A couple of questions on DxO and Nik

[Thornton]

I’m now using DxO PhotoLab 2 (Essential version) for most of my raw conversions, and then use Nik plugins with the TIFFs. I have a couple of queries that I hope another user may be able to help with.

1) For noise reduction is it best to use the NR tool within PL2, rather than the Nik Dfine plugin? I tend not to shoot at high ISO and most noise I see tends to be a bit of luminance noise. The cheaper version of PL2 only has the “Quick” function and lacks the PRIME NR tool which it seems may definitely be better than Dfine.

2) Is it better to use the auto sharpening feature of PL2 rather than the Nik Pre Sharpener? Since DxO recognised the lenses I’ve used, it seems it may be better than the Nik tool?

I’m also a bit confused about the Nik-suggested Nik workflow. Pre-sharpening seems to be recommended before NR, which seems counterintuitive to me.

For screen display I am re-sizing the finalised TIFF and using the Nik Output sharpener as the final step before saving as a JPEG..

Julian

[Shadowman]

Hi Julian,

Which method you use is up to you, I would process an image both ways to see which gives you your preferred outcome. Likewise, sharpening/NR which comes first is a debatable subject, I would say it depends on the image, if the image is a landscape/still life you can probably sharpen first, for most other images especially portraits it still depends but usually you are looking for a softer effect with a portrait so NR first won't hurt the output. The Nik suggested workflow that I have followed was by an author/photographer Tony Corbell, in his book Nik Software Captured , written when the software was still OEM, includes a statement that says NR should be done as early as possible/sharpening should be done as late as possible. (p.35), he follows by saying be flexible and adapt as needed! He also starts the discussion by stating "As much as possible, strive to get the shot in the camera with the best possible settings."

[DanK]

The advice one usually sees about when to do noise reduction assumes that when you are done, the editor performs your edits in the order in which you do them. This is true of pixel editors like Photoshop or Nik. It is not true of Lightroom, which is a parametric editor that applies the edits in its own order when it renders the final image. I don't know about DxO.

In the former case, the reason people advice using noise reduction before sharpening is to avoid sharpening the noise. In Lightroom--I don't know about other parametric editors--it makes no difference, as the program doesn't pay attention to your order of edits anyway. I don't use noise reduction much, but when I do, I always do it in Lightroom--which now has powerful and very controllable noise reduction--and because I am in Lightroom, I can do it at any point in editing.

I have no idea why Nik would suggest "pre-sharpening" before noise reduction. Perhaps it is to see whether noise will be prominent enough to worry about. Perhaps it is just a bow to the convention of treating sharpening as having three stages, capture (to compensate for blurring in the camera), creative, and output--that is, let the program compensate for blurring in the camera and then do noise reduction. I don't see why that would help and would be curious to hear their rationale. Moreover, if DxO works like Lightroom, that conventional three-way distinction doesn't make much sense--creative and capture sharpening are part of the same process. It makes no difference when or how often you add (or subtract) sharpening adjustments in Lightroom; all that matters is the sum of all of them. It may be a convenience to have the program do a bit of sharpening at import, but it makes no difference whether you do that or do the same sharpening later in the workflow.

[Manfred M]

Julian - the main strength of DxO PhotoLab is its noise reduction algorithm, especially it's "Prime" option. It is far better than the Nik Dfine. In fact, it is the main (actually only) reason that I will turn to that raw convertor over the other ones I use.

[Manfred M]

I have no idea why Nik would suggest "pre-sharpening" before noise reduction.

Dan - there is a small group out there that strongly feels that this is an appropriate workflow and there are a few places where I have tried it where it works just as effectively (possibly slightly more effectively) than applying the noise reduction before sharpening. As Nik Dfine is built for noise reduction after raw conversion, the suggested work flow for this product makes sense in this context.

[Thornton]

Thank you for your replies. For my purposes, screen display at present rather than printing, I'm finding DxO PL2 very nice, easy and intuitive to use, and am then exporting to PSE to enhance the 8 bit TIFFs with a few of the Color Efex filters. If I process any photos for (hopefully) decent prints in future I'll have to look into the sharpening more critically.

Julian

[Manfred M]

Julian - the main issue that I have with PhotoLab is that its default colour space is Adobe RGB, rather than ProPhoto RGB.

As I do print and these brilliant colours are possible with modern photo printers, I tend to not like raw processors that limit me to Adobe RGB. Noisy images, where I do tend to use PhotoLab are often taken at night or just after sunset at "blue hour", so these tend to have constrained colours, so I can live with what PhotoLab does.

Unfortunately night scenes with fireworks or brilliant city lights do not work well with that software, when I am going to print.

[greg w]

Julian - the main issue that I have with PhotoLab is that its default colour space is Adobe RGB, rather than ProPhoto RGB.

As I do print and these brilliant colours are possible with modern photo printers, I tend to not like raw processors that limit me to Adobe RGB. Noisy images, where I do tend to use PhotoLab are often taken at night or just after sunset at "blue hour", so these tend to have constrained colours, so I can live with what PhotoLab does.

Unfortunately night scenes with fireworks or brilliant city lights do not work well with that software, when I am going to print.

Exporting to Photoshop from Photolab2, I click custom ICC profile, then choose C:Windows\System32\spool\driverscolor\ProPhoto.

[Manfred M]

Exporting to Photoshop from Photolab2, I click custom ICC profile, then choose C:Windows\System32\spool\driverscolor\ProPhoto.

Thanks Greg - this approach seems to work, but that being said, I tend to only use PhotoLab 2 for "problem" images, either noise where I find that their Prime noise reduction routines are superb and when I want more accurate lens correction (and CA) profiles than either Adobe Camera Raw or Phase One Capture One provide.

My preferred print workflow is working in Adobe Camera Raw and outputting the converted image in the L*a*b* colour space as it is ideal for dodging and burning ( the L channel only). I suspect that some of the other raw convertors may handle L*a*b* as well, but I have no interest in learning another one. I like the image quality coming out of Capture One, but was able to confirm with Phase One that they do not support L*a*b* colour space (neither does DxO PhotoLab 2), so use this as my primary ProPhoto RGB raw convertor for digital output.