DXO DNG Workflow

[iugradmark]

Not sure which forum to post this but I would like to use DXO as part of my workflow. Most DXO processed images do not need further processing but to the extent further processing is required, I will use PS.

I am trying to output to DNG file using DXO but the DXO version of DNG does not provide a high quality imbedded JPEG image that can be viewed with IView. Is there a way to process the DNG file from DXO with something like DNG converter in order to create the a JPEG that is useful within Iview. As it stands now, the views I get from IView are not very useful (small and not sharp).

[peterkrogh]

Mark,
(Please sign your posts), why don't you give it a try.  I'm not a DXO user, but recall hearing that this works.
Please report back.
Peter

[johnbeardy]

Mark

Surely the DNG converter or ACR via Bridge would produce the ACR rendition of the raw data, not DXO's? Again, I'm not a DXO user.

John

[roberte]

Hi Mark,

When I used DxO to correct CA I output to DNG. I opened this DNG in Photoshop to finish tweaking. If I updated the DNG with a full size preview it used the ACR colour, exposure, etc, and the CA fixes from DxO.

As my DxO trial has finished I can't try it again so test to see if you get the same result. It may have all been an aberration .

-- Robert.

[peterkrogh]

John (et al)
I think that the DNG DxO makes has a linearized demosaiced data, rather than true raw data.  So ACR would work on the corrected data, applying its adjustments.

At least that's my understanding.
Peter

[AlanDunne]

First, Peter is correct, the DNG is demosaiced (is that a verb?). You can use ACR to operate on the DNG that comes out of DXO. I do it all the time.

Now about the embedded previews ... DXO does not document this very well. They do not support all the feautres of DNG. Back in DXO 3.x, if my memory serves me correctly (it has been several months), you always got an embedded preview, but you had some choice on the size of the previews. With DXO 4.0, I did not seem to get an embedded preview, or if I did it was not visible in IVMP the way they were with DXO 3.x. With DNG's from DXO 4.0 I would run then through the DNG converter to add in the full size preview.  Now with DXO 4.1, I do get an embedded preview, but no choice on whether I even want this, nor any choice on the size. I does seem to be full size and visible in IVMP, so it meets my needs.

DXO's documentation about how it supports DNG is quite poor. Perhaps there is some panel somewhere that allows you to configure the setting, but I have not found it yet, nor is it in their manual.

DXO has some incredible technology, but the usability is lacking. I try to use it only when necessary.

By the way, at Iview' site there is a new testimonial on how some guy uses IVMP and DXO. My understanding is that he uses IVMP to make a collection, and then opens that collection in DXO 4.x as a DXO "project". If this works as I describe then using IVMP as a front end to DXO may help manage the awkwardness of DXO somewhat. I am going to try this and see if it works as describe.

The article describing the interaction of IVMP and DXO is here

http://www.iview-multimedia.com/showcase/tarbouriech/index.php

Cheers ... Alan

[johnbeardy]

Alan

If you are using PC (can't recall) there are sometimes problems opening images in other applications via the Open With. There's a script that can help (not mine originally).

John

Code:

Option Explicit

Const Title = "NX"
Const appEditor = "C:\Program Files\Nikon\Capture NX\Capture NX.exe"
Const maxcmd = 8192

Dim fso, app, file, ext, sh, cmd, skipped, selected

Set app = CreateObject("iView.Application")

If (app.Catalogs.count > 0) Then
   If (app.ActiveCatalog.Selection.Count = 0) Then
      MsgBox "Select at least one raw file", vbCritical, Title
   Else
      skipped = 0 : selected = 0 : cmd = """" & appEditor & """"
     
      For Each file In app.ActiveCatalog.Selection
         If file.Mounted Then
            selected = selected+1
            cmd = cmd & " """ & file.Path & """"
         Else
            skipped = skipped+1
         End If
      Next

      If Len(cmd) >= maxcmd Then
         MsgBox "Too many files selected", vbCritical, Title
      ElseIf selected > 0 then
         Set app = Nothing
         If skipped > 0 Then
            MsgBox   "Some selected items are not available" & vbCrLf & _
                  "online and will be ignored", vbExclamation, Title
         End If
         Set sh = CreateObject("wscript.shell")
         sh.Exec cmd
         Set sh = Nothing
      Else
         MsgBox "No selected files are online", vbCritical, Title
      End If
   End If
End If

[AlanDunne]

Thanks John.

Yes I am on a PC with Windows XP Pro, SP2. I presume this is a Visual Basic script? I am not sure what problem this is suppossed to solve and how this would relate to "Open with"? Does running this script act as a replacement for "Open with"?

Cheers ... Alan

[johnbeardy]

Alan

Yes, it is VB. The problem is how iView passes the path to some applications, or how they read what it is passing - the other app can't work out what it should open. You'll soon see if it affects DXO.

John

[cabrackett]

All:   Just to jump in here with my experiences with DxO, brief but in a state of confusion. I am currently in an email discussion regarding the following problem and if it is of interest I will post the results.

My situation is that I have several times processed in DxO with all three image output formats: jpg, tiff, and dng. (This is DxO version 4.1 on a G5 Mac.) The DxO viewer shows no preview for the dng file. The jpg and the tiff files look similar, but not exact; there are some color shifts.

I then open these files in Bridge and view them in a full size preview and compare them. The dng shows in fact the lens corrections (distortion) but does not show any exposure or brightness corrections; it looks very much like an uncorrected .CR2 file. The jpeg and the tiff output files both show color and brightness corrections ( I am using the "auto" processing here for these comparisons.)

I can certainly open the .dng file in ACR and provide the brightness settings etc., that I want, but that sort of removes part of the attractiveness of the DxO processing.

I am not a regular user of DxO, my workflow is styled after the DAM book and other discussions on this site, but the lens corrections of DxO cannot be matched by ACR and it would be nice to have that option.

The question I am asking DxO is why does the .dng preview seen in Bridge appear to have missed the lighting corrections applied by DxO? Is this just the same problem as the missing previews above? Why is there no preview for the dng outputs in the DxO viewer?

Chuck Brackett

[AlanDunne]

Chuck,

my experience with DXO is similar to your. I am a reluctant user. There are several things that I don't like, or don't get, or don't seem to work as I expect they would. For now I do not have the time to take it up with them as I have seen others enter a "black hole" with DXO support. I hope your experience ends up more positive. I am simply working around, or perhaps avoiding, my issues (real or perceived).

I believe they have some brilliant mathematicians and physicists, but less than brilliant product developers (not the s/w coders per say, but the people defining the product). On other forums I visit, the general observation is that there customer support is also weak. They don't seem to understand, or even want to understand, their customer's needs and issues.

I would be interested in hearing the outcomes from your discussions with them. Firstly from a technical perspective, as your issues are important and I would want to understand how they get resolved. Second, simply to see how they respond to your concerns from a customer satisfaction perspective.

Cheers ... Alan

[peterkrogh]

Chuck and Alan,
It's to be expected that the brightness and color of a DxO DNG opened in Bridge would be significantly different than the TIFF or JPEG.  Bridge cannot understand any DxO image adjustment metadata, so I would expect it to look pretty much like the Raw file with the lens corrections made.

DxO needs to fully implement DNG by embedding a full-res preview in the file.  This really should not be that hard if they can do all that other cool stuff. They need to hear from their user base that this would be of value.

You guys are on the bleeding edge of Metadata Image Editing technology.  Actually, *nobody's* fully implemented it yet. Adobe has done a very good job on the creation side, (mostly by creating a format that solves almost all the problems), but still does not have full implementation.  For instance, no Adobe product will let you choose to use the embedded preview made by another application. So even if DxO made a full-featured DNG, you would have to go off to DAM software to take advantage of all the features.

This is a pretty fast-moving train, although it feels to me like it is creeping along.  The one objective development that encourages me is that the uptake for DSLRs has gotten so fast that industry players really have no choice but to get on board and start shoveling coal...
Peter

[AlanDunne]

Chuck and Alan,
It's to be expected that the brightness and color of a DxO DNG opened in Bridge would be significantly different than the TIFF or JPEG.  Bridge cannot understand any DxO image adjustment metadata, so I would expect it to look pretty much like the Raw file with the lens corrections made.

Peter,

about the DXO DNG ... I understand that. I was most concerned that Chuck described that the TIFF and JPEG appeared different, and that should not be the case.

Just so you know, and was stated in an earlier postof mine, DXO V4.1 does generate a full size embedded preview in the DNG output. At least it does on my copy, on my PC. There is no option to turn it off, nor change the size (not a problem for me as I have become addicted to full size). But in V4.0 there was no embedded preview and no option to turn it on. In V3.x you had the option to turn it on, and a choice of sizes.

The DXO DNG behaviour seems to have no roadmap, no consistent behaviour, or even direction, from release to release. I have given them this feedback but it seems to enter a black hole ...

I use DNG to perform some specific optical corrections. In particular it is rather good at dealing with CA in an automated way. And sometimes its "lighting" feature can rescue images that were taken under brutal lighting conditions. I almost always use ACR to further post process the DXO DNG because for tonal corrections, ACR is much simpler and faster. In these cases I actually would prefer that DXO did not include the full size preview because it slows down ACR/Bridge. I would much rather complete all the editing, then in one big bang operation, generate the embedded previews on the final set of images.

These are exciting times in digital imaging, but also challenging. So many new concepts, new players, new s/w and tools. But I am loving every minute of it.

Cheers ... Alan

[cabrackett]

Peter and Alan
I appreciate the comments. You both are way ahead of me on these issues. I am not bleeding edge, just perhaps bruised and confused.

It took me a while to understand that ACR, or Bridge, will not show the preview generated by the DxO dng format,  and find that I still don't understand the concept of Linearized files. I had presumed that meant the demosaiced file, which includes RGB image data? I have visited the following web site found in a google search for "linearized file":

http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/dng/linear.htm

where there is a discussion of DNG files in two flavors: First is what he calls a "Raw DNG", and second, a "Linear DNG". He claims the first is the more familiar variety containing the raw image plus added-value metadata. The second, the "Linear DNG" is rarer, containing the RGB image data arranged in a rectilinear format...

I have never heard of the first flavor so I presume the second is what we are dealing with when ACR outputs a .dng file. I understand also, now, that when ACR outputs a dng, embedded in it is a full size jpeg preview (I knew that), but that DxO does not.

Regarding the responsiveness of DxO support, they have been cooperating cheerfully, I have uploaded some files to their site for them to play with and compare, but it is slower than I had hoped.

Regarding the version 4.1 preview that Alan mentions, I do not get one (I am on a MAC, DxO version 4.1.1), but the manual that I have (4.1) states that it does indeed  have one, so there seems to be something wrong here.

One general complaint that I have about tech support across the boards is that I rarely get complete answers.

Chuck

[cabrackett]

Hello again:

Here is the response that I received from DxO:

There is a bug in the current program that does not process the DNG file properly in the Viewer.  The development team is working on this and plans to have it corrected in a future update.

By linearized, there are two supported formats for DNG files.  One is mozaic, and the other is linear.  This refers to how the information is written to the file.  In a linear format, the information is written sequentially.

We looked at your images, thank you for sending them, and we checked with our development team.  Because of the way RAW is converted to DNG, there is a difference in contrast between DNG and TIFF and JPEG.  This due to how the processed information is stored in each file and rendered by the RAW converter, in this case the ACR in Bridge.  JPEG and TIFF do not contain the original file information, only processed information.  The DNG contains the original file information which ACR uses, along with the processed information, to render the images you see.  Since Bridge is using an entirely different rendering engine for TIFF and JPEG versus DNG, that is why the contrast between the images is different.

Additional processing for better contrast in Photoshop is left entirely up to you and what you feel is necessary.


By the way, I think they did a pretty good job of looking at my concerns.

So, that clears up things a bit. Linear is Linear, DNG includes both a mosaiced and de-mosaiced form of file, and the output of DxO is indeed a linear dng file. They expect some differences between various renderings, and most interesting is the bug that makes the preview of the dng not available. No mention of the fact that your PC version, Alan, appears to provide it.

I have poured over previous threads in this forum looking for info re DxO and once again went through the old thread in which several of you posted alternative raw conversion results for DxO and other comparisons. What is interesting to me is that nearly everyone who first looks at the DxO outputs gets really excited, and then calms down and pretty much determines that, while there are some neat tricks, the workflow issues seem to overshadow except in certain cases.

So I ran yet another set of test images which were not really very stressful on the systems and had again the same personal response as you all before. I also found that the DxO default results seem to overdo the contrast and the highlight values (blocking). Now I know that can be adjusted and presets can be defined, but I think that is one of the things that gives it an initial WOW factor.

One issue is the claim for noise reduction on a localized basis to minimize overall sharpness and contrast degradation, which might also be a factor here.

I am still looking at a comparison with Canon's Photo Professional results.

We spend way too much time on all these technical things. I am currently studying the works of Cartier-Bresson and may go look for a Leica...

Chuck