DxO Photolab 8 - InDepth Review - One RAW Editor to Rule Them All?

[@InfluHamster]

I ditched Adobe a little while ago after using it for about 20 years. For a short while I filled the gap with (free) Darktable. But I'm so happy DxO PhotoLab 8 crossed my path. I'm so happy with the purchase, the processing (and output) of raw pictures is amazing!!

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea I only discovered it with version 5 - wish I'd known about it sooner. :)

[@joseph-boza]

Another excellent review - thank you! I've been only working in PhotoLab 7 for the past several months and as I've learned the nuances and capabilities of the suite I've come to really, really appreciate the approach. PhotoLab 8 seems evolutionary in nature, building on DxO's philosophy and approach and likely offers more value than initially may seem to be case. At least that's my hope, we'll see how I feel after I upgrade. ;)

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thanks Joseph. It definitely clicks with some folks and not with others. :)

[@Joh146]

The typical user wants the best image quality and Photolab 8 delivers. It´s a logical step for Photolab 7 users, too. The best denoising, new algorythm for sharpening, now luminance masks and a very helpful loupe. Yes, there a 109 EUR for me, but to buy new lenses with more quality ist much more expensive. Sure, if somenone looks for exchange the sky ore a bunch of ai tools this ist not his software. He should look for Luminar or Lightroom with monthly costs and have to live wiht the fact that Adobe seems to believe to have right on your photos.

[@jogey5890]

Very intelligent reviews, so nice to get educated by someone who actually knows his stuff.

[@Andyhutchinson]

I appreciate it - thank-you :)

[@michaelwplant]

I always love your Ironic approach to discussing photography software, I also love the Luma curve for what it does. good video Andy.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Cheers Michael - you guys reading all these comments about AI masks 😁

[@Seymourphotos]

Ive used DxO Raw Software for years, I have now upgraded from Photolab 6 to PL8 and up to now all is good, Great review by the way.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Cheers mate. 6 to 8 is a decent upgrade. :)

[@hywel3143]

Thanks for another balanced and in depth review, Andy. My main issue with Photolab 8 is that you still have to purchase the Nik collection in order to access DXO's HDR Efex module separately. I've been using PureRaw 4 for three months or so and as you say it is excellent. Again, though, we see a fragmentation of DXO products presumably to hike profit margins in that my copy of DXO Optics Pro for Apple Photos has both Smart Lighting, lens corrections, Prime Denoise and Clearview (not Clearview Plus) all for £9.99 (!) , whereas PureRaw 4 just has Smart Lighting. It's a similar story with the Essential vs Elite versions of Photolab 8, with Smart Lighting in the Essential edition but not Clearview Plus...

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea that's a fair comment. It would be nice to integrate some stack functionality within the main app as in Lightroom. I think they definitely need to work on their messaging and line-up and be a bit clearer about precisely what you get in each app/suite.

[@MedusaJellyFish300]

What I recommend you do is buy all your upgrades on Black Friday. That is what I do every year to save some dinero. Have a great day

[@hywel3143]

@@MedusaJellyFish300 Good advice!

[@sounderdavis5446]

...as well as FilmPack (for Luminosity Masking) and ViewPoint (for Perspective Correction). DxO PhotoLab 8 becomes a very pricey and questionable-value option compared to the competition, including subscription-only Adobe. I'm paying for both DxO and Adobe, but for me, DxO is a little hard to justify long-term in terms of value.

[@TheDesertsweeper]

Or of course you could pay Adobe's forever subscription fee...

[@EricGross]

Excellent review. Very much appreciated.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Cheers Eric :)

[@WillNewcomb]

I always smile hearing your accent! Since I'm a relative beginner Lightroom Mobile user on my phone so I won't bother changing.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thanks mate. :)

[@joeytranchina8839]

I appreciate this introduction to DxO Photolab 8. I've been frustrated with Adobe for the common reasons but only just began to search for an alternative... As an American who lives in France, I'd like to say Thank You & "Go Cats."

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thanks Joey and welcome. :)

[@EricGross]

I've been using DXO for nearly five years and I find that it still falls far short of LR. The ability to select subjects, using AI in LR is an exceptionally powerful feature that is nonexistent in PL8. Factor in the ability to intersect masks and to add and subtract from them, then LR just destroys PL8 and local adjustments are far more important than global ones, at least in my experience.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea it's a pain - no argument from me. I think if they added the add, subtract and intersect functionality then it would at least be a workaround because you could create a subject mask using the autobrush and then use either luma or hue masks to finesse it.

[@bernardlanguillier7970]

On the other hand U-Point removes to a large extend the need to have exact subject selection

[@dingbat19]

@@bernardlanguillier7970 not at all - when a subject has varied hue, saturation, tonality, u-points don't do a great job whereas typically LR/ACR can still accurately select the subject

[@EricGross]

@@bernardlanguillier7970 I disagree. U point is configured around light and not object.

[@FierceSleepingDog]

Don't agree. It does what I need it to do.

[@julianpaxton5750]

Thanks, nice video. I use DXO pure raw for the lens correction and noise reduction, then edit in lightroom/photoshop. There are so many choices 😊

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thanks Julian - yes - a mixed approach is the way to go if you can afford it! :)

[@ernreeders5583]

What a clear and articulate presentation. Love the Rainbow Lorikeet. I've used PL7 & 8 on Z8 files at ISO 50,000 and the denoise and sharpen functions work really well.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thank-you kindly. It's crazy how super-high ISO images are now useable.

[@travellingjoey]

Thank you for another nice review 👍👍👍

[@Andyhutchinson]

No worries :)

[@ericprouzet3851]

I have PL7 and it's true that the denoise tool is by far the best on the market. I do like their local masks as well and the fine control you can achieve. I usually proceed my RAW with PL, followed by Topaz Photo AI (mostly for the outstanding sharpen tool) and finish with Luminar Neo for colour adjustment. It's a long editing process, but I can afford it because I'm not a professional photographer, which is required to assess the benefit over time. I'll give a try to the free trial of PL8 to see if what it delivers is worth the upgrade price. Thanks for your fair review.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Sounds like a great workflow you've refined for yourself. Do you really rate the Photo AI sharpen algorithm? I still use regular Topaz Sharpen because I find the Photo AI version lacking. :)

[@nyobunknown6983]

@@Andyhutchinson I find Photo AI sharpen gives the same results as the old Topaz Sharpen AI app.

[@hanahoeo7073]

Thanks Andy, just got chance to watch. Currently using V7 since its release. May wait on this one, maybe. As always great video, thanks

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thank-you kindly :)

[@weddingbells100]

Thank you Andy for an exact and Informative review. I use DxO Photo Lab 7, but I'm considering upgrading to DxO Photo Lab 8 for the Hue Mask and Deniosing capabilities. Thank's again.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thank-you kindly :)

[@youblumax]

Tanks a lot Andy for this really detailed demo & explanation. As I see you are working with Apple: which processor & how much RAM (48 or even 64?) do you use or rather suggest? I’m going to upgrade to a Mac Mini M4 Pro most probably…

[@Andyhutchinson]

When it comes to Apple hardware just buy the most maxed out one you can afford. I upgrade every five or six years on average because the gear is so good and always go for the top-spec to give it proper longevity.

[@UpgradeLemonade]

I think DXO simply needs a simple AI selection tool so selecting certain objects or people can be a touch quicker/more accurate. No more AI than that

[@Andyhutchinson]

Something like the one in Capture One?

[@UpgradeLemonade]

@@Andyhutchinson ya pretty much lol just odd they have so many masking tools but avoid this again

[@sounderdavis5446]

Not just people, but main subject, sky, background, brush-selected element... As is so very easy to do in Adobe, Luminar Neo, and ON1 Photo RAW... omg... c'mon DxO.

[@krimke881]

Well, that and heal functions, probably need some AI. But everything else just needs a but more of the same work they already do. :)

[@anthonyverolme]

Thanks for the review Andy, great alternative to Photoshop/Camera raw/Lightroom I believe, greetings from The Netherlands!

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thanks Anthony - it is indeed a great alternative. :)

[@neutrinostorm]

Thank you for this review! As an “old” DxO user with licenses for PureRaw 3 and 4 and since PhotoLab6 was released, the update from 7 to 8 is a given for me. Nice upgrade feature: All presets created in the older version 7 are automatically imported into version 8. But as with any new software, there's a small bug: after optimizing a RAW photo and trying to save it as a JPG, a random error occurs, indicated by a red exclamation mark in the bottom right corner of the thumbnail. Shutting down PhotoLab also causes a crash. However, after restarting the software, JPG export works.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Is that the Windows version? Had no issues at all on Mac.

[@neutrinostorm]

@@Andyhutchinson Sorry, Yes, it ist the Windows version, running on Win10 and Intel 13900K + 3080Ti.

[@neutrinostorm]

And it ist NOT the Intel bug. I am monitoring the hardware-errors, that can occure.

[@tomdearie5165]

Thanks, Andy. Lucid and efficient. I’m a wildlife photographer who generates thousands of frames per expedition and use Photolab for NR and lens profile sharpening before jumping to Lightroom. I’d drop Lightroom entirely for Photolab - meaning buying every version - if they added intelligent object detection tools along with boolean functions. I don’t mind spending time on fine tuning my best images but, at present, Photolab simply doesn’t complete the picture. I wish it did - I’m seriously considering dropping Adobe entirely after 40 years.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea, I hear you Tom. Add, subtract, intersect would make the other filters far more powerful.

[@grahamf695]

Really useful review, thanks. Just a small point. Photolab 8 is a new version, not a point release. Admittedly, the change in function is not huge. A point release would be minor changes in 8.1, 8,2...

[@Andyhutchinson]

Fair enough :)

[@alexyphotoman9716]

Very nice review - thank you. I now have to decide whether to upgrade from PL7 now, or wait until Black Friday for a possible further discount!

[@Andyhutchinson]

I think quite a few folks are hanging on for the discount.

[@jeffolson4731]

Thank you for good review. I really like DxO Photolab but I don't see me upgrading. I am at 7 now, and 109 USD to upgrade is absurd.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea I'm not sure I'd pay to go from 7 to 8 either, particularly since the new XD2S denoise doesn't yet support my X-T4 RAW files.

[@gregmcray]

Great review, Andy. I use both LR and PL, but always seem to come back to PL even though LR has better masking technology. I always enjoyed driving a stick shift car, so maybe that explains it :) .

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thanks Greg - same here. :)

[@fernanddurler4709]

COLOUR IN PHOTOS LOOK ARTIFICIAL

[@reginaldwalton]

Nice looking program. I did download the free trial and maybe I'll buy it as something to own and maybe look to in the future. Very happy with LRC and Capture One, but will be letting the C1 subscription expire as it is a bit costly. Love the $10 a month for both LRC and Photoshop. I wish DXO had something like C1 where you could mimic the LRC workspace, but I suppose just using it more often, it will become more familiar. Good to have competition out there. I know everyone loves to hate on Adobe, but they are number 1 for a reason.

[@Andyhutchinson]

You do get used to the DxO interface pretty quickly and it is much more configurable than LR's. Like you, I'm hanging onto my Adobe photography plan for the time-being.

[@ericprouzet3851]

Addendum: I started with the free trial of PL8. Something you forgot to highlight is the incredible change in the speed of displaying the catalogue. This is day and night, compared with previous versions.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea fair enough. I was going to do a bit on that and managed to forget in all the excitement of testing high ISO photos :)

[@edbaak5786]

Thanks for your review Andy. Love your unbiased reviews. I tried PL8 myself, hoping I could ditch CaptureOne but I have found PL8 to be unbelievably buggy and their implementation of masking is just clumsy. I don't mind that they haven't jumped onto the AI band wagon as much as other brands but they're even doing a shit job in implementing non AI mask tools. What I mean in particular is the ability to check with a colour or grey overlay what exactly I have selected in the mask. In PL8 I found it difficult and unintuitive to switch between various mask display modes and it's missing hotkeys to quickly switch between these display modes. Sure enough the noise canceling and colour technology are great, no question about that, and what I find super high value is that you can do noise suppression without the need for an intermediate TIFF or DNG file, but the non intuitive UX just puts me off. I'll stick another year with C1 and hope DxO have improved their UX next year.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Cheers. Yea, I think you echo the sentiments of a lot of DxO's potential customers.

[@sounderdavis5446]

I agree with almost all of your review; Andy. I'm on the fence between upgrading from PL6 to PL8, or switching to DxO PureRaw (and will trial PL8 in November to decide), because I only do DxO's best-in-class noise reduction and (you just touched on this one) optical adjustments, and I do these from Lightroom Classic. Where the lack of masking in DxO really hurts, for example: your favorite PL8 upgrade feature, Lens Softness. With a landscape image, do we really want to sharpen globally, including sky and water? What LrC, Luminar Neo, and ON1 Photo RAW (all of these make heavy use of AI analysis, and are pretty darned good at it now) can do in seconds, isolate and sharpen a subject or other very limited elements we want the .eye to be drawn to, DxO PL8 can't do as fast or reliably as well.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea all fair comments mate. I'm actually going to make a video about the whole area of masking because I came to a realisation about AI masks in LR the other day. Pretty much every AI mask I make in LR I have to finesse using either luminosity, hue or autobrush. Because as good as the AI is, there aren't hard and fast rules when it comes to, for instance, the sky to land intersection. The sky tints and alters the brightness of the land in that edge region and if you just accept the sky mask you get a harder edge than would actually occur and it looks slightly unnatural - almost composited - I see it in people's post-processing all the time. And my thinking was, that if I'm having to finesse with luminosity, hue or brush - then why not just use them in the first place? I just don't think a computer has the ability (and I don't think it ever will) to make that judgement call about those edge regions because it's so subjective. I've been a hardcore user of those amazing LR AI masks since they first came out, but I wonder if we've placed too much faith in them. What do you reckon?

[@sounderdavis5446]

@@Andyhutchinson Absolutely valid point, Andy. While I don't try to blend masking adjustments with sharpening, usually, with tone and color, yes, (EDIT: oh though sometimes for gentle blurring), a smooth blend can be critical. And the point I missed for a long time in LrC that I'm sure you're onto already was that when we do a luminosity or color range mask for that, we don't want to just set the range slider but need to fiddle with the small handles below, while displaying the mask, to adjust the blend for a much smoother effect. So yes, if you do a video on masking in LrC, showing viewers how to blend the mask with tone and color towards the goal of directing the viewer eye is key. Luminar Neo and ON1 Photo RAW also have excellent and easy-to-use tools for not just making an initial selection of elements and adding to it or inverting or removing from it, but also for blending a mask.

[@josephbardwell8838]

Very good review. I downloaded the trial.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thank-you. :)

[@brianrowland9993]

Great review and no doubt the upgrade has a number of strengths.with noise reduction and general image editing. I found my edited images were superior to Lightroom with better noise reduction and colour management. But the Print Module in V8 remains basic and in my opinion not the same standard as the rest of the product. The lack of a decent Print Preview window is a major drawback compared with Lightroom and Photoshop. Lack of flexibility with text editing and borders is also underwhelming. I needed up exporting images to Lightroom to Print.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thanks Brian. I never used the Print module in either LR or Photolab because I always get them professionally printed, but that's interesting information to have.

[@MarkFinney]

I was surprised that v8.0 doesn't include the oval selection tools introduced in the most recent version of Nik. Hopefully that will come with a future 8.x release.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea agreed Mark.

[@Jim-BobWalton]

Great review! I just tried Photomator and found glaring holes - such as no lens correction on the iPad version. I have a Mac too, but would like to be able to do some editing away from home. Affinity Photo seems to be missing a lot of basic adjustments in their raw editing. Also, DNGs show up blank. Just a black screen. My best finals have come from Darktable, but that’s complex, and slow - even on an M2 with 16GB RAM (with NO Metal GPU acceleration). AI masking for complex, multi hue subjects are the main area that I’d like. AI generative, in my opinion, is just 🍌🍌🍌

[@lesboucher542]

The price alone, here in Australia, scared the hell out of me. As a pensioner I'm afraid that DXO have followed in the steps of Adobe and the Dodo bird...

[@Andyhutchinson]

Definitely not an impulse purchase. :)

[@Thetyrerepairer]

Us pensioners are getting forgotten.The ever increasing cost of camera gear and software is making it difficult to carry on.

[@Twobarpsi]

Great review!

[@Andyhutchinson]

Appreciate it.

[@graham-kirby]

Thanks for the review, I’m a newcomer to DXO and have not plumbed the depths of version 7.8 yet. I am struggling to see the justification of price they are charging for the upgrade based on the features in version 8, maybe I will have a lightbulb moment somewhere along the line.

[@Andyhutchinson]

I figure it's a bit like upgrading your phone. Sometimes you look at the new features and decide that there isn't a compelling enough reason to change.

[@ted_jerome]

As a since-beta LR user, I was all set to leave AdobeVille for this software, but then I checked the compatibility list. The two raw file types that I need are Sony RX100 VII and Apple HEIF , and neither are supported. Argh! Great review, though! 👌🏻

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea, I understand the frustration. There are some annoying gaps in their support, like the two you mention. To be honest the last one boggles my mind - if they supported iPhone RAW files they could untap a huge potential market.

[@ted_jerome]

⁠@@AndyhutchinsonAssuming they eventually add those two profiles, my remaining important question about this is: as someone with 120,000 photos from many cameras all processed and tagged via LRC, is there any way to import that processing metadata into this software? I suppose I could caused the data to be written to Adobe’s photo+data file format (I forget the name of it), which might them be imported? I just can’t lose 15 years of processing.

[@Andyhutchinson]

It's a question I've wrestled with myself and there's no answer that satisfied my main requirement - namely that the photos need to be moved with non-destructive settings. There's fairly good inter-operability when it comes to rating/keyword metadata, but the actual develop settings are unfortunately unique to each app and the only way of keeping them and moving apps is to bake them into a TIFF.

[@ted_jerome]

@@AndyhutchinsonYikes. That implies that I can’t ever leave Adobe, as my development work is too valuable to abandon. I’m 71, so it’s not like I could just plan to re-do 15 years of work… My best hope, it seems then, is to wait for a software solution to come along. Hurry up, coders! Many thanks for your replies.

[@Andyhutchinson]

I've reached out to Cyme to get a review serial for their app - Avalanche. This does transfers between apps and includes the standard RAW adjustments.

[@subwaydav]

8 is stellar...it caught me off guard...I dumped Adobe ages ago...my main editor is Photolab folowed by Pixelmator Pro for minor projects but 8 is super!, I do celebrity shows and events here in new york city...I love Photolab hands down.

[@Andyhutchinson]

No arguments here. :)

[@stuartsilverman3797]

I enjoy your videos very much. Your manner is wonderful and I like your willingness to talk honestly about your ADD; not common for one to allow others to glimpse the real person inside. In the meantime, I am curious about your photo editor of choice. What is your go to editor. Ta ta

[@Andyhutchinson]

I use Lightroom for my regular shots and Photolab for my best images that I want to lavish a bit of attention on. :)

[@petercardow2083]

When talking to DxO support last week, I get the feeling that there wont be any support for Fuji X-Trans Sensors, they simply avoid answering my question on when to expect the X-Trans support :-(

[@krishnansrinivasan830]

Awesome & Thanks Sir :)

[@Andyhutchinson]

Cheers - glad you enjoyed it!

[@EdwardMartinsPhotography]

Since Photolab 6 came out I have used that pretty much for 98% of my editing. Affinity 2.0 takes up the other 2%. But I don't add Unicorns, rainbows, or leprechauns to my photos, nor do the clouds usually go behind the moon in my landscapes... I will upgrade to 8 the day after Thanksgiving in the States.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Haha - I'm not a unicorn or leprechaun fan either.

[@EdwardMartinsPhotography]

@@Andyhutchinson And excellent review, you made it very clear what was new and how everything worked and why it's an advantage. Thanks!

[@pics7161]

Excellent review, simple and accurate. Question, I have DxO PL7 Elite, but the Luminosity mask will only work if I have DxO Film Pack. Does PL8 include the Luminosity Mask feature without the need for Film Pack. Thank you.

[@Andyhutchinson]

I don't believe that's changed - it was certainly disabled in the review version I was sent which did not have filmpack.

[@pics7161]

@@Andyhutchinson Thank you for the quick reply.

[@ro4lol]

Andy you excel at this

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thank-you kindly :)

[@marcmurison]

PL8 noise removal finally -- finally! -- does proper and excellent NR on astrophotos. For me, that alone is worth the upgrade price. (Nobody else comes close on astro NR, btw. DxO is the only game in town.)

[@Andyhutchinson]

Just given me a great idea for a video, Marc - thank-you :)

[@drazencavar1012]

I wouldn't say a faraway background with crisp, tiny details is natural. That seems to remain the main deficiency of generally excellent lens softness correction-the inability to mask the feature to your image needs.

[@Andyhutchinson]

You can dial it back. But actually what I've done on a couple of shots is do two edits in Photolab and then mask it in Photoshop.

[@dingbat19]

Very nice - but you mentioned Fuji - is it not the case that the latest XD2 version of PRIME NR in PL8 will not work with Fuji RAF files?

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yes, that’s correct. They’ll add it in an update in a couple of months like they did with photolab 7 came out. Worked great on the Canon and DJI raws though.

[@bhovis]

A very thorough and helpful analysis - thanks, Andy. And, I love cilantro (oddball that I am), so does that imply Photo Lab is right for me? 😅

[@Andyhutchinson]

haha - yes mate - I'm a big cilantro fan too :)

[@oo0Spyder0oo]

The lifetime license, is that for all future versions or for the current one? Also at the current exchange rate it's $331 AUD for the elite version. Not so bad if this is perpetual for every release like Davinci etc

[@Andyhutchinson]

No - they use the same 'one-off' slight-of-hand trick that they *all* use these days. You can use the software forever, but you only get free updates for a year after purchase.

[@ianyorke2617]

A couple of questions. Is the Luma mask now included in PhotoLab as previously you needed to own FilmPack to enable this functionality? I also thought that the colour calibration function was introduced in V7?

[@Andyhutchinson]

No I think you still need the filmpack. The test version of the app we were sent did not have filmpack enabled (which is why I didn't reference it) and the luma masks were disabled. With the colour calibration - I didn't cover that feature in my v7 review so added it here for completeness :)

[@sounderdavis5446]

My understanding is Luminosity Masking requires FilmPack. But I believe Luma tone curve adjustments are a feature of PL8 (Elite 8anyway) regardless of whether you get FilmPack. Luma tone curve adjustments are not the same as Luminosity Masking. I may be wrong; DxO's feature set is a moving target, so try before you buy! lol

[@DalsPhotography]

Thank you very much for a great piece of info! I am just trying today the new version. I only miss that I can have a mask to hide some parts of my photos, ex: skies, subject.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yep - AI masking would be great.

[@DalsPhotography]

@@Andyhutchinson I am sad I couldn't install the new update, but I wrote to support and I am waiting to know from them. I guess they will fix this, as not everyone hast the latests firmware in their computeres :)

[@sounderdavis5446]

@@DalsPhotography They can't fix it if you're not meeting DxO's minimum hardware and operating system requirements for PL8, including video processor (the most common gotcha), CPU, and RAM. I know it's expensive, but photo processing is very demanding in terms of hardware and software all up-to-date within the past, say, three-to-five years.

[@snafuval]

Hi, great review , just 1 thing, I am sure you say that one of the images you try in denoise xd2s is a fuji file, i have downloaded the trial and it says fuji is not supported for xd2s, did you just do the fuji file on xd? thanks

[@Andyhutchinson]

Correct. Coming soon according to DxO. The same thing happened with they released the original XD2. From memory I think it was about a six month wait.

[@snafuval]

Thanks, it's not such a huge leap for fuji users from 7 to 8, I will keep checking out the trial and see.

[@sounderdavis5446]

DxO will get there. Fujufanz need to be patient, because their camera sensors, while really good, are different from other manufacturer sensors and need a photo app software rewrite for a relatively small market share. You'll notice Fuji compatibility with photo software updates usually lags a bit, if it arrives at all.

[@eddu4361]

I think you should mention to the viewers right upfront that there is no support for HEIC format in DXO Photolab, I installed the trial version of DXO 8 and figured this out in one minute. Checked it also at the DXO forum, and indeed no support for HEIC. And I don't understand this. Due to the enormous amount of iPhones out there and thus almost infinite number of HEIC format photo's shot every day I would expect support for this enormously widespread format. Big bummer. I was really interested in this app. 😞

[@Andyhutchinson]

Definitely some strange gaps in the camera support.

[@themullerfiles]

Great points, manual transmission indeed!

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yes indeed!

[@danev1969]

I understand the emotional desire to go to another product, we all assume that will help our photography (kinda like getting new golf clubs). And DxO may indeed be as good or better than the PS/LRC subscription at $10/month U.S.). DxO at $230 U.S. purchase would take about 2-years to break even, but neither Adobe or DxO will remain static. They both tend to introduce improvements and new features all the time. The upgrade price of DxO is listed at $100, or at least every two years (or less), so there is no cost savings. So, if we switch away from the ever improving Adobe products to an ever improving DxO product, it would be for the added features or improved results, not price. It is a bit like using one camera brand, getting numerous expensive lenses for that mount, and then considering another manufacturer, but not really thinking about now needing to get new lenses.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Ultimately it comes down to whether you 'click' with an app or not. As you point out, the pricing is effectively the same as an Adobe Photography subscription. That said I find that DxO's secret sauce in their demosaicing code is far and away the best for my Fuji RAWs.

[@rdbimages]

I am interested in DxO PL8, but I am concerned it does not have distraction removal tools like Photoshop. Am I wrong? Is there Removal, Clone Stamp and Content-Aware tools in PL8? Or is PL8 strictly a raw processor? Thanks.

[@Andyhutchinson]

No, there is a removal tool. It's very similar to Lightroom's pre-generative AI tool and works about as well - it has repair and clone options. I found that it's okay for dust spots, hot pixels and minor glitches, but struggles on anything much larger.

[@rdbimages]

@@Andyhutchinson Thanks, Andy. So it sounds like I am better off staying with Camera Raw and Photoshop. DxO PL8 seems over-priced for what it can do even though it is a good raw processor.

[@calcorstudios-rvcstevenson3666]

Nice review. I will likely skip here. I was not surprised when they did not introduce AI masking in PL7, but am now. I do bird photography, and subject selection saves a ton of time and is offered by everyone else, even Photoshop elements. DXO is getting like Henry Ford refusing to improve or offer new features in the Model T.

[@Andyhutchinson]

They are being pretty stubborn about it. :)

[@johns7988]

Andy, are the denoise and lens softness algorithms/engines in Photolab 8 exactly the same as the ones in DXO Pure Raw 4?

[@Andyhutchinson]

No I don't believe they've added XD2S to PureRAW yet - I dare say they'll update it soon now that Photolab 8 is out the door.

[@sounderdavis5446]

DxO generally avoids discussing upcoming features but *if* they follow previous years' form, they'll likely release Pure Raw 5 in spring 2025 and incorporate Deep PRIME XD2s into it, yes.

[@krimke881]

Do you need internet connection to have the AI feature on PL8 to work? ie. for offline work. ? And does PL support Wacom boards?

[@Andyhutchinson]

No Internet connection required - all offline once you've activated the app. As to Wacom if it has pressure sensitivity, but everything else works.

[@hywel3143]

HI again! I am continuing with my trial, and I've been really impressed overall. The interface is customisable, which makes it easy to cut though the complexity so you just see the tools you need. However, it was supposed to be a fully featured trial, and yet certain functions such as anything expect HQ processing are disabled and there are several other functions also disabled. I've upgraded to Sequoia 15.0 which is less than a month old, so that may be the reason, but I just wondered if you had upgraded to Sequoia also and if so whether you have had similar issues? I'll also contact DXO...

[@Andyhutchinson]

Not had issues like that no - all the features are present and correct.

[@dingbat19]

I have used DXO raw software for many years - it remains fabulous with the quality of the NR and demosaic, but is slipping further and further behind in terms of masking, which is a big deal - really disappointed not to see AI-driven subject/person/sky/background selection - it's now available in pretty much every single competitor product, even ones from small teams like Luminar. I have bought the upgrade to keep supporting the folks at DXO but come on DXO, we need masking on a par with other products now

[@Andyhutchinson]

Maybe one day they'll surpise us all :)

[@pentagramyt417]

They will add it one by one, to monetize their product. If they give you all, they can close company for beeing stuck and not profitable.

[@rustialex]

I remember switching from Adobe to Capture One back in 2017. Adobe was slow and horrible with Fuji files. What's your take on how this software compares with Capture One. For AI stuff I use TIFFs exported from Capture One in Luminar Neo or Evoto. I wouldn't mind a good raw editor without monthly payment.

[@Andyhutchinson]

I think a lot of stuff like this - how the different apps demosaic the RAWs - is down to a matter of taste. That being said, I think DxO get between half and one full stop of extra information out of my Fuji RAWs compared to the competition - and the Wide Gamut profile in Photolab is incredible.

[@Banhdatrangnho]

does this denoise work well for Fuji raw file?

[@Andyhutchinson]

The new model (XD2S) is not yet compatible with compressed Fuji RAW files, but the previous XD2 is, and it works incredibly well. Support for XD2S will come with a point release update based on DxO's previous actions.

[@michaelrobinson9255]

Super tempted by DXO. one of the most frustrating things about dxo 7 i found was you had to buy a stupid upgrade to flip an image horizontally 😱. To me that is such a super basic essentials feature, to have to purchase an upgrade to flip your image seems soooo dumb idk.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea, fair enough.

[@TerryKontopoulos]

Hey Andy, I hope you are correct as the 7.6 version I have (I haven't upgrade it to 7.8 yet) affecting the luminosity and the sharpens of the image then compared with LrC Denoise in a random 500 ISO image of mine to up 200% pixel pipping clearly the Lightroom file is obviously better as is not effecting the image but only the noise... IMHO 😊

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thanks Terry. What kind of camera do you have? I wonder if there's some variability according to the specific RAW files used.

[@TerryKontopoulos]

@@Andyhutchinson Nikon Z9 supported from version 5.2 I think

[@stevemckenzie4731]

I'll just wait for the new noise reduction and lens correction algorithms to make it into the next version of PureRAW. PL is far too clunky to use as a replacement for ACR and PS. When ACR is used in conjunction with PureRAW however, I get the best of both worlds.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea that's pretty much my workflow too.

[@RewDowns]

Rather than adding new features I just wish that they would improve their shadow and highlight adjustments

[@Andyhutchinson]

Never had any dramas with them - what's the problem you have?

[@Aladdin_TV]

Same as you, I gave up on Adobe and I bought photolab 6. Upgraded to 8 yesterday. The only thing I miss is some supersize option. Now I use Topaz but I do not like it. I take bird pictures and the colours is not right

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea I bought Topaz Gigapixel for that purpose. :)

[@Aladdin_TV]

@@Andyhutchinson How do you like Gigapixel? I do not like it very much, think it change the colours. Of course, some of the pictures are getting very good, but mostly not so good.

[@sounderdavis5446]

@@Aladdin_TV I had Topaz Gigapixel AI 6.3 (not the current 7.4.3, said to be better) but didn't like it. I'm not printing enlargements but I crop Micro 4:3rds shots a lot. If I've cropped 20%+, I see a loss of detail. Then my favorite tool for resizing to bring back that detail, without oversharpening, is one you dropped: Adobe Photoshop. From LrC, highlight the image, right-click and choose Edit in > Photoshop. In PS, Image > Image Size > Fit to (NOT Original Size, but manually enter the pixel size of your sensor--you can save a Preset for this for both Portrait and Landscape Orientation, so you don't have to keep typing in the numbers). And then be sure to check Resample and choose Preserve Details 2.0. OK. Close and Save back to LrC. Works great for me, as long as I don't try to push it by cropping too much, as in maybe 50% but surely 70%+. I don't notice color shifts. You can resize this way to make enlargements, but the file sizes can balloon to a GB or more, and it's not quick. As I use it, it takes seconds round-trip from LrC, and the saved TIFF file size is about 115 MB. (That would be higher if you resized pixels to a full-frame sensor size.)

[@krimke881]

@@Aladdin_TV That is weird, because Topaz has some of the best upscaling tools there is. It's quite high up there amongst the very best. But there are no catch-all these days. even if we want. one is good for some scenarios, one is good for another. denoise, upscaling, recovery, healing tools, etc. It's a big mess. Maybe it's different for each of the camera profiles.

[@draganjovanovic5213]

Can you remove subjects in an image with DxO 8

[@Andyhutchinson]

It has a basic retouch tool, but it's like the old Lightroom clone brush and has no AI.

[@sounderdavis5446]

This feature is coming to Adobe Photoshop, sorta in PS Beta right now. I say sorta because it doesn't automatically remove what it considers a human main subject, but rather people in the background, although you can add to or remove one or more people from its AI selection with a brush. Sometimes it struggles with the background though. Like Generative tools in Photoshop that clearly needed work two years ago in beta, Remove Distractions > People will probably get better in general release.

[@eiredes666]

IS THIS JUST FOR RAW FILES OR CAN IT ALSO BE USED ON JPG ?

[@Andyhutchinson]

It'll do JPEGs too - better results with RAW files obviously though.

[@LaughingLion4Ever]

No AI masking is a deal breaker for me. Once you get used to it, it is hard to go without.

[@Andyhutchinson]

True.

[@SensibleChuckle]

I just gave you the one point required to make 1,000 likes

[@Andyhutchinson]

lol - thank-you kindly :)

[@SensibleChuckle]

@@Andyhutchinson this is good stuff. I'm looking forward to testing if DXO software can replace Capture One for my Fuji system. I absolutely hate the subscription model and I'm making a lot of changes, to a lot of things... Windows to iOS... Android to iPhone, etc. time for changes. I'm coming back into my creative element on a number of fronts and I'm tried of tools getting in my way. While C1 is outstanding I have a fundamental issue with how they don't do "point revision" updates for the stand alone. I switched away from Adobe to Affinity already. I've had DXO on my shopping list for a yea (it's a lot of money to change up everything so it's a slow transition. I plan on getting all the creative tools (HW & SW)switched over next 1.5 years. the rest over another two years. Your channel is helpful to me in this regard. Thank you.

[@Andyhutchinson]

No worries. I think a decision regarding DxO or C1 rests entirely on the kind of photography you shoot (and of course your budget!). C1 are pushing further and further into studio/portrait territory and looking at the forthcoming 16.5 release there's very little of interest to everyone else - just the match look feature really.

[@rojharris]

Yeah, Great software but they're very greedy. I only bought 7 a couple of months ago and they want £99 to upgrade to 8... Nah, it aint that much different. Especially considering the cameras/phones they don't support. Good review as always though!

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea it's a pricey app, but at least it's subscription free.

[@chris1le]

@@Andyhutchinson If you do not update every other year, you pay full price again. If DXO decides they do not want to support your operating system they will not allow you to activate the DXO software you paid for. Even if it works perfectly fine on your current OS. Sounds like a subscription to me.

[@matrixate]

​@@chris1leAh forget this software. You may as well get Capture One in that case. It has better color processing anyway. This was the comment everyone needs to know about.

[@nyobunknown6983]

I find the asset manager useless to me because I have my own method for organizing my photos dating back 20 years. When I used Lightroom I never used its file organizing feature.

[@friendofarca6550]

I decided not to upgrade this years after I did a careful comparison with adobe enhance raw & noise ai. adobe delivers, compared to all flavours of deep prime , less artefacts, better pixel level detail and micro-contrast at the price of some noise. the difference in under exposed and lifted shadows is rather great, xd2 performs good but is no match for adobe as even very low NR setting produce a smeared look in such areas. I also found that it seems adobe now adds a sharpness correction with (some newer ? ) lens profiles what really surprised me. but if quality in deep shadows is less important dxo is the clear winner for speed with very good overall quality. i also think it is rather unfortunate that dxo does not keep both apps PR and PL in sync for deep prime in hope for some extra money.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Certainly not my experience. LR's great - it's my daily driver if you like. But when I have a 5 star shot I use Photolab and have found that it does a far superior job on detail retention over LR's Enhance with the raw details enabled. Also the lens softness correction in Photolab makes LR look like there's vaseline on the lens. :)

[@friendofarca6550]

@@Andyhutchinson ai base NR solutions seem to perform different depending on the image content which is no suprise and as a result they are very difficult to compare. what is not discussed talking about adobe vs dxo is that the linear dng files they create are different ! dxo does clips the black point while adobe does not this may be the reason why you think dxo has better shadow detail but letting the app clip the black point is not without issues too.

[@donsemo4804]

Nice presentation, but not enough to make me switch from Lightroom.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Whatever works for you - there's no single solution :)

[@ArminSteiner]

Very good review as usual 👍🏻 I stick with LRC though, can’t help it I am an Adobe guy even if that’s a crime today with some creators 😂 just love the how easy the different programs work together.

[@Andyhutchinson]

lol - whatever works for you mate :)

[@brucecggallagher1949]

A well thought out presentation of Photolab 8. Thank you from Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

[@Andyhutchinson]

Cheers Bruce - appreciate it :)

[@chris-nj3vg]

It just can't open raw files of the most popular cameras: smartphones 🤯

[@Andyhutchinson]

True.

[@krimke881]

WHAT? wow

[@TroupeGoal]

That's a bit of a swizz about not being able to do things like select the sky automatically, for instance, if I've understood this review correctly. I want the results without the effort!

[@Andyhutchinson]

lol - luminance masks get you there :)

[@krimke881]

IMIO. Dxo are lagging behind on denoise. Both the AI and non-AI. it's barely better than LRc buil-in. And Its still so incredibly dependent on what situation you have. But I really hope they can find some inspiration from Topaz' work on recovering unsuccessful or old photos. As it is now, they are all heavily developing to catch up to Adobe, I will have to wait until they have, Topaz, Dxo, and others. IF not, I will have to purchase every new version they release, and then, it'll be as costly as the Adobe photo package. It'll probably a couple of years until I make the switch it seems. I'm not in need of very big AI-features, although I hate the heal-features of LRc, they are so bad. It's the only thing I use PS for instead. Really really apreciate this walkthrough. I'm gonna follow the development of Photolab as it seems to be the closest to LRc for now. Cool! :)

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thank-you kindly. Yea there's not a lot between them these days, but DxO still edges it when it comes to very noisy images as it does a far superior job retaining detail over LRc.

[@alankefauver6187]

We really need subject masking.

[@Andyhutchinson]

It would be nice.

[@AR-vf7vg]

(Adobe could probably easelly buy DXO or ... but I guess this all is like an accordeon... )

[@davidowen9308]

the irony here is that DxO is supposed to be the software for the thinking photographer who wants to do things manually without AI assistance but yet the default develop settings for the software give a ridiculously over-sharpened (with lens softness overcompensation) and micky-mouse cartoon colours (with completely unnatural so-called "natural" setting) which would immediately put any discriminating photographer off. It seems the company are not quite sure who the product is actually for. And you still can't see the results of corrections like purple fringing without a preview of at least 75% -- this is ridiculous. A shame because in many ways Photolab 8 is really good!

[@Andyhutchinson]

Fair enough. I shoot everything in Velvia on my X-T4 and like those saturated colours. But you do realise that you can simply select an alternative default preset for the develop profile in the settings? There's even one for RAW and one for RGB. You can even use your own preset with a completely flat profile if you want.

[@davidowen9308]

@@Andyhutchinson yes, I realise you can change the defaults -- for me the standard profile makes much more sense and the lens softness should default to an absolute maximum of 0. When I was with Fuji, there were very few shots I chose Velvia for (there was the odd one, I admit) but of course it's entirely a matter of taste. What worries me with the DxO approach is that is seems inconsistent that the "thinking person's" developer should start with, to me, clearly consumerist defaults. But I may well be in a minority here and don't rule out eventually getting Photolab. Unfortunately at the price it is, it would probably have to replace LR and I certainly don't feel ready to take that step yet.

[@krimke881]

With their separated software packages, I feel that too. But maybe they believe this splurging of resources on endless programs with hardly (...) any difference, are driving innovation.

[@DB-wx1zs]

The only thing that would impress me and have me dropping every other program for Photolab is if photolab had a AI precision masking tool, the other apps have it, but photolab is still behind in this? Why? It’s frustrating to see them focus on every other feature expect for AI masking. What’s the point of all these features if I can’t easily make a targeted selection?

[@Andyhutchinson]

Precision AI masking would definitely be nice for portrait photography, much less useful for landscape though. LR's sky mask for instance never gets it right first go - and if I have to intersect an AI sky mask with a luminosity or hue mask - then why not just use a luminosity or hue mask in the first place. :)

[@DB-wx1zs]

@@Andyhutchinson Fair enough, good point!

[@krimke881]

YES! this!

[@nospam-hn7xm]

I just bought version 7 a few months ago. Now they want me to pay full price for version 8? I don't think so! I thought the full price covered any and all updates for the year of licensing! What a rip-off!

[@Andyhutchinson]

Definitely worth reaching out to them.

[@nospam-hn7xm]

@@Andyhutchinson I tried, but to no avail.

[@DalsPhotography]

By the way, it's NOT working with OLDER VENTURA OS !!!

[@bronekjelonek3323]

Some good directions, like color profiling. But generally, for me, insufficient (AI masks are absolute must have nowadays)

[@Andyhutchinson]

You're not alone. :)

[@woozyjoe4703]

Too many things to have to buy to get the "finished" DXO product. By the time you've bought all the add -ons and other products, you're paying way more than with Adobe. It's a fair review but if you don't just compare default settings but compare best results possible from each product, this is not greatly better than Adobe.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Some valid comments for sure. I guess the differences are that if you stop paying for the Adobe suite then the apps stop working, whereas Photolab will carry on whether you update or not.

[@robs3557]

In 2024 no support for HEIF files.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Yea, there are other weird gaps too.

[@jordanking7711]

Still no smartphone support other than Apple? COME ON DxO. What about the new Samsung phones, you supported up to the Galaxy S5, so what's changed? What about Google Pixels? SMH!

[@Lez325]

I still prefer Adobe Photoshop 2024 version is awesome

[@distomos8118]

Well, Photolab seems a good choice and a good chance to ditch the Adobe subscription model. I don’t care much for all the AI stuff.

[@Andyhutchinson]

It's a great app. :)

[@andersistbesser]

No ai masks.. this is where i stopped watching

[@nimbuskhannk627]

Lol!...All these people hurting themselves by not using the best of tools simply because of mass-induced hysteria like..."It's subscription!", or "they steal your photos!"...It's hilarious...

[@AMore429]

Cost ??? 🤦🏻‍♂️

[@Andyhutchinson]

I list the pricing at the end.

[@matrixate]

Didn't know why it was so difficult for the this KZbinr to type $229USD. What was the point of not answering the question directly?

[@Andyhutchinson]

@@matrixate because this KZbinr didn't know if they were being told off for not listing the pricing or if the OP was suggesting that it was very expensive software. Perhaps if the OP had written something like, "What does it cost?" Instead of a single word, three question marks and an emoji, I'd have been able to respond better. To summarise - I ain't fucking psychic.

[@matrixate]

​@@Andyhutchinson​Such professionalism. I'm sure DxO supports this type of response from their affiliates

[@Andyhutchinson]

@@matrixateI’m not an affiliate for DxO or any other company for that matter. Affiliate deals comprise the content creator. I usually work off the 30 day trial version, but DxO sent me a key and according to KZbin’s rules I have to declare that.

[@eruditect]

Nice review as usual! *sigh* I had my hopes up for some new auto selection tools. If not quite LR or PS quality, at least a move in that direction. But… alas. Still it remains my go to editor.

[@Andyhutchinson]

Thank-you. Yea, I hear you. I was wondering if there was a workaround of some kind possible using TIFFs which I'm looking into at the moment. :)

[@Stop-All-War]

$209 N O P E