#Dxo pure software
#Dxo pure iso

Your workflow would be to use Lightroom to select your best images and then pre-process those to DNG files using DxO PureRAW. The attached link to the Adobe Photoshop GPU FAQ page also indicates which PhotoShop features require a GPU for acceleration and which features won’t work without a GPU!. This is the ideal scenario for DxO Pure RAW. However, Adobe indicates that, “If your using an older graphics card or driver, GPU functionality in Photoshop may be limited or not supported”. I don’t know if these features are as processor intensive as DeepPRIME and Denoise AI. PhotoShop also has features that take advantage of a graphics card’s GPU. You can use it without a GPU, but it just takes longer. The DeepPRIME AI algorithm requires a lot of processing. Like PureRAW and PhotoLab, a supported GPU will process Topaz files significantly faster than with the CPU alone. Topaz products also take advantage of the GPU to speed up processing. I believe your assumptions are incorrect. You will be able to generate Linear DNG files for post. Indeed, by applying optical corrections and DxO denoising to your Raw files, and then doing the rest of the processing in your usual program, you will enjoy the best possible results. So, DxO is putting something on the market that almost requires one to have a GPU, and in my case it would require me buying another machine. The purpose of DxO PureRAW 3 is simple: to improve the quality of the digital images you will work with. My image processing has definitely improved in the past 6 weeks as I have made a concerted effort to get better at it.But, it’s important to note, that I run Photoshop, Lightroom, Illustrator and in every case I am not limited by not having a dedicated GPU. I’m also sometimes only doing a single pass of high pass filter sharpening, at 0.2px, rather than 2 passes. I’m now finding that sometimes, I’m not adding contrast, or using opacity to turn the contrast down.

#Dxo pure software

I use a piece of software called “PixInsight” and it’s night and day better than Photoshop in UI imh9o not even close, but it’s a dedicated application for processing astrophotography images. I hate the way Photoshop does masks, it’s horrible. At least I’m using masks now, even if it’s not very good, or very efficient lol.

I’ve tried the quick selection tool, but personally find it horrible to use. I’ve been sometimes using Topaz at the end of my workflow, and I’m now learning about masks, so sometimes I’m painting out the effects of Topaz on the bird where I feel that it’s way over sharpened the birds feather detail. Fed it a number of Nikon raw files (NEF).

#Dxo pure iso

I guess if you have a newer camera with much better high ISO performance than my 60D, ymmv.ĭo that, it is the only way to fine tune for your work flow. It does not work on all photos but when it works, it does a great job So I thought I needed to see for myself is version 3 was worth the upgrade. I have found DXO and Topaz to work well together and compliment each other very well. I do a minimal amount of sharpening in Lightroom too (+20).

Interesting on the halos - I have noticed some halos on my images, and I do use the lens correction enable profile corrections option in Lightroom. I would make a decision which program to use for noise reduction on a given file, not both.

If I used noise reduction in DXO PureRAW I would not use Topaz Denoise. It is generally used to get the best RAW file (DNG here) before final edits in a photo editor like PS or Affinity Photo. If you use optical corrections, noise reduction or sharpening in DXO PureRAW, best to avoid adding more in the photo editor, or you will get ugly halos from over sharpening and too much noise reduction. It does a very good job of RAW conversion to DNG, optical corrections, noise reduction and sharpening.