I love PhotoLab & have been using it in various versions for years. I would not trust my "asset management" to any software; I prefer to create my own system of folders and subfolders and indices, so that my files and organization will remain secure and readily accessible no matter what happens to a given software program or company. I agree with all of the positive things you had to say about PhotoLab as a RAW converter, and I always use a variety of software programs on any given photo file to get to the best possible end result, which is my only concern. I hope that people will heed what you had to say rather than just following the crowd to Lightroom or using it because it comes with the Adobe Photography Plan. I couldn't do without Photoshop, but prefer PhotoLab for the RAW conversion & first level of editing in my photographic art practice. Best to you for your contributions, L Russ
It was interesting to read your comment. Suddenly my whole Lightroom library has disappeared and I can’t get it back so will follow your plan of keeping and creating my own system.
Totally agree! I've also been a Photolab user almost since its beginning, then it was called something else: I don't even remember what the software was called back then😊
PhotoLab is pretty much only a digital dark room with rudimentary file management from my point of view. I've been using exclusively it for a few years/versions now. It's lens corrections are great when there is a corresponding lens in the database but can be a pain if it's not. Don't miss Adobe at all... Good review mate 👌
From a purist standpoint accurate raw mage processing is the pivoting point and it seems PL does accomplish the job excellently. I don’t care that much about a nifty asset management, basic does the job for me. I’d like to give up LR because I’m fed up with the subscription model and therefore I think I’ll give PL a spin. Thanks for your analysis. 👍🏼
Many thanks for the great review - like all of your videos it’s not only very informative, but also very entertaining😁! I used a trial version of Photolab 5 for a month and quite liked it overall. The noise reduction was a major highlight, most other things also worked well and intuitively. Nevertheless, there was one basic problem with it that made it unusable for me: as soon as I raised the shadows, which I do for most of my images, faces acquired a very odd and off-putting orange tint; it also affected other elements of the image, but was most annoying on faces. I spent a lot of time trying to find presets that would prevent or minimise it, but couldn’t come up with anything satisfactory. I had no such issue in Lightroom or Capture One Express. Looking at the DxO Photolab Forum, this has been a known issue since the early versions of the software with no straightforward solution until now. I wonder if things may have changed in Photolab 6 - any experience in this respect?
Love your international breakdown. I have the X-H2 and DxO PureRaw does a magnificent job on the files. The only other proggy that recognizes the latest Fuji cameras and lenses is CaptureOne.
Management is not a concern for me, but I am old enough to truly dislike subscription software. That was the main reason that when my subscription finally neared the end I went looking for something else and found a recommendation for PhotoLab over Lightroom Classic. I have never looked back.
Just installed DxO PureRAW 3 to use as plug-in with Lightroom. Processed a couple of Fuji X-H2s raw files shot is fairly low light, ISO 5,000 - 12,800. WOW sums it up! Details are much crisper, noticed with beard hairs being much more distinct. Entire photo went from a noisy overall appearance to smooth.
@@Andyhutchinson I did some further testing. On these photos in low light, it does a better job than the camera’s jpg, Phase One or Adobe’s Camera Raw. Can’t claim it’s always better. Need to check some photos taken with much better light. BTW, running a Mac Studio.
Nice video summary - covers the waterfront quickly. No, asset management is not a priority or any concern at all - I prefer a simple folder-based system that allows me to group photos as I like, so I do that with the OS file manager - yep, I really do. And, I do not use Lightroom at all. Instead, I use a couple of other editing programs with satisfaction. Thanks for your take on it. JT
Hey Andy, a very thorough review. I own both PhotoLab 6 and Lightroom and I stick with Lightroom plus Topaz Denoise for my high ISO sports photography. Although DxO does a very good job with its noise reduction, the fact that I can't see the results until I export the final image is a deal breaker for me. I want to know if the image is good to go before I export a couple hundred images from a game into a gallery. Also, at very high ISOs (16,000), PhotoLab 6 produces some odd-looking artifacts in its noise reduction. I actually had to take my export jpegs from PhotoLab 6 back into Lightroom to smooth out some of those artifacts. The other issue I have with PhotoLab is the masking - Lightroom's is so much better and easier to use.
Thanks. Yea I can see how the noise reduction would be an issue for you. I only ever output single files at a time, so not a drama for me. Funnily enough I've had the weird artifact issue in Topaz and never in Photolab. In Topaz I get these weird blocks of dark colour, sometimes on a grid pattern and it seems to happen in particular if I zoom in on the preview further than the default. In Lightroom I get weird wormy artifacts due to LR not handling the X-trans sensor in my X-T4 very well. Only clean results I get without fail are photolab but the highest I've shot is 12,800.
I am a Adobe guy have been since the dark ages of image editing 😂. DxO is pretty good in dome areas but I agree the masking in LR is far superior and I just love the seemless integration with Photoshop. Also with LR you are getting a mobile and Webversion as well syncing you images. But if a software dies something better than LR I gladly add it to my workflow, the result is all that counts.
I have the opposite critique of lightroom. I detest having to 'import' the pics into LR, bloating my hard drives and making me do things the way adobe wants. I prefer the simplicity of either Bridge or PL. I have the same critique of Capture one, which I used to prefer as a raw editor, but now am leaning to PL6
Nothing beats LR for smart previews, but it's Adobe*. Not much beats PL for noise reduction and their optical correction library - it even updates older version of PL with new lenses when you need to. It's brilliant for getting the most out of a RAW file. After using PL for a year or so it drove me nuts not being able to tweak the UI to my liking - there's no way to resize the Preset Editor, even when it's floating. If you have loads of presets you're endlessly scrolling up and down that little window. In the end I settled on Exposure X7 for speed, syncing settings across computers, being able to customise exports and keep them as presets, and it's flat file structure way of working. Point it at any location and you can edit what's there. No faffing about importing into LR. * Adobe can get stuffed for locking up any of my files behind a subscription.
Haha - yea the old Adobe subscription has sent many people off in search of alternatives. I genuinely love Photolab and it's always my first choice for important edits. :)
Appreciate your thoughtful evaluation. As much as I'd like to abandon LR, DXO's masking is so last decade. Maybe they'll rectify this in the next few releases. Thanks for your efforts.
Thanks Barry - yea it's definitely its weak spot. The way things are going they'll be the only RAW editor on the market without some kind of AI based masking tool if they're not careful.
Helpful review. Do you think Lightroom plus DXO Pure Raw 2 might be a better combination than Photolab?. So you get the raw processing and denoising in Pure Raw and then do everything else in Lightroom. I think Pure Raw is about half the price of Photolab.
I would like to leave the evil Adobe empire but 1) I really like the Lightroom iPhone app, 2) I use indesign which doesn’t really have an adequate replacement so it’s convenient since I have to pay the Adobe piper anyway. But I do resent the subscription model
Excellent video with some clear analysis. I agree with much of what you said. I bought a copy of DxO PhotoLAB several releases back and maintained the licence up to and including 5 but have now canned it. The editing was fine and gave some good results, but I want a solution with a comprehensive photo-management system as well as a very good RAW editor. I used Lightroom for 5 years and made extensive use of the Collections and Keywording to manage my ever growing library. However, 2 years ago I stopped using Lightroom and switched to Capture One. I found this to be a better RAW editor with flexible masking and layers and, most importantly, a comprehensive Cataloguing system with Collections and multi-layered keywords every bit as good at the Lightroom system. I still have one up to date DxO product - PureRAW - their de-noising solution which, of course, is essentially the Deep-Prime module from PhotoLab which I think is still better than the Topaz Photo AI solution.
Thanks Brian. I'm not a fan of Capture One, but we all work in so many different ways and have different expectations of our software that it's important to find the solutions that work best for you. :)
I really wish DXO tried to rival LR on the DAM side of things. It's absolutely baffling how these sorts of comparisons only take the editing into account when the DAM is just as important in such a program to many, if not more given you're going to find a good editor a lot easier than a good DAM. If it wasn't for Adobe's business model I'd be happy to go for Lightroom, but I'd rather not. So if DXO could make PL a good DAM that'd be incredible and possibly bring in a lot more customers. If only Apple had never killed Aperture... What a fantastic DAM it has been. Hell I'd probably still have a Mac at least as secondary computer if they hadn't given up on it.
Karin, I no doubt left out some things in my last message about my storage system, but I had to add one caution: If you nest too many subfolders within subfolders, or if you make your photo file names too long, you may wind up with a "path" to that file -- you know, like COMPUTER/D Drive/PHOTOGRAPHS/2023-7-3, Bristol, Carousel Museum/2023-7-3, Bristol, Carousel Museum, blue and red horse and refreshment stand and people XDA3569_DxO," whatever -- that your operating system or other program will tell you, when you're doing a mass transfer/migration to another computer or hard drive, is too long to transfer, and it will suggest that you should, say, shorten the file name. But in the middle of migrating hundreds or thousands of files, it's just too disuptive to try to find that problem file and shorten its name sufficiently. For me, only a very small number of files wind up presenting that problem, but it has happened and it's a major pain at the least.
Hi Andy, An excellent review as usual 👍 As I have been using Luminar Neo with DxO PureRAW 3 and LRC for managing my library, does PhotoLab 6 offer anything that compliments Neo? I was considering Peakto as well but decided to keep using LRC, my workflow is as 1) on my Mac; 2) move to my external drives; 3) move to my main storage on my network for backup/archive (after 1 year.) Any thoughts/recommendations? Cheers.
To be honest if you get Photolab you could ditch Neo completely since it does the same job but is more refined. Or at least just hang to Neo for a couple of its specialist tools such as the powerline and dust removal. Photolab and Peakto is a great combo, but LRClassic and Photolab is too. Give the old trial version of Photolab a whirl and see if it fits in with your workflow. :)
I agree. Catalog based software is subject to file corruption. That happened to me with Capture One and the software won't even work anymore due to a 'corrupted catalog'.
could you please check if there is lens support for Canon TSE 17mm + TSE 24mm as well as Voigtlander 10mm, 12mm, 15mm in Sony E mount - Thank you so much !
I agree with you on the masking limitations in PL6 and that is a main reason for me keeping Lightroom. Asset management from Lightroom is not a reason for my use of the product.
Only problem is Lightroom's not the best at demosaicing Fuji RAW files, whereas Photolab's great at it, but Lightroom will remain at the heart of my workflow for a long time. :)
No subscription fee but pay for major upgrades methinks. If my memory serves me well my Adobe subscription was a better deal when I include Photoshop etc.
@Martin Harvey However, you have the option not to buy into that upgrade (which are at a reduced price) unless it includes features that you think are truly worth that extra money. For example, I am waiting for them to include panoramic stitching. Otherwise, 6 does all that I need, but I still accept the free updates.
I've started to use Photolab in combination with Lightroom. Photos imported, rated and GPS data added in LR. Then I do my baseline edits in LR but if it's a good shot or looks like it could benefit from an external editor then I round-trip it through Photolab. Images that I give a high personal rating I also round-trip through Photolab. :)
You can save around 70 USD if you buy it during the year end holiday sale. But wait till version 7 is out. Hopefully they will provide AI masking in the next major release.
I do not perceive dxo lab as a competitor to affinity photo. Affinity is more a competitor to Photoshop and DxoLab is more a competitor to Lightroom. I - in essence - think about using DxoLab and Affinity in combination to replace Lightroom/Photoshop (may be in combination with Adobe Bridge).
@@Andyhutchinson For me the asset management stuff is not that important. But you can easily substitute that with (free) Adobe Bridge. But you are right that there is a lot missing like for example stitching, instant preview, Slide shows, HDR, ... Agree. But I am just not willing to pay 100, 200 or 300 Dollar per year to retain access to my photos. It is not even about today. It is about the fact that if you opt out of the ecosystem, you will lose access to all past editing features. My wife is using Affinity publisher. She came from Adobe InDesign. In the mean time, she tells me it suits her better. You will adapt your workflow when substituting Adobe and the results are comparable.
Yep it's a great app combination. I would have no issues using Mylio (or Peakto) in combination with Photolab but for: 1) no stacking - that's a deal-breaker for me - I shoot pretty much everything bracketed and without stacking my library is much harder to mange. 2) no plugins - I use some amazing plugins for added functionality. Also I use the map function a lot and the one in Mylio is primitive looking and slow. Also, while you can view GPS metadata on the Mylio map it doesn't have the 'show visible on map' option which is incredibly useful for filtering by location, not just nested groups. :)
I have pro raw 3 and photolab 6, but is there a point of having pro raw3 since photolab has all the same features like deep prime and more right? I am just a little confused between these 3. I am blown away with pro raw but haven't really used photolab 6 since I always used lighroom mobile version on the desktop. Any advice?
What is LR. Haven't used LR since LR 4, when it was still on disk. Been using DxophotolabElite since version 2, in conjunction with Affinity Photo 1. Never looked back.
@@jfphotography69 Easy tiger. You do realise you're commenting on a video I made in which I praise DxO Photolab and suggest it's probably the best RAW editor on the market? Personally speaking, I just use the tools that work best. You admit that you haven't used LR since v4 which was, let me see - 10 fucking years ago. So you have absolutely no clue what LR is about, just some ancient knowledge of a version that got released about the same time the space shuttle was taking its last flight. Affinity Photo is an awful bit of software with a confusing interface, a deliberately obtuse tool-set that seems to have been chosen at random and a fan club who seem to like it mainly because it costs only marginally more than a Happy Meal. But you know, you do you.
@@jfphotography69 Well, if being mature means using software that was purposefully designed to be as confusing as possible, while retaining a primitive toolset, then I'll be a happy child. And I say that as someone who paid good money for Affinity Photo. Have to see if I can get a refund.
I don't believe Affinity photo is a competitor to Lightroom, etc Yes you can use it as a raw editor, but what it really is, is a competitor to photoshop. Its an image editor much more then a raw processor... Affinity photo is good at doing things like manual photo retouching, its not very good at raw processing... I have Affinity photo and Luminar Neo, On one photo raw, and capture one. I never use Affinity photo for raw files. Its great at skin retouching etc...
Thank you for the clear review, Andy. After I discovered DxO Photolab a couple of years ago my fear of low light and noise disappeared completely. And since Photolab 6 showed up it's not even the smallest issue for me at all whatsoever. And I guess I have a right to say as a user of the MFT-system, where the dark parts of scenes always have some bigger risk to produce noise. My slogan today is: "who's is afraid of noise anymore?" And moreover in my workflow I don't need to use it as my asset management system; I do that afterwards. And there is another reason not to build your workflow on Lr and that's the price. It's absolutely no use for me to have a contract for 10 or more euros a month to be "allowed to use" Lr. That's 120 bucks every year?? I wanna have it for a 100 or 120 bucks but no more. There for Lr is not sophisticated enough in my opinion.
Absolutely right about the noise recovery with Photolab - the best there is I think. If you don't need the asset management side of things life's a lot simpler! :)
I keep hearing people say that Adobe products are expensive. I subscribe to Lightroom CC, Camera Raw, Lightroom Classic, and Photoshop for $10 a month. This also includes regular updates for each product and telephone tech support, which other companies never have. These other companies run rackets with expensive initial purchase prices, expensive updates, and horseshit or non-existent tech support with 2 or 3-day response times. On top of that, I want to support an American corporation and not some slimy company from Ukraine or France. I am not saying that Adobe is perfect, but that is just my opinion, take it for what it is worth!
Calling another company "slimy" is low life on your part; slimy one might say. $10/ month sounds like a hook deal. What specific experience do you personally have with those other companies to blather on about them? Well bubba bob I know first hand that Affinity and DxO does none of the things that you insanely ranted about in your worthless opinion.
![[กูเพิ่งซื้อมึงปิดหนี] 20 นาที ผมรีวิวเกมที่แย่ที่สุดในโลก CONCORD](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XhC-3q3Ii7I/mqdefault.jpg)
![POLYCAT - ข้อความรูปยิ้ม [Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/lBhIgPGCgbI/mqdefault.jpg)
What a fine review. Pros and cons stated in a straightforward, concise manner, thank you for the careful analysis!
Thank-you kindly. I did a more recent review of Photolab 7 too. :)
I love PhotoLab & have been using it in various versions for years. I would not trust my "asset management" to any software; I prefer to create my own system of folders and subfolders and indices, so that my files and organization will remain secure and readily accessible no matter what happens to a given software program or company. I agree with all of the positive things you had to say about PhotoLab as a RAW converter, and I always use a variety of software programs on any given photo file to get to the best possible end result, which is my only concern. I hope that people will heed what you had to say rather than just following the crowd to Lightroom or using it because it comes with the Adobe Photography Plan. I couldn't do without Photoshop, but prefer PhotoLab for the RAW conversion & first level of editing in my photographic art practice. Best to you for your contributions, L Russ
Yep - time and again I find that DxO's demosaicing is the best of the premium RAW editors.
It was interesting to read your comment. Suddenly my whole Lightroom library has disappeared and I can’t get it back so will follow your plan of keeping and creating my own system.
Totally agree! I've also been a Photolab user almost since its beginning, then it was called something else: I don't even remember what the software was called back then😊
You helped me decide to purchase DXO - thank you very much!
No worries - it's a great bit of software :)
PhotoLab is pretty much only a digital dark room with rudimentary file management from my point of view. I've been using exclusively it for a few years/versions now. It's lens corrections are great when there is a corresponding lens in the database but can be a pain if it's not. Don't miss Adobe at all... Good review mate 👌
Thanks mate. :)
Good Review, able toshow the workflow great
Thank-you :)
Great in-depth review I also was very impressed by their technology to remove noise!
Cheers. It's industry leading at the present time I believe :)
From a purist standpoint accurate raw mage processing is the pivoting point and it seems PL does accomplish the job excellently. I don’t care that much about a nifty asset management, basic does the job for me. I’d like to give up LR because I’m fed up with the subscription model and therefore I think I’ll give PL a spin. Thanks for your analysis. 👍🏼
No worries. I genuinely think it's the best RAW editor on the market by some margin. :)
Many thanks for the great review - like all of your videos it’s not only very informative, but also very entertaining😁! I used a trial version of Photolab 5 for a month and quite liked it overall. The noise reduction was a major highlight, most other things also worked well and intuitively. Nevertheless, there was one basic problem with it that made it unusable for me: as soon as I raised the shadows, which I do for most of my images, faces acquired a very odd and off-putting orange tint; it also affected other elements of the image, but was most annoying on faces. I spent a lot of time trying to find presets that would prevent or minimise it, but couldn’t come up with anything satisfactory. I had no such issue in Lightroom or Capture One Express. Looking at the DxO Photolab Forum, this has been a known issue since the early versions of the software with no straightforward solution until now. I wonder if things may have changed in Photolab 6 - any experience in this respect?
Love your international breakdown. I have the X-H2 and DxO PureRaw does a magnificent job on the files. The only other proggy that recognizes the latest Fuji cameras and lenses is CaptureOne.
Cheers. Not a big Capture One fan - lol :)
Management is not a concern for me, but I am old enough to truly dislike subscription software. That was the main reason that when my subscription finally neared the end I went looking for something else and found a recommendation for PhotoLab over Lightroom Classic. I have never looked back.
Just installed DxO PureRAW 3 to use as plug-in with Lightroom. Processed a couple of Fuji X-H2s raw files shot is fairly low light, ISO 5,000 - 12,800. WOW sums it up! Details are much crisper, noticed with beard hairs being much more distinct. Entire photo went from a noisy overall appearance to smooth.
Thanks Richard, it's pretty cool isn't it. I really like the way it preserves the detail without making it look over-processed :)
@@Andyhutchinson I did some further testing. On these photos in low light, it does a better job than the camera’s jpg, Phase One or Adobe’s Camera Raw. Can’t claim it’s always better. Need to check some photos taken with much better light. BTW, running a Mac Studio.
Appreciate your excellent insight.
Admire your comportment and delivery .
tyvm!
Thanks Bruce :)
Thank you, good review.
Glad it was helpful!
Nice video summary - covers the waterfront quickly. No, asset management is not a priority or any concern at all - I prefer a simple folder-based system that allows me to group photos as I like, so I do that with the OS file manager - yep, I really do. And, I do not use Lightroom at all. Instead, I use a couple of other editing programs with satisfaction. Thanks for your take on it. JT
Thanks mate - yea a lot of folks are happy to let the OS manage the files and just have a basic file manager in the app. :)
Hey Andy, a very thorough review. I own both PhotoLab 6 and Lightroom and I stick with Lightroom plus Topaz Denoise for my high ISO sports photography. Although DxO does a very good job with its noise reduction, the fact that I can't see the results until I export the final image is a deal breaker for me. I want to know if the image is good to go before I export a couple hundred images from a game into a gallery. Also, at very high ISOs (16,000), PhotoLab 6 produces some odd-looking artifacts in its noise reduction. I actually had to take my export jpegs from PhotoLab 6 back into Lightroom to smooth out some of those artifacts. The other issue I have with PhotoLab is the masking - Lightroom's is so much better and easier to use.
Thanks. Yea I can see how the noise reduction would be an issue for you. I only ever output single files at a time, so not a drama for me. Funnily enough I've had the weird artifact issue in Topaz and never in Photolab. In Topaz I get these weird blocks of dark colour, sometimes on a grid pattern and it seems to happen in particular if I zoom in on the preview further than the default. In Lightroom I get weird wormy artifacts due to LR not handling the X-trans sensor in my X-T4 very well. Only clean results I get without fail are photolab but the highest I've shot is 12,800.
I am a Adobe guy have been since the dark ages of image editing 😂. DxO is pretty good in dome areas but I agree the masking in LR is far superior and I just love the seemless integration with Photoshop. Also with LR you are getting a mobile and Webversion as well syncing you images.
But if a software dies something better than LR I gladly add it to my workflow, the result is all that counts.
Yep same here - always open to new possibilities and would definitely ditch LR if something better came along. :)
I have the opposite critique of lightroom. I detest having to 'import' the pics into LR, bloating my hard drives and making me do things the way adobe wants. I prefer the simplicity of either Bridge or PL. I have the same critique of Capture one, which I used to prefer as a raw editor, but now am leaning to PL6
Yea, the problem for me is that I heavily rely on the metadata in the LR catalog. :)
Nothing beats LR for smart previews, but it's Adobe*. Not much beats PL for noise reduction and their optical correction library - it even updates older version of PL with new lenses when you need to. It's brilliant for getting the most out of a RAW file. After using PL for a year or so it drove me nuts not being able to tweak the UI to my liking - there's no way to resize the Preset Editor, even when it's floating. If you have loads of presets you're endlessly scrolling up and down that little window. In the end I settled on Exposure X7 for speed, syncing settings across computers, being able to customise exports and keep them as presets, and it's flat file structure way of working. Point it at any location and you can edit what's there. No faffing about importing into LR.
* Adobe can get stuffed for locking up any of my files behind a subscription.
Haha - yea the old Adobe subscription has sent many people off in search of alternatives. I genuinely love Photolab and it's always my first choice for important edits. :)
Appreciate your thoughtful evaluation. As much as I'd like to abandon LR, DXO's masking is so last decade. Maybe they'll rectify this in the next few releases. Thanks for your efforts.
Thanks Barry - yea it's definitely its weak spot. The way things are going they'll be the only RAW editor on the market without some kind of AI based masking tool if they're not careful.
That was a very helpful review, thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
Helpful review. Do you think Lightroom plus DXO Pure Raw 2 might be a better combination than Photolab?. So you get the raw processing and denoising in Pure Raw and then do everything else in Lightroom. I think Pure Raw is about half the price of Photolab.
Yea, that'd be a good combination for sure.
I would like to leave the evil Adobe empire but 1) I really like the Lightroom iPhone app, 2) I use indesign which doesn’t really have an adequate replacement so it’s convenient since I have to pay the Adobe piper anyway. But I do resent the subscription model
Yea, that app's pretty neat - surprisingly full-featured.
EXCELLENT REVIEW!
Thank you kindly!
Excellent video with some clear analysis. I agree with much of what you said. I bought a copy of DxO PhotoLAB several releases back and maintained the licence up to and including 5 but have now canned it. The editing was fine and gave some good results, but I want a solution with a comprehensive photo-management system as well as a very good RAW editor. I used Lightroom for 5 years and made extensive use of the Collections and Keywording to manage my ever growing library. However, 2 years ago I stopped using Lightroom and switched to Capture One. I found this to be a better RAW editor with flexible masking and layers and, most importantly, a comprehensive Cataloguing system with Collections and multi-layered keywords every bit as good at the Lightroom system. I still have one up to date DxO product - PureRAW - their de-noising solution which, of course, is essentially the Deep-Prime module from PhotoLab which I think is still better than the Topaz Photo AI solution.
Thanks Brian. I'm not a fan of Capture One, but we all work in so many different ways and have different expectations of our software that it's important to find the solutions that work best for you. :)
I now use DxO Deep Prime as my primary RAW file conversion tool. It is far superior to Lightroom. Now I am more interested in Photo Lab.
No arguments here. :)
I really wish DXO tried to rival LR on the DAM side of things. It's absolutely baffling how these sorts of comparisons only take the editing into account when the DAM is just as important in such a program to many, if not more given you're going to find a good editor a lot easier than a good DAM.
If it wasn't for Adobe's business model I'd be happy to go for Lightroom, but I'd rather not.
So if DXO could make PL a good DAM that'd be incredible and possibly bring in a lot more customers.
If only Apple had never killed Aperture... What a fantastic DAM it has been. Hell I'd probably still have a Mac at least as secondary computer if they hadn't given up on it.
Some good news - DxO DeepPRIME XD is now compatible with Fujifilm X Series cameras.
Yep - I saw that. I did a follow-up to this about PureRAW using Fuji RAW files to test :)
Ah, ok. Got it. Thank you
Karin, I no doubt left out some things in my last message about my storage system, but I had to add one caution: If you nest too many subfolders within subfolders, or if you make your photo file names too long, you may wind up with a "path" to that file -- you know, like COMPUTER/D Drive/PHOTOGRAPHS/2023-7-3, Bristol, Carousel Museum/2023-7-3, Bristol, Carousel Museum, blue and red horse and refreshment stand and people XDA3569_DxO," whatever -- that your operating system or other program will tell you, when you're doing a mass transfer/migration to another computer or hard drive, is too long to transfer, and it will suggest that you should, say, shorten the file name. But in the middle of migrating hundreds or thousands of files, it's just too disuptive to try to find that problem file and shorten its name sufficiently. For me, only a very small number of files wind up presenting that problem, but it has happened and it's a major pain at the least.
Hi Andy,
An excellent review as usual 👍
As I have been using Luminar Neo with DxO PureRAW 3 and LRC for managing my library, does PhotoLab 6 offer anything that compliments Neo?
I was considering Peakto as well but decided to keep using LRC, my workflow is as 1) on my Mac; 2) move to my external drives; 3) move to my main storage on my network for backup/archive (after 1 year.) Any thoughts/recommendations?
Cheers.
To be honest if you get Photolab you could ditch Neo completely since it does the same job but is more refined. Or at least just hang to Neo for a couple of its specialist tools such as the powerline and dust removal. Photolab and Peakto is a great combo, but LRClassic and Photolab is too. Give the old trial version of Photolab a whirl and see if it fits in with your workflow. :)
@@Andyhutchinson Thank you very much. I shall install a trial copy of PL6 and start learning it then 😇
I luv the File Management of DXO , Silkipix also, I don't like the Catalog BS of Capture One and other's.
Whatever works for you mate :)
I agree. Catalog based software is subject to file corruption. That happened to me with Capture One and the software won't even work anymore due to a 'corrupted catalog'.
Thanks for the review. Have you tried comparing Photolab sharpening to Topaz Sharpen?
Haven't done a direct comparison no, but it's a great idea and I'll definitely do so in a future video. :)
could you please check if there is lens support for Canon TSE 17mm + TSE 24mm as well as Voigtlander 10mm, 12mm, 15mm in Sony E mount - Thank you so much !
I agree with you on the masking limitations in PL6 and that is a main reason for me keeping Lightroom. Asset management from Lightroom is not a reason for my use of the product.
Yep. Feels like if they upgraded the masking they'd have a far more successful product.
Have you heard of Affinity Photo.
I have been trying to dump Capture One for the past four years but unable to find anything I like. DXO will probably do it one day.
Lightroom classic all day. Couldnt gel with DXO photolab or anything else. With the NIK collection lightroom combo is more than enough.
No need for ven photoshop with lightrooms fantastic masking abilities.
Only problem is Lightroom's not the best at demosaicing Fuji RAW files, whereas Photolab's great at it, but Lightroom will remain at the heart of my workflow for a long time. :)
No subscription fee but pay for major upgrades methinks. If my memory serves me well my Adobe subscription was a better deal when I include Photoshop etc.
Yep - I've pointed this out myself - Lightroom, Photoshop, Photoshop and LR mobile, Adobe Express - all included.
@Martin Harvey However, you have the option not to buy into that upgrade (which are at a reduced price) unless it includes features that you think are truly worth that extra money. For example, I am waiting for them to include panoramic stitching. Otherwise, 6 does all that I need, but I still accept the free updates.
So given your review which is still/now your goto?
I've started to use Photolab in combination with Lightroom. Photos imported, rated and GPS data added in LR. Then I do my baseline edits in LR but if it's a good shot or looks like it could benefit from an external editor then I round-trip it through Photolab. Images that I give a high personal rating I also round-trip through Photolab. :)
You can save around 70 USD if you buy it during the year end holiday sale. But wait till version 7 is out. Hopefully they will provide AI masking in the next major release.
I do not perceive dxo lab as a competitor to affinity photo. Affinity is more a competitor to Photoshop and DxoLab is more a competitor to Lightroom. I - in essence - think about using DxoLab and Affinity in combination to replace Lightroom/Photoshop (may be in combination with Adobe Bridge).
For sure, although I don't think DxO will be serious competitor to Lightroom until they ramp up the asset management side of things. :)
@@Andyhutchinson For me the asset management stuff is not that important. But you can easily substitute that with (free) Adobe Bridge. But you are right that there is a lot missing like for example stitching, instant preview, Slide shows, HDR, ... Agree.
But I am just not willing to pay 100, 200 or 300 Dollar per year to retain access to my photos. It is not even about today. It is about the fact that if you opt out of the ecosystem, you will lose access to all past editing features.
My wife is using Affinity publisher. She came from Adobe InDesign. In the mean time, she tells me it suits her better. You will adapt your workflow when substituting Adobe and the results are comparable.
In my opinion, mylio photo is a far better digital asset management software than Lightroom. It works perfectly together with DXO Lab.
Yep it's a great app combination. I would have no issues using Mylio (or Peakto) in combination with Photolab but for:
1) no stacking - that's a deal-breaker for me - I shoot pretty much everything bracketed and without stacking my library is much harder to mange.
2) no plugins - I use some amazing plugins for added functionality.
Also I use the map function a lot and the one in Mylio is primitive looking and slow. Also, while you can view GPS metadata on the Mylio map it doesn't have the 'show visible on map' option which is incredibly useful for filtering by location, not just nested groups. :)
Fuji X is now supported and is supported by XD
Thanks Martin - yes - I released a subsequent video about PureRAW made just for Fuji shooters for this reason :)
I have pro raw 3 and photolab 6, but is there a point of having pro raw3 since photolab has all the same features like deep prime and more right? I am just a little confused between these 3. I am blown away with pro raw but haven't really used photolab 6 since I always used lighroom mobile version on the desktop. Any advice?
If you use Lightroom then I'd say all you need is Pro Raw since PhotoLab duplicates lots of the functionality in LR :)
@@Andyhutchinson ok thanks, I really like lightrooms presets that's why and it's super simple
What is LR. Haven't used LR since LR 4, when it was still on disk.
Been using DxophotolabElite since version 2, in conjunction with Affinity Photo 1. Never looked back.
Well, it's come a looooong way since v4 that's for sure. Photolab's terrific, but you can keep Affinity Photo - lol :)
@@Andyhutchinson
Another Adobe snob. You can keep your Adobe subscription, Affinity and DXO do the job just fine.
@@jfphotography69 Easy tiger. You do realise you're commenting on a video I made in which I praise DxO Photolab and suggest it's probably the best RAW editor on the market? Personally speaking, I just use the tools that work best. You admit that you haven't used LR since v4 which was, let me see - 10 fucking years ago. So you have absolutely no clue what LR is about, just some ancient knowledge of a version that got released about the same time the space shuttle was taking its last flight. Affinity Photo is an awful bit of software with a confusing interface, a deliberately obtuse tool-set that seems to have been chosen at random and a fan club who seem to like it mainly because it costs only marginally more than a Happy Meal. But you know, you do you.
@@Andyhutchinson
Like I said, you can keep your Adobe subscription.
Your childish "lol" response was just that. Childish.
@@jfphotography69 Well, if being mature means using software that was purposefully designed to be as confusing as possible, while retaining a primitive toolset, then I'll be a happy child. And I say that as someone who paid good money for Affinity Photo. Have to see if I can get a refund.
75% of my shots are from fuji. Disappointed to hear it's not compatible
Since I released this video in February they have now added Fujifilm support for all of the noise and image enhancements including DeepPrimeXD. :)
I don't believe Affinity photo is a competitor to Lightroom, etc Yes you can use it as a raw editor, but what it really is, is a competitor to photoshop. Its an image editor much more then a raw processor... Affinity photo is good at doing things like manual photo retouching, its not very good at raw processing... I have Affinity photo and Luminar Neo, On one photo raw, and capture one. I never use Affinity photo for raw files. Its great at skin retouching etc...
Yep, all good points. :)
Thank you for the clear review, Andy. After I discovered DxO Photolab a couple of years ago my fear of low light and noise disappeared completely. And since Photolab 6 showed up it's not even the smallest issue for me at all whatsoever. And I guess I have a right to say as a user of the MFT-system, where the dark parts of scenes always have some bigger risk to produce noise. My slogan today is: "who's is afraid of noise anymore?" And moreover in my workflow I don't need to use it as my asset management system; I do that afterwards. And there is another reason not to build your workflow on Lr and that's the price. It's absolutely no use for me to have a contract for 10 or more euros a month to be "allowed to use" Lr. That's 120 bucks every year?? I wanna have it for a 100 or 120 bucks but no more. There for Lr is not sophisticated enough in my opinion.
Absolutely right about the noise recovery with Photolab - the best there is I think. If you don't need the asset management side of things life's a lot simpler! :)
I keep hearing people say that Adobe products are expensive. I subscribe to Lightroom CC, Camera Raw, Lightroom Classic, and Photoshop for $10 a month. This also includes regular updates for each product and telephone tech support, which other companies never have. These other companies run rackets with expensive initial purchase prices, expensive updates, and horseshit or non-existent tech support with 2 or 3-day response times. On top of that, I want to support an American corporation and not some slimy company from Ukraine or France. I am not saying that Adobe is perfect, but that is just my opinion, take it for what it is worth!
It's a great deal. No arguments from me.
Calling another company "slimy" is low life on your part; slimy one might say. $10/ month sounds like a hook deal. What specific experience do you personally have with those other companies to blather on about them? Well bubba bob I know first hand that Affinity and DxO does none of the things that you insanely ranted about in your worthless opinion.
You must like that Adobe tech support from an American company that comes from somewhere in India, or is it Pakistan?