More DXO bits for free

[mac_hordam]

<p>A few posts down we were alerted to DXO Optics Pro 8 as a free download. It's possible to download the full suite of 3 DXO software programs (older versions) by going to the link mentioned there and also to the following two links.</p>

<p>DXO FilmPack3<br>

http://www.dxo.com/intl/digitalphoto</p>

<p>DXO ViewPoint1<br>

http://www.dxo.com/intl/practicalphotography</p>

<p>The format of the offer is the same as per Optics Pro 8 except the FilmPack site is in German, I'm assuming there will be a language selection at installation as there was with Optics Pro. Also the ViewPoint offer sends an email to you with the code rather than opening a page showing the code and download button. Check your Spam folder for this, mine arrived in there.</p>

<p>Update : FilmPack does have a language selection so no problem there.</p>

[Laurie1]

<p>Thanks for the additional links Mac. Much appreciated.<br>

Laurie</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Indeed. Thanks Mac!

[Gup]

<p>Thanks for the information. <br>

I registered hours ago but no email response so far.</p>

 

[JDMvW]

<p>Yes, thanks. They had offered the Filmpak3 before, but I hadn't seen the ViewPoint.</p>

[Mary Doo]

<p>Absolutely super! I downloaded and installed both. Beautiful apps. Thanks Mac!</p>

<p>Gup, I received the email for "Viewpoint" instantly. Can it be possible it is in your spam mail? If you still can't find it, it may be a good idea to try again with a different email. Good luck!</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Like Gup, I have not received an e-mail with the code, and it's not in the SPAM box either. Now nearly 24-hours.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>I've been a DxO user for years and love it. They're trying to get you hooked. You can download the current version for a 1-month free test.</p>

<p>Some big changes since v. 8 are the PRIME noise reduction, which does a pixel-by-pixel comparison and correction, which is outstanding. They've also added a Haze Clearing slider and made some speed and stability tweaks. If they'd add just a few local adjustments, ala Lightroom, it'd be perfect.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Just downloaded it again, still no e-mail with activation code after several hours.</p>

<p>I'm thinking maybe it's just not worth the trouble.</p>

<p>Even tried going through a non DxO shareware site found on Google, still no happiness.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

I got a confirmation email with code for Viewpoint in a short while after downloading. But the code for Filmpack was on the download page itself (which i saved). No email.

[mac_hordam]

<p>Things to do.<br>

For anyone who has downloaded and installed the program(s) and thinks they may continue to use them I would strongly suggest you download and save the User Guides.</p>

<p>Optics Pro 8<br>

http://support.dxo.com/entries/22091601-DxO-Optics-Pro-8-User-Guides</p>

<p>ViewPoint1<br>

http://support.dxo.com/forums/21269133-DxO-ViewPoint-Documentation</p>

<p>FilmPack3<br>

http://support.dxo.com/entries/21603998-DxO-FilmPack-3-and-4-User-Manuals</p>

<p>You'll need to select the appropriate version for these older programs but doing it now may be of benefit if at a later date they become unavailable. Save them with your downloaded program in folders with your activation code in the folder name, then if you need to reinstall them in the future you have everything ready to go. Needless to say make back-ups of these and all data.</p>

<p>For those having trouble with the activation code email I can only suggest using a different browser and email and try again. I used Chrome browser and a gmail email and it all worked fine (except Gmail put the email in the Spam folder). It may seem a bit of a palaver if you don't already use them but once done it won't need doing again, all depends how keen one is to get the programs...for free.</p>

<p>And now a personal observation on just a brief usage of Optics Pro 8 and ViewPoint (not that interested in FilmPack). At this stage of using them I can't say I'm seeing anything to lure me away from my LR4/CS2 workflow so far. I had high hopes for ViewPoint but I can get better/easier results so far with LR4 and CS2, largely due, no doubt, to greater familiarity with them. Whether I could be bothered to persist with DxO to get the same fluidity when I'm already pretty happy with what my current workflow can do remains to be seen.</p>

<p>But I'm not knocking the release of these programs for free by DxO, I wish Adobe would do the same for their old versions.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>I'm a DxO user, but agree with Mac, if you've invested hundreds of hours in LR, then there's not much to be gained by running DxO parallel.</p>

<p>You might consider moving to DxO if you're a big user of zooms and LR doesn't have a custom Digital Lens Optimization add-in for you lens/body combinations. DxO seems to have the most combinations of any Raw converter. Another area where DxO shines is in there PRIME noise reduction program, that does a pixel-by-pixel comparison and can dramatically reduce noise without destroying detail. Unfortunately, PRIME is not part of the free downloads.</p>

[Dave410]

<p>I wasn't interested in Filmpack, but I signed up for Viewpoint. No email yet. </p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Tried with a different e-mail address, Google Chrome, still no e-mail with activation code.</p>

 

[Mary Doo]

<p>JDM, I just did it again (Viewpoint) and have received an email with activation code and download link. <br>

Please send me your email address so I can forward their email to you.</p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

I tried again (first time worked straight away) using a different email account, and i got an immediate email response with Viewpoint activation code.<br>Did the same for the Filmpack and the code was on the download page, and there only.

[JDMvW]

<p>Someone was kind enough to get a valid duplicate activation code for me that they weren't using, but thanks to all the other kind people who tried to help. Greatly appreciated.<br>

Folks here is swell!</p>

[Glenn McCreery]

<p>I downloaded Optics Pro and got it running, but was disappointed to learn that I can not use it as a Photoshop (CS5) plug-in, nor as an Aperture plug-in. The other disappointment is that it does not cover the main lens that I use for night-time scenes with a background of stars, my Canon 17-35mm f:2.8 L lens (not the newer 16-35mm L lens). The lens produces noticeable chromatic aberration in the corners at 17mm and f:2.8. This can be cured by using Canon DPP software, which does include this lens, if I start by opening an image in DPP, save it as a tiff file, and then open the tiff file in Photoshop. As far as noise reduction, I use Nik Dfine software as a plug-in in Photoshop, which does a fine job. So, although Optics Pro may be graet software, it does not fit my work flow, nor does it cover one of my main lenses, so out it goes. </p>

[dcstep]

<p>Later version of Optics Pro have much improved NR over this free download.</p>

<p>Digital Lens Optimization in DPP covers more Canon lenses, particularly discontinued lenses, but DxO covers meany more body/lens combinations, including Tamron, Siggy, Ziess, etc. Whether DxO makes sense for you depends on your bodies and lenses and other software that you already use. Most DxO users are very light users of PS.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I've tried several times over the past few weeks to download those DxO freebies but there's never any email acknowledgement, regardless of which browser or PC I try. Odd, because I was able to download the free version of DxO Filmpack 3 last year.</p>

<p>But judging from the comments by folks who've used both Lightroom 4 or later and these free version of older DxO products, I'm not missing much. I might be interested in DxO's advanced noise reduction software, which isn't included in this freebie. But so far the one DxO freebie I have tried - Filmpack 3 - is mildly interesting but more for special effects rather than emulating the look of real film. I've found only a few of my color photos that somewhat resembled Kodachrome. Usually I prefer my own tweaks in Lightroom over the emulations of DxO FP3 color negative and positive films.</p>

<p>And the b&w film emulations need a lot of adjustments to be realistic. In particular the default grain is far too exaggerated. Tri-X should be around 50% of the default grain setting; and T-Max 100 should be only 5%-10% of the default grain setting. Those films were never that grainy unless abused. And the contrast control filters don't behave realistically either. Some of the DxO FP3 emulations respond wildly inaccurately to routine settings for orange filters.</p>

<p>I appreciate DxO making FP3 freely available, and I suppose the free temporary trials of their current software is still available. But so far I'm not seeing anything that would motivate me to buy the full current versions. Although I might give the current version a try to compare noise reduction with Lightroom to evaluate the balance between NR and retention of fine detail.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>I don't know anyone that uses DxO's Default settings for anything. Custom adjustments are easy. I create a Preset that I call Default and apply it to almost all of my images for a starting point and then fine tune from there.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<blockquote>

<p>I don't know anyone that uses DxO's Default settings for anything. Custom adjustments are easy. I create a Preset that I call Default and apply it to almost all of my images for a starting point and then fine tune from there.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>On the subject of starting with new defaults other than what the program provides, how does it affect the appearance of thumbnails?</p>

<p>I often thought of creating linear defaults that would make the image either dim, dark, low contrast or bright and flat depending on the various exposures and dynamic ranges of a wide range of captures as the new starting point, but then saw what it did to all my thumbnail views within Bridge and Lightroom and so I backed out and accepted the program's defaults which gave reasonable overall previews.</p>

<p>I don't know how thumbnail previews are handled in DXO apps since I don't use them.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"I don't know how thumbnail previews are handled in DXO apps since I don't use them."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There is an odd quirk to thumbnails from photos edited in DxO Filmpack 3, at least with my Windows 7 PCs. In Windows Explorer (the file browser/manager included with Windows), the thumbnail defaults to the original in-camera embedded JPEG. So even when I've converted to monochrome in DxO FP3, the thumbnail retains the appearance of the original color version in Windows Explorer. However when I open the full version it appears as intended.</p>

<p>This doesn't occur with Picasa, Lightroom or other image viewer/editors. There may be some default setting in Explorer that can be changed to reflect the edited version rather than the embedded thumbnail.</p>

<p>There's no problem with printing as intended, whether at home, at a local minilab or via online services like mpix. So I haven't worried about it enough to figure out why Windows Explorer does this.</p>

[dcstep]

<p>Tim asked:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>On the subject of starting with new defaults other than what the program provides, how does it affect the appearance of thumbnails?</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

I "Select All" thumbnails, then apply my personalized Default adjustment to the thumbnails and you will see the adjustment applied there, after a slight delay to allow application. You can set a Preference to open the thumbnails with your Default.</p>

[Tim_Lookingbill]

<p>Lex, that's some complicated thumbnail wrangling you have to deal with. And yet thumbnails are our first sight and source for judging quickly whether to keep or toss while often forgetting just how much it's influenced by the app it's viewed in.</p>

<p>Why can't all imaging apps get on the same page with thumbnail generation? Now we need a standard for that? Frankly I don't know how we ever get our work done.</p>

<p>I have to switch CS5 Bridge thumbnail generation to as needed basis just to keep it from rebuilding the thumbnails with every new click to a folder of images. I actually like being able to see the non-Adobe Default version of the thumbnail because it looks so crappy compared to when the Adobe thumbnail kicks in making it look rather spectacular by comparison that I don't bother creating a custom default.</p>

<p>David, you make that sound rather too simple and easy. Thanks for the response.</p>