 |
EDITOR NOTES
Three versions of DxO Optics Pro are available: Starter ($79), Standard ($149), and Elite ($299)
DESCRIPTION
DxO Optics Pro is a unique application that automatically increases the quality of images taken with supported Digital SLRs and Bridge Cameras, whether in JPEG or RAW format.
WHAT'S NEW
Version 5.3.3: supports The Canon DIGITAL REBEL T1i (or 500D), Nikon D5000, Pentax K-m and K200D, Sony A200 and A300, and Fuji S100FS.
REQUIREMENTS
Mac OS X 10.3.9 or later.
|
|
|
 |
|  |
 | |  |
| DxO Optics Pro User Reviews (13 posts) | Write A Review |
 | May 30 2009 |
BORLOX WARNING: Installs the Interlok DRM rootkit.
(Version 5.3.3) | |
| [ 4 Replies - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Jun 10 2009 |
MIKAELF Why is this a problem? I've been using DxO for years...never any issues related to this. Please elaborate on why the whining? Are you even a user of DxO? | |
| Jun 10 2009 |
BORLOX It's a problem because my computer belongs to me, not to a software developer. The Interlok rootkit modifies the whole operating system in ways completely unknown and unknowable to the user. The rootkit developer, PACE, isn't answerable to the end user and doesn't care about his interests. Are there any known issues where machines spontaneously reboot or freeze when using PACE protected software? ... It should be noted that InterLok does have mechinisms whereby it can reboot the machine if it detects aberrant behavior that could be trying to compromise the security of the wrapped application. http://paceantipiracy.com/ilqanda.html So if Interlok thinks you might be trying to do something the application developer wouldn't approve of, it can shut down your whole system, destroying whatever you may be working on in the process. If it's acceptable to you to give that kind of control over your computer to someone you don't know or trust, fine. To me it isn't and never will be.
(Version 5.3.4) | |
| Jun 10 2009 |
MIKAELF http://help.dxo.com/faq/index.php?action=artikel&cat=1410&id=14100035&artlang=en I checked my machine...no rootkits. I think you're just being paranoid for no reason. | |
| Jun 10 2009 |
MIKAELF More info from a thread in dpreview... I have more confidence in a vendor that actually tells you what they do and why. How many pieces of software on your machine can you say that about? Ever installed a freeware with no guaranties on your machine? "Here's what DxO says about Interlok in their FAQ: http://help.dxo.com/... ...cat=1490&id=14900028&artlang=en&highlight=interlok Here's a reply DxO in their forums (copied without permission). I would link to the forum post directly, but it requires registration even to just view the posts: ------------------------------------------------------- I would like to take the opportunity of your message to provide some information addressing a number of Interlok related concerns : - We've used Interlok to manage and protect the license of DxO products for several years now. Certainly the use of Interlok is not something new nor is it something “hidden” with version 5 of the product. In fact we have made no changes in the use of Interlok between versions 4.5 and version 5. - some of the posts and comments that are critical of the Interlok technology are based on information and Interlok product reviews (usually copy/pasted from the web) that concern: -a version of the Interlok technology which is nearly six years old (2002) and which we do not use. -a feature of Interlok (known as the “kernel mode”) which DxO Labs does not use for either DxO Optics Pro or DxO FilmPack. - After more than three and a half years of selling DxO products to a vast worldwide audience, we are yet to have confirmation of a single case where a user lost any data due to Interlok/DxO software. Were we to have such a confirmation, we would extend the guaranties as documented in the user license agreement. - The only data that is collected and used by Interlok on the host computer is the name of the drive, memory, processor speed. This data is only used to ensure proper operation of Interlok. - Over time we have built a lot of functionality around our license management such as: -ability to download the software on one computer platform and install on another platform. -ability to activate on a computer not connected to the internet. -ability to transfer a license from one computer to another. -The Interlok driver can be easily removed by using the install/uninstall feature in the Windows control panel. The driver is not uninstalled by the DxO Optics Pro uninstaller because that would cause problems if the user wanted to keep using other applications that require Interlok (DxO FilmPack or others third party apps…). After uninstalling the Interlok driver only a few, very small and completely inactive data files remain on the computer (ie there are no Interlok executables left). This is similar to storing a few text files of a few kilobytes and is harmless. This is the principle on which many demo versions work (ie DxO and non DxO products; Interlok and non Interlok). - One thing we would not be able to do without Interlok or a similar solution is to provide a time-limited fully functional demo version. In terms of the future: we're always reviewing possible scenarios/changes to our licensing technologies. A change, if selected, would have to make sense and bring increased benefits. In that respect - the opinion of our user base / potential user base and opinion leaders is something that we listen to very carefully. I hope this helps. Thanks for your question. EN: Vice-President Sales & Marketing - Photography FR : Directeur Marketing et Commercial - Photographie ------------------------------------------------------- I believe Nikon's Capture NX uses Interlock as well. In any case, I'm not really trying to defend DxO....just providing their explanation. | |
 | Mar 16 2009 |
JAN13 DxO Pro 5.3.2, as much as it ŇlooksÓ good it does have a major flaw ... Since this application is mostly design for batch processing, well it will NOT process CANON small RAW format which is used by professional studios shooting catalogs or fashion. This DxO will simply refuse this format which makes it useless !!! Unless this issue is fixed the Dxo application will remain as hope for amateur photographers since pro-photographers can use LIGHROOM, APERTURE OR PHOTOSHOP to create perfect images. This application as it stand now is virtually a waste of money for those who own above mentioned applications.
(Version 5.3.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Aug 22 2008 |
AJOE I can only comment on the latest version (5.2.1), since I just tried and purchased this application, If stunning image quality and ease-of-use are your requirements, this app has no peers! I have used the lastest versions of Photoshop CS3, Aperture 2, Lightroom 2, Lightzone, and SilkyPix, but none of them can come close to the image quality produced by DxO on high quality RAW images. The organizational/database features in Dx0 are the only shortcoming. If you frequently deal with a large volume of images that need to be sorted and stored, DxO may not be the best tool, but when the ultimate image quality of each photo is the goal, this is the tool I want.
(Version 5.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jul 15 2008 |
IAMDORIAN FINALLY we're seeing stability returning to this fabulous product. So far, so good. However, why does "Save Project" do nothing, and no "saved projects" appear in the "Recent Projects" menu? This certainly needs fixing (Whoops!) One of the things that makes this product less productive than apps like Aperture, is a lack of either keyboard combinations for many of the commands (mousing is always slow...) or scripting. Another is somewhat slow redraws. It would be very useful if the dust brush corrections would be visible at least at two settings, 100% and 50%, instead of 100%. For those NOT working on a 30"+ monitor, this is an oversight. Most images from todays cameras are huge, so zooming in and out - to fix, and then find imperfections - gets unnecessarily tedious. I set up several very useful commands on my "Shuttle®" but there are still many I cannot control via keyboard shortcuts. This needs to be amended. As for stability, it appears to be functional once again. And, as expected, no comment (publicly) from the manufacturer. At least, it appears they ARE listening. Absolutely useful program! 5 Stars (4 for ease of use).
(Version 5.2) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
 | Jun 28 2008 |
IAMDORIAN A small addendum to v.5.1. The problem – which appeared in the beta using the latest Apple Leopard OSX - is still with us. It did not seem to be a problem before about a month prior to the release date of the final Mac version of 5.1 (hope this helps?). I use this application for time-lapse, primarily. This means loading 300-1500 images (usually only JPEGs) into the processing set-up window. After the last few OSX upgrades, the time to move the images into the pre-process que (for stacking) now takes about 20 minutes+ for 500 images. At 600+ images times ran into an hour or more. This is only half the problem. After running the first batch, if I try loading a set of images, Pro Elite fails. Throw away all plist files and reset permissions and I got one more batch to run. Then, crash on the next, and so on. What gives? As it is - at least for people like me with a large batch to run - this is close to unusable. And what's up with the lack of controls over the famous DxO lens softness. It seems...disabled...using JPEGs. This was one of DxO's best features. I already bought the upgrade, so I am a "believer." However, I am starting to wonder if I made a mistake. As the last reviewer mentioned, version 4 was pretty solid. What gives? I hope the DxO gnomes are busy fixing all these -should-have-been-fixed-in-beta issues? H-E-L-P! I am using an 8-processor Mac Pro with 16Gb of RAM and virtually unlimited hard drive space. When I see some fixes I'll change my rating.
(Version 5.1) | |
| [ 1 Reply - Reply ] | |
Replies:
| Jun 29 2008 |
WILLIAM OBRIEN DxO 5.1 build 6815 will not process a Canon raw file from a 1Ds-III in a reasonable manner. Color is off, JPEG SIZE is way to low, 3 meg file from a 22 meg raw file. Most of the detail is gone. Manufacturer has been painfully slow to respond, actually they have not responded. Any others in agreement, suggestions as to what I may have done incorrectly are welcome.
(Version 5.1) | |
| Jun 19 2008 |
IAMDORIAN [ROBERTOAVANZI wrote: DxO used to be a useful piece of software. The tragedy began with the development of version 5...Now, even though version 5 was promised for, like, 10 months ago, mac users are allowed to suffer, too. Wow. An alpha-level release. Not working, just a shell with a PREVIEW of functionality.] Yes, this was a pain, but the Beta I tested was pretty solid in most of the important areas. There was some work needed. However, this statement... Simply put, it just does not process my images. I select them, import in the project, select the parameters, then hit "start process". After just a few seconds, DxO outputs images that are identical to the input. No change whatsoever. Discussion on the closed beta forum brought nothing] ...seems a bit one-sided? Probably the reason this happened is you did not understand how to use their new and improved (what do you want for Windoze developers) not-very-intuitive interface. However, once you figure it out...it DOES work. I think the reason no one responded is that there are not a lot of developers in this company, and most of those you might tell this to would likely laugh at you, and assume you are a novice. The fact is, the last few days using the Beta (I think it quit a day or two ago), followed an Apple QT update. I think this broke the Beta. I hope that the commercial v5.1 release has already taken the problem into consideration, and fixed it? Other than issues like this (not uncommon for smaller developers) I believe that there has been a genuine effort to produce a stable and powerful image processing solution here. To state your complaints only, especially when one of them as likely your own problem (perhaps unique to your machine, or your lack of expertise) is a bit unfair and may mislead those looking for something this powerful to turn away. Is this your intent, or are you simply grousing? Hope you figure things out. I also hope DXO stays on top of the on-going Apple OSX fixes? Perhaps a small note in this forum from a DXO rep would help all concerned to get behind this very good software. When it works well there is no substitute. HANG IN THERE DxO, and thanks for supporting the Mac/Apple community!
(Version 5.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Jun 2 2008 |
ROBERTOAVANZI DxO used to be a useful piece of software. The tragedy began with the development of version 5. Version 5 was supposed to support new camera bodies. I was going to buy a 40D, which would not be supported in 4.5 - but was to be supported in version 5. In the meantime, I got my camera, but of course I cannot process the images. Because DxO version 5 does not work. Sadly, I did buy 4.5 then with the promise of a free upgrade, which was supposed to be "real soon now". First Windows users had to suffers through tens of non working versions, from last november to just recently. Now, even though version 5 was promised for, like, 10 months ago, mac users are allowed to suffer, too. Wow. An alpha-level release. Not working, just a shell with a PREVIEW of functionality. Simply put, it just does not process my images. I select them, import in the project, select the parameters, then hit "start process". After just a few seconds, DxO outputs images that are identical to the input. No change whatsoever. Discussion on the closed beta forum brought nothing, the developers are not really interested in developing. I think they are just waiting for the company to go belly up. I started to admire Microsoft because of DxO. Stay away from their products. They do not even *attempt* to work. At least some microsoft products can be used in production environment.
(Version 5.1) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| May 7 2008 |
IAMDORIAN EXIF Restricted file processing issue! I think it would be helpful if the developer provided a workaround for one of this application's little snafus. Since all processing is as automated as possible, the developer seems to have felt that once images are tweaked in DXO that no one would want to re-tweak them, and so all EXIF data is stripped from the image. Since hard drive space is at a premium, users might (I do) throw out originals. Ooops. Once this is done DXO's products will not allow ANY modification. In other words, not EXIF data, no processing. This is a major oversight, as I see it. (Almost) All of the features in DXO's products can be controlled manually. Why not allow EXIF-stripped images to be processed? After all, there are many features which might be used to alter already cleaned up images, or to modify (like the nice dust/spot repair tool) to adapt them for some other use. If you're going to strip our EXIF data in the first place, give us an option to go back and reprocess stripped images using as many other functions as possible. Or better yet, simply ALLOW AN OPTION to retain all (or relevant) EXIF data. This would eliminate the restriction on files. This is probably my biggest gripe with this otherwise incredibly useful software. Such a superior application should allow us some sort of work around for this problem. This SHOULD be included in the official retail release. It's not too late developer(s)!
(Version 5.0b) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| May 4 2008 |
IAMDORIAN It's gratifying to see that DXO has FINALLY made their interface a lot more logical. The new beta (been running it for a couple of weeks now) shows that the development crew is finally making some really good interface decisions. Their list of bugs was pretty long, but they do know the problems and are working them out. Some memory issues with the beta, especially when you're trying to modify presets a few times. Hopefully these will also be worked out asap and we can have a stable working version. DXO DEVELOPERS TAKE NOTE: A VERY useful feature might be a slide strip sort of preview, like that in ViewIt. ViewIt loads thumbnails, and then allows you to scroll through the images at any speed. For things like time-lapse footage and reviewing VR shots, this is really neat. It also permits one to see the shifts in exposure and framing for a series of stills, in a way that no other program does. Add this feature, and you've got the quintessential automated correction tool.
(Version 5.0b) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
| Aug 8 2007 |
GRAHAM BERKS I would like to give this a good review, and when it works it's superb ! a) it fails to start for no reason b) constantly asks me to validate my licence ! What use is an app you cant run !!!! Am getting very fed up with the lack of support !
(Version 4.5) | |
| [ Reply ] | |
|
| View all 13 posts >> |
|
