DxO

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Carl Miller, Jan 23, 2005.

  1. Carl Miller

    Carl Miller Guest

    Carl Miller, Jan 23, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Carl Miller

    Phil Wheeler Guest

    Phil Wheeler, Jan 23, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Carl Miller

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 21:37:41 GMT, in rec.photo.digital Phil Wheeler
    <> wrote:

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


    I have only looked quickly, but this to be a review of a product which only
    worked on JPGs, not raw files. I've been trying the raw converter, but am
    having problem understanding the corrections available to the user.
    Distortion and vignette correction have user controllable sliders. If they
    have analyzed each lens, as you have to purchase a component for each of
    your lenses, then why is this?
    ----------
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf, Jan 23, 2005
    #3
  4. Carl Miller

    Carl Miller Guest

    On January 23 2005, Ed Ruf <> wrote:
    > I have only looked quickly, but this to be a review of a product which
    > only worked on JPGs, not raw files. I've been trying the raw
    > converter, but am having problem understanding the corrections
    > available to the user. Distortion and vignette correction have user
    > controllable sliders. If they have analyzed each lens, as you have to
    > purchase a component for each of your lenses, then why is this?


    Well... "better" is subjective (which is why I asked about the program
    here, hoping to get more than the one or two opinions I found in the
    reviews out there) so perhaps sometimes you might WANT your wide angle
    lens to LOOK like a wide angle lens.

    (That's one reason that comes to mind anyway.)

    --
    Carl Miller

    www.stellarphotos.com
     
    Carl Miller, Jan 24, 2005
    #4
  5. Carl Miller

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Sun, 23 Jan 2005 22:40:50 -0600, in rec.photo.digital
    (Carl Miller) wrote:

    >On January 23 2005, Ed Ruf <> wrote:
    >> I have only looked quickly, but this to be a review of a product which
    > > only worked on JPGs, not raw files. I've been trying the raw
    >> converter, but am having problem understanding the corrections
    >> available to the user. Distortion and vignette correction have user
    >> controllable sliders. If they have analyzed each lens, as you have to
    >> purchase a component for each of your lenses, then why is this?

    >
    >Well... "better" is subjective (which is why I asked about the program
    >here, hoping to get more than the one or two opinions I found in the
    >reviews out there) so perhaps sometimes you might WANT your wide angle
    >lens to LOOK like a wide angle lens.
    >
    >(That's one reason that comes to mind anyway.)


    Personally, I don't like sliders by themselves, as making repeatable inputs
    is a PIA.I saw on the reviews that the distortion correction for the kit
    lens was less than what was needed according to the reviewer's testing. If
    so, it would be nice for the sliders to go to greater than 100%. I really
    don't like the interface itself. But that's a personal issue.
    ----------
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf, Jan 24, 2005
    #5
  6. Carl Miller

    Carl Miller Guest

    On January 24 2005, Ed Ruf <> wrote:
    > Personally, I don't like sliders by themselves, as making repeatable
    > inputs is a PIA.I saw on the reviews that the distortion correction
    > for the kit lens was less than what was needed according to the
    > reviewer's testing. If so, it would be nice for the sliders to go to
    > greater than 100%. I really don't like the interface itself. But
    > that's a personal issue.


    I agree it is a bit "overly simple" although I've seen some screen shots
    of older versions and it looks like it's more "tweakable" than it used
    to be. I need something like this program, and honestly I really like
    Capture One, but I don't shoot everything RAW, so Capture One won't
    really work for me. I was looking for something else and came across
    DxO. It's not perfect either, but it's still in a fairly early version
    (2.something) so I figure it'll only get better. (Yeah, I know, I'm
    being naive.) I like the fact that it will batch correct both .jpg and
    RAW files, and it definitely does better RAW to .jpg conversions than
    Canon's software. (I converted a RAW file to .jpg using Canon's
    software, Capture One, and DxO, and to my taste, DxO did the best job,
    Capture One was second.)

    I haven't even tried Photoshops RAW converter. From the reviews I've
    read I didn't think I needed to bother.

    --
    Carl Miller

    www.stellarphotos.com
     
    Carl Miller, Jan 25, 2005
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Brian C. Baird

    DxO gets the thumbs down from dPreview.com

    Brian C. Baird, Sep 8, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    939
    Gisle Hannemyr
    Sep 12, 2004
  2. Philip Procter

    DxO Correction Program?

    Philip Procter, Nov 8, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    295
    Philip Procter
    Nov 8, 2004
  3. Keith Cooper

    DxO raw file conversion

    Keith Cooper, Nov 16, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    548
    Keith Cooper
    Nov 16, 2004
  4. TheFlyingDutchman

    DxO -> Is it the holy grail?

    TheFlyingDutchman, Oct 26, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    600
    TheFlyingDutchman
    Oct 26, 2006
  5. Replies:
    3
    Views:
    409
    bmoag
    Nov 5, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page