Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: dxo pure raw test

  1. #1
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,545
    Threads
    383
    Thank You Posts

    Default dxo pure raw test

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    This White-faced Heron was taken today and the raw file was processed using DXO pure raw 30 day trial. As this was taken at ISO6400 I was quite impressed what it could do in 1 click. I then did some basic adjustments in Photoshop. I then processed the same raw file in ACR and then in PS with Topaz denoise AI and got a similar result after adjusting the noise reduction slider. However that overall process took longer. I like the software, but not sure I'd buy Pure raw as it works out to be $AUD170 ($USD129).

    D500/500PF, 1/3200th sec@f7.1, iso6400, manual mode hand-held.

  2. #2
    Lifetime Member Colin Driscoll's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lake Macquarie, Australia
    Posts
    2,273
    Threads
    415
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Nice pose and lighting but I think you might have sacrificed some detail Paul. I have tried both and can't get as good a result as with Neat Image which preserves detail pretty well.
    Much of a crop?

  3. #3
    Macro and Flora Moderator Jonathan Ashton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Posts
    17,015
    Threads
    2,604
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Paul if you do buy ensure you get the latest version!!! new one released recently and yes a hefty price tag.

  4. #4
    BPN Member Andreas Liedmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Dortmund / Germany
    Posts
    10,906
    Threads
    1,196
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Paul .. still a ton of noise visible , so why should one get DXO or Topaz when the output is as presented ??? At least here on my large 4K display .

    BIF capture is looking good , the whites do look hot without detail .

    TFS Andreas

  5. #5
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Can't really see much difference between this and the previous posting Paul. The BKG still has 'grain' but that might just be contrast coming through, certainly control that and apply some more NR and it almost disappears. Likewise there is far more detail that can be extracted from the subject too. From what I have seen, Topaz is the better choice out of the two, but hey, what do I know.

    Not sure if this is more on Topic with Workflow and PP rather than Avian?

    TFS
    Steve
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  6. #6
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,545
    Threads
    383
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Thanks all...I appreciate the feedback. No I won't be buying pure raw. There is plenty of detail and not much visible noise on my monitor, but it's not 4K so can't comment there.
    Colin: I moved the bird a bit to the left, 90% full frame.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics