or DNG please? I would like to use PureRaw 4 first, then use Apple Photos as a catalogue and also for basic edits. I use Photomator for more advance edits such as for landscape within Apple Photos. Alternatively, I'd be happy to use PureRaw 4 from within Apple Photos, but I'm not sure whether this is possible. I know should be able to find this out myself, but I stupidly had a recent trial of PureRaw 4 but then got distracted by trials of Photomator, Capture One and Affinity (simultaneously!) and failed to test PurRaw 4 properly. Muppet...
Yes, you can pre-process in PR4 and open the DNGs in Apple Photos - I just tested it. Great way of getting the camera and lens corrections, colour profile and denoising done and then finish it simply in the Photos edit module.
my big issue with Photomator is that it does not do any lens correction, and since the Apple Raw engine does not support ANY newer Canon RF lenses, it is a big problem. Photomator has been adding more raw formats beyond those supported by Apple, but nothing about lenses that Apple do not support and there are many. Modern lenses especially wide angle lenses required correction by design, and because of that Photomator is not a usable RAW editor for canon RF glass. I contemplate addressing that by using DXO PR4 to pre-process the RAW and then edit in Photomator, at the cost of those large DNG files.
Yea, it's a work in progress that's for sure. Lightroom has a 20 year headstart and the Photomator devs are slowly iterating new features on a regular basis, so I reckon they'll get there at some point. :)
Great review, but I wish I had seen more shots of faces, closer up. As a sports photographer, I'm always looking for good faces in low light but most reviews of noise reduction apps are focused on animals and landscapes. PureRAW3, for me, fell short for faces as it tended to make them look angular.
Thanks Jack. Unfortunately the only faces I do are mountain faces! Best bet would be to download the trial and test it on your shots. If you do I'd like to hear how you get on and whether it is badly affecting faces.
@@Andyhutchinson Thanks. I just tried it on some images from a low light, high ISO game I shot recently. Yes, the faces are better than with Raw 3, and I would say it's marginally better than Lightroom's denoise. I also found it processed images faster than either Raw 3 or Lightroom Denoise. As you noted, Topaz Photo AI was the slowest and resulted in the AI doing things I don't like. I find that software has to be handheld on every image, and not left to its own devices.
Good video, but as a recent purchaser of PR3 I'm dismayed by the "no upgrades" policy by DxO. I bought PR3 two months ago, and now they want another $80 to upgrade to PR4. I'm movin' on (ON1 is looking pretty good!).
I'd be contacting them - seems like a pretty recent purchase and I reckon if you ask they might do the right thing. I wouldn't be moving on to On1 though - NoNoise is vastly inferior even to the original PureRAW. :)
Thanks Andy. Actually, I did contact them, which is when I was informed of the total lack of upgrade allowance. Also, in my use of ON1 I've found it to be quite effective in noise reduction, quite competitive with others I've tried (including DXO PR3). Obviously it's just my opinion, but in this instance, that's all that matters. Best@@Andyhutchinson
I enjoy your videos and vlogs very much, Andy. I own DXO Nik, Filmpak, and PhotoLab 7 Elite. Do you know if PureRaw 4 algorithms will eventually be added to PL 7 Elite? Thanks!
I just wished I didn't tested it..... my mind says, the difference is small, not worth the extra money..... but editing photo's doesn't feel the same anymore without. The difference might seem small but the end result is so much more pleasing on your big screen.
The RAW demosaicing process is an often intangible one and the results vary enormously from app to app. If you like the way PureRAW looks, then why not stick with it? :)
There's something very wrong with your system my friend. I downloaded sample OM-1 RAWs from DPReview and ran them through PureRAW 4 on my M2 Macbook Pro. Took under 20 seconds per shot. I recorded one being processed here: share.cleanshot.com/v6jVZK7Q
![[Live] : ONE FIGHT NIGHT 28 วันนี้!! "พระจันทร์ฉาย vs เอลลิส"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LfImEQqfARc/mqdefault.jpg)
Always good to listen to a review from you. Thank you!
Cheers Scott - appreciate it. :)
Great review. I have found that DxO is consistently "top of the heap" in denoising. Plus, you get the lens corrections as well. I have the Topaz suite, and they are quite good, but still not up to DxO standards. Not sure I'll upgrade past version 4, but that's just because it's SO good. BTW, the Euro and Dollar costs are the same. =)
Thanks. I think they've improved it sufficiently to make the upgrade a sensible choice for most folks and I look forward to being able to process my X-T4's shots with it. :)
Hi@@Andyhutchinson
I'm a new fuji-er with my XT5. May I know your workflow for that? I read some information told that some people use DXO pure raw -> Light room to handle Fuji raw but I'm still not clear detail for that
As a Fuji user who just went for a PL7 package for its handling of RAF files, I hope that DeepPrimeXD2 is ported over sooner than later. They would gain more Fuji users for PL7 Ultra immediately.
No arguments here :)
Credit is due to DXO for adding the new XD2s denoising feature to PureRaw 4, as of the current version 4.6. I am writing in November 2024.
I own a copy of PureRaw 4, and had expected the new XD2s to become available with a future PureRaw 5 release.
Curiously, there is no "check for software updates" option in PureRaw 4, so in order to check you are using the latest version you need to log into your DXO account and download the latest version from there.
Think mine auto-updated. In any case, yea it's great to have it in there. :)
I use Capture One and my main frustration with PR3 is that it’s not integrated with C1. I have to either run every file through PR3 on import (it will export directly into C1) regardless of whether the image needed that level of pre-processing or, instead, import directly into C1 work on the files and when I come across one that I like but needs more work, export the unedited raw file to a folder, run it through PR3, which then automatically sends it to C1. This is a nightmare workflow. Could PR4 improve on that?
There's a few options demonstrated by DxO in this support video - th-cam.com/video/P-knqqSWYzI/w-d-xo.html
Personally speaking I import into LR Classic, rate and then select my preferred shots and then output only my picks to PureRAW.
Great review. Thanks.
Thank-you kindly :)
Excellent review. As a happy amateur I still use dpp4 for my canon raw files. I would like to hear your opnion whether these modern denoising tools are on a completely next level, or if dpp4 does a decent job.
Thank-you. I've never used DPP4 so couldn't comment as to its denoising capabilties, but I would say that, yes, these AI tools are on an entirely different level. If you're comparing standard old-school denoising tools with something like PureRAW 4, it would be akin to going from a Toyota Yaris to a Lamborghini Aventador.
Thanks for your reply. Perhaps I should test drive one or two of those Lambo's 😎
Thanks for this quality review, Andy.
Is it possible to pre-process in PureRaw 4, then to send the image to Apple Photos as TIFF or DNG please?
I would like to use PureRaw 4 first, then use Apple Photos as a catalogue and also for basic edits.
I use Photomator for more advance edits such as for landscape within Apple Photos.
Alternatively, I'd be happy to use PureRaw 4 from within Apple Photos, but I'm not sure whether this is possible.
I know should be able to find this out myself, but I stupidly had a recent trial of PureRaw 4 but then got distracted by trials of Photomator, Capture One and Affinity (simultaneously!) and failed to test PurRaw 4 properly. Muppet...
Yes, you can pre-process in PR4 and open the DNGs in Apple Photos - I just tested it. Great way of getting the camera and lens corrections, colour profile and denoising done and then finish it simply in the Photos edit module.
@@Andyhutchinson Brilliant, thanks for taking the trouble, Andy!
Very good presentation.
I appreciate it - thank-you :)
my big issue with Photomator is that it does not do any lens correction, and since the Apple Raw engine does not support ANY newer Canon RF lenses, it is a big problem. Photomator has been adding more raw formats beyond those supported by Apple, but nothing about lenses that Apple do not support and there are many. Modern lenses especially wide angle lenses required correction by design, and because of that Photomator is not a usable RAW editor for canon RF glass. I contemplate addressing that by using DXO PR4 to pre-process the RAW and then edit in Photomator, at the cost of those large DNG files.
Yea, it's a work in progress that's for sure. Lightroom has a 20 year headstart and the Photomator devs are slowly iterating new features on a regular basis, so I reckon they'll get there at some point. :)
Great review, but I wish I had seen more shots of faces, closer up. As a sports photographer, I'm always looking for good faces in low light but most reviews of noise reduction apps are focused on animals and landscapes. PureRAW3, for me, fell short for faces as it tended to make them look angular.
Thanks Jack. Unfortunately the only faces I do are mountain faces! Best bet would be to download the trial and test it on your shots. If you do I'd like to hear how you get on and whether it is badly affecting faces.
@@Andyhutchinson Thanks. I just tried it on some images from a low light, high ISO game I shot recently. Yes, the faces are better than with Raw 3, and I would say it's marginally better than Lightroom's denoise. I also found it processed images faster than either Raw 3 or Lightroom Denoise. As you noted, Topaz Photo AI was the slowest and resulted in the AI doing things I don't like. I find that software has to be handheld on every image, and not left to its own devices.
Good video, but as a recent purchaser of PR3 I'm dismayed by the "no upgrades" policy by DxO. I bought PR3 two months ago, and now they want another $80 to upgrade to PR4. I'm movin' on (ON1 is looking pretty good!).
I'd be contacting them - seems like a pretty recent purchase and I reckon if you ask they might do the right thing. I wouldn't be moving on to On1 though - NoNoise is vastly inferior even to the original PureRAW. :)
Thanks Andy. Actually, I did contact them, which is when I was informed of the total lack of upgrade allowance. Also, in my use of ON1 I've found it to be quite effective in noise reduction, quite competitive with others I've tried (including DXO PR3). Obviously it's just my opinion, but in this instance, that's all that matters. Best@@Andyhutchinson
@@NeilWNC 100% - the main thing is to find the software that works best for your circumstances - everything's relative :)
I enjoy your videos and vlogs very much, Andy. I own DXO Nik, Filmpak, and PhotoLab 7 Elite. Do you know if PureRaw 4 algorithms will eventually be added to PL 7 Elite? Thanks!
Sure seems logical to me. I do wonder if they're working on PL8 and perhaps release it with that?
I discovered the sliders stay in the last position used, therefore its manual adjustment no matter what you choose !
True - what settings have you found work best for you?
@@Andyhutchinson It depends on how bad the noise is, but using the same setting is useless when doing a batch of photos imo.
Thanks for saving me $79.00 (Shoot exclusively Fujifilm X-Trans cameras) PR3 is good enough for me right now so I'll wait until they update
Yep - it's a bit frustrating but I suspect it won't be too long until they upgrade and support X-Trans sensors.
Can it output 32bit unbound files?
Don't know - sorry. I've reached out to DxO though and hopefully they'll answer your question.
I just wished I didn't tested it..... my mind says, the difference is small, not worth the extra money..... but editing photo's doesn't feel the same anymore without. The difference might seem small but the end result is so much more pleasing on your big screen.
The RAW demosaicing process is an often intangible one and the results vary enormously from app to app. If you like the way PureRAW looks, then why not stick with it? :)
I've not found PR 4 to be fast at all. 7.5 minutes or more for OM-1 files.
There's something very wrong with your system my friend. I downloaded sample OM-1 RAWs from DPReview and ran them through PureRAW 4 on my M2 Macbook Pro. Took under 20 seconds per shot. I recorded one being processed here: share.cleanshot.com/v6jVZK7Q
1.5