DxO PureRAW 5 Review: Worth the Upgrade?
Over the last 4 months, I have been working towards improving my raw file optimization. Previous articles showing the results of numerous tests have included:
- Raw File Optimization, where I examined the usefulness of Lightroom Enhanced Noise Reduction compared to DxO PureRAW, OM Workspace, ON1 No Noise, and Topaz PhotoAI;
- How well can Topaz PhotoAI and ON1 No Noise ’rescue’ images with motion blur?
- Up-scaling Raw Files 1: High quality cropped images with Lightroom, ON1 and Topaz
Having tested and compared Lightroom Enhanced Noise Reduction, DxO PureRAW and Topaz PhotoAI, I know I can confidently recommend any one of them to demosaic, denoise, and sharpen raw files, extracting the maximum image quality possible.
But now, DxO has upset the cart by releasing the ‘latest, greatest’ update to PureRAW: PureRAW 5 with Deep Prime 3. Rarely do I have the opportunity to test one version of software against the next, so when DxO announced the new and improved PureRAW 5 was on the way, I was excited and purchased it.
I am not one for superlatives unless they are truly warranted and I am never impressed by advertising weasel words. I want results. Does the product do what it claims, or not? Is it truly an improvement, or not?
You tell me . . .
Here is the same Catbird image I used in my first article comparing the various methods of raw optimization, processed in PureRAW 4 and 5.
Click or tap on the image to view the original file at full size.
And here is the image compared to Lightroom Enhanced Noise Reduction and Topaz PhotoAI.
Maybe DxO has reached a plateau and I’m seeing the results of product maturity, but I sure feel like we’re watching that laundry detergent ad from the 1980s:
”Can you tell the difference?”
”No, I can’t tell the difference. Can you tell the difference?”
Hmm, not really.
The difference between v4 and v5 does not seem to be in the overall demosaic and denoise part of the upgrade. It may be there, but even with further testing—here is Sunset Vigil—I do not see any appreciable difference.
Click or tap on the image to view the original file at full size.
And the 4-up comparison:
According to the DxO website, DxO PureRAW 5 is supposed to deliver ”the ultimate in RAW image quality”. It is supposed to give us, ”sharper, cleaner, more detailed RAW files without upgrading your gear”.
But I’m not seeing that.
The Real Upgrade
Perhaps of greater relevance is that PureRAW 5 offers ’Local Adjustments’ allowing users to ”make targeted changes when processing challenging RAW files. Simply create masks to fine-tune denoising and focus Lens Sharpness Optimization with a new level of accuracy” the website tells us.
Finally! We can create masks to, for example, sharpen only the subject and not the background. Except, Topaz PhotoAI already has this AND it has a better implementation of it. With Topaz, it automatically selects the subject for you. With all the power of modern AI, why doesn’t DxO have this as an option.
Huh? Did I miss something?
That being said, while Topaz’s subject detection is good and helpful, it’s not perfect. I often need to paint in additional subject details and/or paint out areas not part of the subject. However, it always begins with a pretty close approximation, meaning less work for me. Not in DxO PureRAW. Frankly, in 2025, I find it bizarre. How could a bunch of six-figure software engineers miss this simple AI feature?
The other issue with DxO PureRAW 5 is that, when painting in the mask, you can only set the view to either full or to 100%, nothing in between. I wanted 50%, to see more of the bird as I masked it, but nope, it was all or nothing, at least up on the settings bar at the top. I subsequently discovered I could un-pinch on my trackpad to zoom in. Okay, so other viewing options are available, but why not just have a selection of viewing %s in the top bar, say 25%, 50%, 67%?
The Big Reveal
One thing I’ve been clamouring for with Topaz is to have the ability to set the amount of sharpening for different masked areas. In a previous blog, I wanted the Red Fox to be 100%, but the stone wall to be between 50 and 75%. First of all, Topaz only allows one mask, so it’s all or nothing. However, DxO allows multiple masks—and DxO allows users to set the ’Flow’ and ’Opacity’ of the paint brush while masking. Brilliant! The masking brush is almost as intuitive as Lightroom’s, though theDxO brush seems ’blobby’ and has slight delay as you drag it over the image.
I see three areas of improvement here:
- The pixel size of the brush is not actually the pixel size of the brush. If it was, then the paint brush would increase in size as I zoom in. It does not; it remains the same size on screen. However, there may be a silver lining as when I zoom, I tend ot want a smaller brush for details. Hmm—I’ll need to work with this.
- If I paint or unpaint over an edge I didn’t intend to, there is no easy way to correct it. With Lightroom, I just hold down ’Option’ and the brush switches to the opposite. That would be very handy here.
- If I paint something then decide I’ve made an error, the industry-standard ’Undo’ (Cmd/Ctrl+z) is not available. This, too, would be helpful as it is in Lightroom! In both cases, if I need to erase, I must drag the cursor over to the panel and switch to ’Erase’ mode, make my change, then switch back which to me, is an unnecessary series of clicks.
High ISO
Interestingly, when I passed one of my High ISO files through DxO PureRAW 5, I saw a decrease in image quality using the default settings. I used the ISO 6400 Junior Cardinal photo from my Raw File Optimization comparison article.
I must admit being dismayed at the High ISO results. I checked and re-checked them and my methods to ensure it wasn’t ’user error’, but time and again, the v5 results did not have the same finesse. I don’t shoot a lot of High ISO, but it is worth investigating. My only guess is that the engineers at DxO made the decision to be less aggressive with the default settings because now users can mask areas for more or less sharpening. So let’s test it out . . .
The double masking worked, so, maybe that’s the approach—allow users more control, more finesse by using masks. Though it wasn’t onerous, it took longer—significantly longer than using default settings. To make the subject mask, I set the brush to 50% Feather and painted away. My Kindergarten teacher wouldn’t be pleased as I slightly when outside the lines, in this case to catch feather detail that overlapped with the background. From there, I duplicated then inverted the mask and worked on the settings. Probably 10 minutes in total. The final version is worth it, though the original DxO PureRAW 4 version took only 30 seconds using the default settings!! Interesting. It’s progress, I guess.
Workflow
Something I appreciate about DxO is how easy it is to move from Lightroom to DxO and back again. Note: I never use ’File > Edit In . . .’ from Lightroom as that creates a useless TIF—I prefer DxO has the original raw file to work from, and so does DxO. So I ’Export > Original’ to a folder, right-click the file and select ’Open in > DxO PureRAW 5’. When the processing is complete, DxO applies the changes, saves the file back to the same folder then prompts me to select where I want it opened. I choose Lightroom and voilá, there it is, ready for importing. I can work with that.
Bottom Line
First of all, another small gripe. When I visited the DxO PureRAW 5 Learning and Support page, to look at the tutorials for masking—the great new feature—there weren’t any. And, when I selected the ’What’s new in PureRAW 5’ video, the ’What’s New in PureRAW 4’ video played. Hmm. Someone’s dropping the ball here. I really want to give a positive review, but it’s becoming more difficult.
Will DxO replace Topaz PhotoAI as my go-to raw file processing app?
In a word, no. Lightroom’s own Enhance Noise Reduction already does the job. In fact, I think I have it nailed down: EnhancedNR at 80% followed by aggressive Detail Sharpening of 100 or more, then finishing with Masking. It’s this final step of Masking in the Sharpening panel which eliminates the sharpening of smooth areas. So, Lightroom already allows for great demosaicing, noise reduction and sharpening. Plus it has extensive, intuitive Adjustment Masking with auto selection of ’Background’ and ’Subject’ and any additional Adjustment Masks I might need to increase or decrease Texture, Clarity, and Sharpening.
However, when an image specifically requires masking of subject and background separately for raw file processing, beyond what Lightroom can do for me, then DxO would be the app I turn to. The thing is, as I wrote above, since Lightroom already does an excellent job, I won’t be using DxO too often.
Is it worth upgrading to DxO PureRAW 5? If you use Lightroom, then perhaps not. Check the comparison files above. If you’re using Lightroom properly, then you already have excellent Denoising and Sharpening. However, if you are not a Lightroom user, then yes DxO PureRAW 5 is worth it because now you can mask out the background from any sharpening.
Is it worth switching from Topaz PhotoAI to DxO PureRAW 5? No, not unless you’ve run into cases where you need masking beyond the subject mask offered in Topaz PhotoAI.
Remember, all of this talk around improving raw image processing is really geared to those making significant use of their images. If you’re sharing images on social media or online, then it really doesn’t matter—the images are not large enough for a difference to be noticeable. However, if you’ll be printing your files or entering them into photo contests and competitions, then a case can be made for spending the additional time and money on improving your raw files.
Thanks for reading! In the COMMENTS section below, add your questions, comments, or discussion about raw file optimization, the app(s) used and what you’ve found.
This work is copyright ©2025 Terry A. McDonald and may not be reproduced
in whole or in part without the written consent of the author.
Please SHARE this with other photographers or with your camera club,
and SUBSCRIBE to receive an email notice of new blogs.
Have a look at my work by visiting www.luxBorealis.com and consider booking a presentation or workshop for your Nature or Photo Club or a personal Field & Screen workshop at Workshops.
Wildlife and Bird Photography—On Safari in Tanzania, Part 3
Apologizes for the slow materialization of this post. There has been much to write on the photography front with articles on M43 as the Sweet Spot in modern photography, Raw File Optimization, and Navigating the AI Juggernaut, amongst others. So, casting my mind back to our final few days in Tarangire has been difficult, but oh, so pleasurable.
The two articles previous to this are:
- Wildlife and Bird Photography—On Safari in Tanzania, Part I: Arusha National Park; and
- Wildlife and Bird Photography—On Safari in Tanzania, Part 2 – Tarangire National Park
Back to Tarangire . . . with Allison
Our daughter Allison joined us for our last two weeks in Tanzania. It was a wonderful trip down memory lane with her, re-visiting the school we taught at and where she first started school. We visited with her Year 1 and Year 2 teachers and her carer while Laura and I were teaching. The reunions were special as they had not seen Allison since she was a young girl of 8!
3:25pm, 3 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 342mm (684mm efov), ƒ8 @ 1/640, ISO 800; raw file processed in Lightroom
2:06pm, 6 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 400mm (800mm efov), ƒ8 @ 1/1000, ISO 1600; raw file processed in Lightroom
5:06pm, 6 oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 400mm (800mm efov), ƒ8 @ 1/320, ISO 200; raw file processed in Lightroom
Having Allison with us on safari was equally great, as she pushed us a bit. Early morning wildlife drives, afternoon drives that extended right into evening—she was a positive influence on getting us out at the edges of light. And it paid off in terms of seeing and photographing wildlife, as it always does!
Like our previous safari, at some point, we expected to see wildlife around Tarangire Safari Lodge—our favourite place in the whole world! In the past we’ve seen elephants, many bird species, warthogs, and zebra around the tents. This time it was elephants and a lion. The elephants were looking for water and they are ingenious. The water system serving the tents is all under ground with underground access points to drain the water when repairs are needed. In their clever way, the elephants have discovered how to remove the small cement covers to the faucets and turn the faucets on, providing them with a small fountain to drink from.
However, when that didn’t work, they found another method and it happened to be Allison’s tent. One elephant calmly picked up a foot and gently applied pressure to break One of the the water lines going into the washroom, providing all the water they could drink. It was most entertaining, though not for Brenden and his fundis (tradesmen) who had to first drive the elephants off, then make repairs.
One afternoon, while enjoying downtime at the lodge, one of the workers alerted everyone to a potential threat—a lioness had parked herself at the base of the water tower, right at the end of the lodge grounds. The lodge is not fenced simply because the most dangerous of wildlife, lions and leopards, would simply jump them or find ways over them along tree branches. In the case of elephants, they would simply walk through them.
From a safe distance we watched the lioness, pestered as she was by a cloud of flies. (Maybe they could smell her last dinner on her!) A few moments later, one of the workers came by in an open safari truck and offered to bring us closer. Definitely!
Allison really was a magnet for lions, and for elephants, too. We saw more lions and elephants the ever before, and they were closer and more spectacular than we could ever hope for.
Out on a drive early one morning, we encountered a group of elephants just coming up from the river. A few had crossed the road ahead, so we stopped to watch the remaining herd members. Rather than following the leaders, they spread out and walked on either side of us, coming quite close, but never in a hurried, worried or unfriendly manner. We were just part of the landscape.
8:07am, 4 Oct; OM-1 with M.Zuiko 100-400mm; ƒ8. ISO 800; raw files processed in Lightroom
As if often the case, while we were watching the elephants, serendipity struck when two male lions popped out of nowhere. They made their way across the road and along a ridge down towards the river. Only one of the two came into the open enough for a photo.
7:12am, 4 Oct; OM-1 w/ M.Zuiko 100-400mm at 400mm (800mm efov); ƒ8 @ 1/640. ISO 1600; raw file processed in Topaz PhotoAI and Lightroom
Our best encounter with lions occurred a few days later and lasted well over an hour. It involved two sleeping males and later, a female. We had been watching the two males sleeping down on the sand of the river floodplain. Seeing lions is always exciting, spotting two males, together is even more so. But watching them sleep is, well, tiresome. We waited and waited for something to happen. From time to time, they would roll over, brush a few flies away, but otherwise they just slumbered along, so we eventually carried on our way.
5:33pm, 6 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 328mm (656mm efov); ƒ8 @ 1/320, ISO 800; raw file processed in Lightroom
Not five minutes down the road, what should Allison see but a lioness padding along the river floodplain towards the males. So, we high-tailed it back, negotiated our way in amongst the two other trucks we had left behind, and voilá, some action. She nosed greetings at them, they rolled over, then she climbed the river bank and pulled herself up a large acacia tree to keep watch over the surrounding area—us and the two male lions.
6:29pm, 6 Oct—As the sun set, the dwindling light began causing some concern. Increasing the ISO and reducing shutter speed was offset by bracing against the window frame of the truck, trusting the OM-1’s stabilization and begging for complete stillness in the truck.
OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 400mm (800mm efov); ƒ8 @ 1/25, ISO 3200; raw file processed in Topaz PhotoAI and Lightroom
But the female’s presence must have stirred things up between the two males as they became active and followed her up the river bank. One of them padded between the safari trucks, over to the acacia, and climbed up into a notch where he then kept vigil, as the sun set. Sadly, that meant we had to get back to the lodge.
Evening Vigil (Panthera leo)
6 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 292mm (584mm efov); ƒ8 @ 1/80, ISO 3200; raw filea processed in Lightroom
It gets dark very quickly at the tropics, and as the night settled, we ended up having to negotiate our way through a massive herd of Cape buffalo—not the most pleasant of encounters as Cape buffalo are the most unpredictable of large beasts and are known to charge at safari vehicles. Laura took it slowly, yielding to them a few times as they passed across the road, then continuing when there was a passage wide enough. Hair-raising, but exciting at the same time.
Birds are everywhere, and the number of different species is truly amazing. Eagles, vultures and herons & egrets are the largest and there must be half a dozen species of each. But there are also dozens of smaller species of all types. One evening, the vultures were especially active as they began gathering and roosting at the tops of doum palms.
5:43pm, 5 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 218mm (436mm efov); ƒ8 @ 1/200. ISO 1600; raw file processed in Lightroom
We had two opportunities to watch Secretary Birds, strutting through the tall grasses. With their long black legs, they humorously appear to be wearing yoga tights! The second time was one evening, and there were two of them. At first, we thought they were hunting snakes for dinner, but when they began picking up sticks, we realized it was for nest-building. Sure enough first one, then the other flew to the top of an acacia to add their finds to the pile, then perform a mating dance.
4:47pm, 5 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 342mm (684mm efov), ƒ8 @ 1/1250, ISO 1600; raw file processed in Lightroom and Topaz PhotoAI
5:02pm, 5 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 342mm (684mm efov), ƒ8 @ 1/640, ISO 800; raw file processed in Lightroom
If you can believe it, this is the closest living relative of the African elephant, and one of our favourite small mammals.
11:51am, 5 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 400mm (800mm efov), ƒ8 @ 1/80, ISO 200; raw file processed in Lightroom
5:01pm, 6 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 400mm (800mm efov), ƒ8 @ 1/400, ISO 400; raw file processed in Lightroom
One of the best encounters with lions came on our last morning. Despite it being gloomy with grey, cloudy skies, Allison had us up and out by 6:30am. There is no better time for wildlife than first thing in the morning and last thing in the evening. Sure enough, not 200 metres from the lodge, she thrilled us by spotting a lioness making her way through the tall grass, less than 50 meters from the road. What a find and we wondered if it was the lioness we had seen at the water tower. Suddenly, Allison squealed with even greater delight—there were two young cubs with the lioness. If you’ve even seen a house cat mom and two rambunctious kittens, then you know exactly how these three were interacting. Mom was strolling across the plains, and her two kittens were playing and chasing each other and gambolling along without a care in the world.
Lioness and cubs
6:47am, 7 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 400mm (800mm efov); ƒ8 @ 1/400, ISO 3200;
Raw files processed in Topaz PhotoAI and Lightroom
Eventually she stopped and laid down, probably to given them a rest, but they played on, climbing on her, then scampering away. Amazing! We had them all to ourselves and followed them at a respectful distance for almost half an hour before they headed across the main road and along another before heading into grasses too tall for us to see them—a truly memorable encounter!
6:02pm, 5 Oct: Near dusk, a mother or older sister elephant playfully sprays water for a youngster. OM-1 with M.Zuiko 100-400mm; ƒ8. ISO 800; raw file processed in Lightroom
Lion Cubs
6:46am and 6:53am, 7 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 400mm (800mm efov); ƒ8 @ 1/400, ISO 3200; raw files processed in Topaz PhotoAI and Lightroom
But, alas, we had to return home. Our hearts were truly heavy as we made our final drive out of Tarangire National Park—quintessentially wild Africa in so many ways.
Our six weeks in Tanzania weren’t only spent on safari—in fact most of it was spent visiting with friends, colleagues, and former students, all of whom are now 20 years older, running businesses and with families of their own. We owe an enormous debt of gratitude for the wonderful hospitality we enjoyed everywhere we went. Nashkuru sana, kila kitu! Our friends Maria and Manfred Lieke hosted us for three of those weeks as well as Allan ’Kiliman’ Philemon for three glorious days at his lodge in Karatu.
6:15pm, 5 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 342mm (684mm efov), ƒ8 @ 1/640, ISO 800; raw file processed in Lightroom
One of our weeks was spent up in Longido visiting Project TEMBO (Tanzania Education and Micro-Business Opportunity). It’s a Canadian-based, Tanzanian-run, grassroots organization devoted to helping Maasai girls and women meet their educational and business goals, and one we have supported since it started more than 20 years ago. Seeing first-hand and experiencing the successes of the dedicated volunteers was truly heart-warming—and worthy of an upcoming blog post.
We spent our last few days in Moshi, at the foot of Kilimanjaro. Gabi and Aat VanderWel toured us around and we enjoyed a couple of down days, just chilling. Each morning I was up before dawn, to see if the clouds might part for Kili to make an appearance—and she did not disappoint, especially on our last morning as we packed for our flight. However, it was disappointing to see how devoid of snow and glaciers she has become over the last 20 years of global climate change. The difference was obvious.
6:21am, 14 Oct; OM-1 w/ 100-400mm at 100mm (200mm efov); ƒ8 @ 1/50, ISO 800; four-photo panoramic; raw files processed in Lightroom.
5:25pm, 14 Oct—Our view of Kili from the air as we cruised north from Kilimanjaro International.
OM-1 w/ M.Zuiko 12-100mm/4 PRO at 70mm (140mm efov); ƒ4 @ 1/2500, ISO 200; raw file processed in Lightroom.
Thanks for reading! Please add your questions, comments, or discussion about safaris and travelling to Tanzania, wildlife and birs photography and equipment used in the COMMENTS below.
This work is copyright ©2025 Terry A. McDonald and may not be reproduced
in whole or in part without the written consent of the author.
Please SHARE this with other photographers or with your camera club,
and SUBSCRIBE to receive an email notice of new blogs.
Have a look at my work by visiting www.luxBorealis.com and consider booking a presentation or workshop for your Nature or Photo Club or a personal Field & Screen workshop at Workshops.
How well can Topaz PhotoAI and ON1 No Noise ’rescue’ images with motion blur?
Raw File Optimization – Part 2
This article is the second in a series exploring how to get the most from your raw files. The first was simply entitled Raw File Optimization and explored how to demosaic, denoise, and sharpen raw files using Lightroom Enhanced Noise Reduction, DxO Pure Raw, ON1 No Noise, OM Workspace, and Topaz PhotoAI.
I tested ON1 No NoiseAI plus TackSharp and Topaz PhotoAI Raw Noise with Sharpening on three recent photos that I would love to see improved.
We’ve all been there!
The sudden rush that accompanies that first view of a bird or mammal—we shoot first, then engage the thinking. Is my shutter speed fast enough for the telephoto lens I’m using? How can I increase the speed? Larger aperture? Higher ISO? Is there something I can brace myself against?
In an ideal world, we would have everything set and ready to go, but that’s not always the case. And if you’re on safari, or with others in a vehicle, you have that motion to deal with as well. Someone in the vehicle may shift in their seat to stretch a leg, or even yawn, resulting in movement of your platform, invariably, just when you press the shutter release.
There are also times when everything is set and still, but in dim light, motion blur remains a reality. Not only are birds and wildlife on constant alert for potential danger, they may also be under a dim tree canopy. Branches moving from the wind or from other occupants, even slight movement can translate into blurred images when shooting with telephoto lenses. It’s bound to happen!
Enter software such as ON1 NoNoise AI and Topaz PhotoAI. Let’s see what they are capable of.
Method
Photos
I chose three recent photos: one with only slight blur, one with definite blur, and a third that, well, let’s just see what the software can do.
1. Black-and-White Colobus Monkey (Colobus caudatus): This is a near full frame (4760x3570px) image made in the depths of the cloud forest on the slopes of Mount Meru in Arusha National Park, Tanzania. It is almost sharp, but slight movement of the monkey’s head seems to have caused the slightest of blur to the hairs surrounding its face, so it doesn’t appear to be camera movement. The photo was made with an Olympus OM-1 and M.Zuiko 100-400mm ƒ5.0-6.3 IS lens with the Olympus MC-14 1.4x teleconverter, at 381mm (762mm efov), ƒ11 @ 1/250, ISO 1600. The lens itself is tack sharp as we saw with the photos of the lion and catbird in the previous article. In retrospect, I should have trusted using ƒ8 and ISO 3200 which would have provided a shutter speed of 1/1000, two EV faster.
2. Olive Baboons Grooming (Papio anubis): Also made in Arusha National Park, this adult and juvenile would not sit still. Mom was grooming the kid, and when do kids sit still, especially when having their hair picked over! It was an overcast morning which, under a dark forest canopy, only added to the dimness of the scene. As well, there appears to be some camera movement, as I can see some hairs with double-blur. The 100-400 was at 210mm (420mm efov), but the dim lighting demanded ƒ6 @ 1/50, ISO 3200—not ideal. This image is a centre-crop of 2916x3888px within a horizontal frame.
3. Red-billed Oxpecker (Buphagus erythrorynchus) on Eland: This was a late evening shot, resulting in slower and less accurate focussing than expected. OM Workspace shows the focus point to be just ahead of the right foot of the Oxpecker as it clung to the back of an eland. Clearly, this is a case of operator error, so I take full responsibility for not getting the focus point on target! The photo was shot at 400mm (800mm efov) with the 100-400 zoom, ƒ8 @ 1/80, ISO 1600, and is an 1825×2460 crop. Yes, the oxpecker was far away, but I had yet to get a decent photo of one from our trip! It’s still not decent, but it’s better than nothing and makes for a good example to test just how far the software can go.
Processing
For each photo, I started with the original ORF raw file, edited in Lightroom. My goal, as always, is to re-create the photo as visualized in the field, using subtle adjustments of Exposure, White and Black Points, Highlights and Shadows, Contrast, White Balance and Tint. Adjustment Masks are applied as needed to shape the light; Lens Blur was applied to the Colobus Monkey photo.
Once the initial editing was complete, the ORF was exported from Lightroom, processed within ON1 and Topaz seperately, then each was output as a DNG file to be added back into Lightroom where the same original edits were then copied from the original and applied.
Treatments
Within ON1 NoNoise, I used both the NoNoise AI and Tack Sharp AI modules together, beginning with the Defaults, then adjusting the ’Enhance Detail’ as needed. Micro Sharpening was not applied beyond the default as it always appeared as too aggressive, making the results look ‘crunchy’.
In Topaz PhotoAI, Raw Denoise was used along with Sharpening using Motion Blur applied to the subject only. The mask was adjusted as needed to ensure only the subject was being sharpened. With the Oxpecker photo, I tried the Super Focus BETA with surprisingly good results. However, it took a couple of minutes to see the Preview results and another 10 minutes(!) to process the image. All processing was done on my M1 MacBook Pro with 16gb of ram. There must have been some seriously intensive number crunching going on as I was a bit surprised by how long it took. It felt like 20 years ago, when trying to send a photo over dial-up! But, I went on to do other things while it chugged along. Were the results worth it? We’ll see.
Results
In each case, I compared each treatment with the Lightroom base image, which had been run through Enhanced Noise Reduction and given appropriate sharpening, typically 80 with Masking set to 30. I’m pleased to say both ON1 and Topaz apps have the potential to achieve very good result when rescuing images from slight camera movement. Neither is good enough to rely on to perfectly correct mistakes, but when the mistakes are minor, they do a pretty good job. While I don’t think either quite matches up to the advertised improvements, both can make some recovery of IQ possible.
Colobus Monkey Of the three test images, this one came up with best results. In fact, the results are good enough for a full-size print 12×15” in size. It could even be up-sized to 16×20” with no loss of quality. However, of the three test images, this was also the largest in pixel size, the best exposed, and had the least amount of motion blur to begin with.
For proper viewing, click to open to view at full size (2700x1200px)
Overall, I prefer the Topaz results. To me, they appear cleaner, especially in the white cheek fur. The facial features also appear more natural. In the ON1 version, the facial features appear carved from wood or plasticine.
Baboons Grooming took a little more work. While the hair appears a bit coarse/crispy, the movement is mostly gone. Using the defaults produced an image with double fine hairs. By increasing both the ’Strength’ and the ’Minor Denoise’, this issue was partly solved, but not entirely. Back in Lightroom, I reduced Sharpening to ’0’ and I further reduced the crunchiness of the individual hairs by moving the Texture slider to -50, softening the coarse hairs into something more natural-looking.
For proper viewing, click to open to view at full size (1800x1200px)
I’m not completely happy with the ‘cheek fur’ as it looks a bit too soft and random. However, Topaz did the best job of sharpening up the area around the eyes of the closest baboon, which is the critical part of any wildlife photograph.
Oxpecker: Interesting results. I don’t think any of them adequately render the bird acceptably sharp for printing, but it could be used for ID purposes or a record shot posted online—not what I was hoping for, but then again, I didn’t give the apps much to work with.
For proper viewing, click to open to view at full size (1800x1200px)
Initially, I used Topaz’s Super Focus BETA, setting the Focus Boost to ’Minor’ and the Sharpening Strength to ’Medium’, but that was too high. Unfortunately, setting it to ’Low’ meant another 10-minute wait for results. However, the wait was worth it, perhaps. While the results were not nearly as ’crunchy’ looking, they still not quite up to a visual quality I was hoping for. It introduced an un-natural pattern to the fur and the Oxpecker, without its red eye ring, is a fail.
The ON1 file processed much faster and, at first glance, has a slightly more natural appearance. It managed to retain the red eye ring which Topaz completely lost. However, while the fur on the eland may look more natural, the Oxpecker itself looks forced. The Topaz version, at least, managed to keep, or generate using AI, some feather detail. So Topaz wins for the Oxpecker and ON1 wins for the fur of the eland, though, even the out of focus fur on the Lightroom version looks more realistic.
Conclusions and Discussion
First of all, it’s important to do everything in your power not to fall into the trap of needing to correct for motion blur. If a tripod or monopod isn’t practical,
- engage IBIS;
- brace your arms or lean against a support;
- relax your breathing;
- gently press the shutter release at the ‘bottom’ of your breath;
- open the lens aperture;
- increase the ISO.
- If you’re in a safari truck ora vehicle with others, ask everyone to be still.
Any or all of these help. While motion blur can be corrected, it is not ideal.
Secondly, do not expect much improvement from software correction. While this isn’t a definitive test, I have learned that very slight motion can be corrected to the point where full-sized prints at 300ppi are possible. But it also shows that the advertising is showing only best case scenarios.
It’s best to think of the improvements as a sliding scale of severity versus tolerance. The worse the motion blur is, the more tolerant you will need to be of how limiting the correction is. In more severe cases, such as the Oxpecker, the photo may only have limited use as a record shot. You can share an image like this online, but again, don’t expect to make large prints and be satisfied. It would work as a small image in a photo book, but it might be stretching it for a decent print any larger than 5×7.
OM-1 with M.Zuiko 100-400mm at 400mm, ƒ8 @ 1/80, ISO 1600; processed in Adobe Lightroom and ON1 No Noise
As far as which app to buy to correct blur . . . ? My go-to has become Topaz PhotoAI. It did an excellent job with the Colobus monkey and the Baboons. But a case could be made for ON1 No Noise, given its results for the Oxpecker photo. Depending on how often you need to correct and the types of correction needed, it may be helpful to have both in your arsenal.
And please, if you are sharing a motion-corrected image, we, the viewing public, don’t need to know it is motion-corrected. If you highlight the fact, then some viewers will become determined to ‘find’ artefacts, even if there are none there. If you don’t tell them and someone notices or suspects, then be honest with them. Explain the situation, but don’t get dragged into long-winded apologies or explanations. It is what it is. We do our best with the situations we are presented with and the tools we have. You could even play it up a bit, using it as an opportunity to engage the viewer, describing how dim the lighting was and how difficult the capture was. 😊
The bottom line is don’t expect miracles! If you are able to correct motion blur using software—great. But don’t count on it. Also, be conscious of the fact that you may think the correction is fine, when really, to an objective viewer who has no skin in the game, it may not be. As with any rescue mission, you need to be honest with yourself.
Thanks for reading! Please add your questions, comments, or discussion about correcting motion blur and the apps and techniques used in the COMMENTS below.
This work is copyright ©2025 Terry A. McDonald
and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent of the author.
Please SHARE this with other photographers or with your camera club, and SUBSCRIBE to receive an email notice of new blogs.
Have a look at my work by visiting www.luxBorealis.com and consider booking a presentation or workshop for your Nature or Photo Club or a personal Field & Screen workshop at Workshops.
Total Lunar Eclipse—Landscape Composite Photographs around Guelph, Ontario
Or evolution by trial and error . . .
This is the third and final article about the Total ‘Blood Moon’ Lunar Eclipse of 13-14 March 2025. The first, Are you ready? provides background and a series of resources for photographing a lunar eclipse. The second is a First Look at Total Lunar Eclipse Photographs, with a couple of composites of the Moon at different phases.
The photographs presented below illustrate what I had originally envisioned when I was preparing for the Eclipse. Over the years, I have tried a few times to make photographs of a lunar eclipse, but, given the poorer equipment I had at the time and my limited experience, they didn’t turn out too well. I also found that a photo showing an orange-red moon sitting in the middle of the black background of the night sky was cool, but wasn’t terribly engaging. This time, I wanted more.
The biggest advantage of modern sensors, like the one in my Olympus OM-1, is how well they handle high ISO noise. Combined with advances in post-capture processing, including Lightroom’s Enhanced Noise Reduction (or DxO Pure Raw or Topaz Photo Ai or ON1 Photo Raw—I’ve tested them all), the quality of the base raw files and subsequent processed files has greatly improved. Finally, I could work with high quality base files, and it was thrilling!
Capturing the base landscape images
A full day before the eclipse, I went out to scout locations around my home city of Guelph, Ontario. Despite their fast pace and bright lights, I don’t really appreciate city landscapes, preferring to photograph scenes from rural and natural areas. To me, cities are ‘necessary evils’. I appreciate the advantages of city living in not having to drive far for amenities, but at the same time, I long for a quieter life out in the countryside away from the sirens and constant white noise. Oh well . , .
As I was planning the base landscape photos, I felt it was important to maintain a sense of authenticity for each view. Each landscape had to show the correct south to southwest aspect, one that would include all phases of the Eclipse. Each photo should appear exactly as if you were standing in the same location watching for the three hours it took for the Moon to pass through Earth’s umbra.
PhotoPills’ AR mode is essential for this kind of planning. At each location, after centring the PhotoPills Planning map on the app and navigating to the date and time of the Eclipse, I could view the eclipse superimposed on the sky. Perfect!
At sunset, on the evening of the Eclipse, I re-visited each location to photograph it. the view required an ultra-wide angle, so I set up the OM-1 with the 8-25mm set to 8mm (16mm with a 35mm sensor). I would have used my new Panasonic-Leica 9mm/1.7, but it wasn’t wide enough. Mounting the camera on the tripod, I set the aperture to ƒ5.6 and the OM-1’s High Res mode to ‘Tripod’, capturing each scene as an 80mp, 10368×7776 pixel image—plenty large enough for virtually any use. After correcting for wide angle distortion in Lightroom, I ended up with 9526×7145 pixels, or a 68mp image. Not bad for M43!
Each base landscape was processed in Lightroom. I had to switch to my laptop as Lightroom for iPad (still) does not have Enhanced Noise Reduction. The files probably didn’t need it, but I decided to err on the side of caution. Processing also included further reducing the exposure of the sky while keeping and even accentuating the brightness of the foreground. Sky masks and Linear Gradient masks worked their charm. Each landscape was then exported as a TIFF to use later in Affinity Photo.
Processing the Moon shots
Capturing the moon itself was relatively straightforward. I was able to work from the comfort of my driveway, as the view to the south and southwest was unobscured. Between each series of shots, I could go inside, warm up (it was –1 to –4°C) and have 10-minute cat-naps. When there was enough time between segments, i could begin working on images already captured. You can read about the details of the set-up and exposure in the previous article, as well as the initial processing
Once each Moon shot was edited, I went through them as a set to balance the exposure, highlights and shadows, and the colour temperature of the moon, reducing the shot-to-shot differences. This tweaking took longer than expected, but was necessary to ensure consistency from phase to phase. I ended up choosing 11 different phases: three are ‘pre-Blood Moon’ showing Earth’s umbra gradually passing over the face of the Moon, three images show Totality, and three more are ‘post-Blood Moon’ as the umbra recedes, with a full moon at each end.
Working in Affinity Photo
At this point, I exported the 11 Moon images from Lightroom as 16-bit TIFF files. I could have used JPEGs but, with compression and sharpening, they reduce overall image quality. The TIFFs were then brought into Affinity Photo as a ‘New Stack’. In Lightroom, I had carefully cropped each photo to centre the Moon and to maintain phase-to-phase consistency, but I wanted the circles of the Moon aligned, so I toggled on ‘Align Source Images’. The app did precisely as directed, and I carried on. The Stack was ungrouped allowing me to work on each layer individually. I could have set them up as 11 different files, but opening and closing each file would have become tedious. Working on them as 11 layers was much easier. My goal was to remove the black background of the sky, leaving just the Moon on a transparent background.
Everything looked great, but something was amiss. It was sometime later that I realized each of the eleven Moon images had been rotated. Affinity Photo had done its job correctly by aligning the various craters and features of the Moon. But something wasn’t right. I literally sat there scratching my head for a moment. It was then the light bulb of understanding flickered on—I realized that, over a period of three hours, our view of the face of the Moon changes in 3-dimensional space. Oops!
Rather than trying to undo all the alignment, I scrapped that set of images and re-imported them as a New Stack, but with ‘Align’ toggled off. Lesson learned. Part of me wonders if anyone would have noticed, though I’m sure the true Skywatchers would have alerted me to my error.
From there, it was one trial-and-error after another. I do this to myself—I set a goal, then learn the the ins-and-outs of an app while trying to achieve that goal. Working through a series of prescribed lessons without a clear and applicable end goal doesn’t keep me engaged. So I try something, then do an online search for a solution, then try it again.
I enjoy working with Affinity Photo, but haven’t used it frequently enough to learn all of its inner workings. I had originally learned many of the techniques in Photoshop and, thankfully, Affinity Photo isn’t all that different. In fact, the iPad version is far more complete than the iPad version of Photoshop. Affinity Photo on iPad is like Photoshop on desktop. It’s brilliant (and much less expensive). Kind of makes me wonder why Adobe knowingly continues to cripple its iPad version of Photoshop. I’m glad I ditched it.
By the way, there is nothing quite as intuitive as editing photos on iPad. With a $25 stylus (pencil), it is it even more so. Tapping and drawing with a fine tip is far more accurate than my pudgy finger or using a mouse/trackpad (apologies to Steve Jobs, who as always pro-finger and anti-stylus—😉)
Now, for the composite—more trial-and-error
Once each of the 11 Moon images was prepped in Affinity Photo, I exported them as 16bit TIFFs. I could have used PNGs to maintain transparency (JPEGs do not), but I also needed to maintain overall image quality.
Opening one of the base landscapes, I then copied and pasted the 11 layers of Moon images. In an attempt to maintain realism, I positioned the moons in an arc across the night sky. As a guide, I drew an ellipse to help with smooth positioning and made constant use of Align > Space Horizontally as well as plenty of nudges.
It looked great, but wasn’t quite ‘there’. With coaching from my better half, Laura, we decided each Moon was much too large in the sky. As well, the sky needed to be even darker, while still maintaining that astronomical ‘midnight blue’.
With trial and error, I ended up reducing the size of the Moons to about ½, and repositioned them on the ellipse/arc. After another assessment, we decided it still didn’t look right, so I tried arranging them in a straight line. Nope—it looked too, well, linear to be realistic.
Finally we settled on a gentler arc and that seemed to do it.
From there, I was able to copy and paste the 11 Moon layers onto each background scene. With further tweaking of each individual photo, I ended up with three landscape composites I was pleased with and one ‘meh’. Sadly, the ‘meh’ view is of one of our favourite places in the Arboretum at the University of Guelph. During the day, there is plenty of detail to draw you in but, at night, it appears too flat-looking compared to the others. Oh well. Live and learn.
Have a look at each of the four then, down in the Comments, let me know which one(s) you prefer and why.
Thanks for reading! If you have any questions about the equipment, apps or techniques discussed above, be sure to add a COMMENT.
Please take a moment and SHARE this with other photographers or with your camera club.
To receive an email notice of new articles, SUBSCRIBE below.
Text and photos are copyright ©2025 Terry A. McDonald
and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent of the author.
Have a look at my work by visiting www.luxBorealis.com and consider booking a presentation or workshop for your Nature or Photo Club or a personal Field & Screen workshop at Workshops.
First Look at Total Lunar Eclipse Photographs
. . . and a review of the experience.
Last night was a long one, but well worth it. Over the course of six hours, from before midnight to just before 6am, I took photos every 20 minutes or so, depending on the ‘action’ in the sky above. Some were made 5 to 10 minutes apart. Exciting, yes, but also a real learning experience.
I used my M.Zuiko 100-400mm ƒ5-6.3 IS lens, which is equivalent to a 200-800mm in 35mm sensor terms. It pulled the moon in, but it still did not occupy even ¼ of the sensor. I tried a few shots with the MC-14 1.4x Teleconverter, but I wasn’t entirely happy with the sharpness. With the OM-1 attached, the lens was firmly mounted on a sturdy Manfrotto tripod. As expected, according to the research I did ahead of time, exposure varied widely. Thanks also to a graphic shared on FB by Peter Baumgarten which also showed the variance in exposure over the event.
All metering was done using the OM-1s Spot Meter mode—essential for this kind of work. I altered exposure with each shot—+1EV, neutral, and –1EV, sometime –2EV—but the images that seemed best were at normal exposure for the dim Moon and +1EV for the bright Moon.
Trying to keep the Moon in focus was a problem I shouldn’t have had, but I messed up. When the Moon was bright, I used single-point AF to lock in the focus, then switched to Manual so the AF wouldn’t need to keep focusing. However, twice I inadvertently changed the focus when zooming between 400mm and 100mm and back again—Duh!—and had to re-acquire focus on a decidedly dim Moon near Totality. As a result, some photos are not as sharp as I would like them to be.
Then there is the motion blur to content with. At ISO 3200, the slowest shutter speed occurred at Totality, a measly ⅖ of a second. Not great for a moving target! I could have opened up ⅔ EV to ƒ6.3 and brought the speed up slightly but, as is always the case with photography, I decided to trade a slightly sharper slightly blurred image for a less-sharp, slightly blurred image. Oh well!
The files were processed in Lightroom (not Classic), with the ISO 800 and 3200 shots run through Enhanced Noise reduction, then sharpened. It took a fair bit of work with exposure, contrast, highlights, shadows, white and blacks to nail just the right balance of black sky, shaded details and the over-exposed highlights that occur just before and after Totality—the Japanese Lantern effect, I am told.
The files by themselves look good but, as individual photographs, they don’t really tell the story. I knew I would be making composites; it’s just a matter of deciding whihc photos and how many to add. The composites above were made in Affinity Photo by placing individual files on a background of the night sky—one of the frames I shot at 100mm.
I have plans for a few different composites that are still in the works. Earlier Thursday evening, just at sunset, I went around to five locations in Guelph, shooting ultra-wide landscapes at 8mm, with 80% sky. My goal is create composites with these photographs to put the Eclipse into context that people might recognize. More and more people I’ve spoken with either forgot the Eclipse or didn’t manage to get out of bed for it, so this will help them see what all the excitement was about. The five base landscapes were all shot specifically including the South and Southwest sky, exactly where the Eclipse occurred. PhotoPills AR really helped to ensure correct alignment.
The landscape composites will be fun to do, but will take more work extracting the Moon from each file, without the surrounding black sky—something for this weekend.
If you had a Eclipse experience, be sure to tell us about it in the Comments section below.
Thanks for reading! Please add your questions, comments, or discussion about the Lunar Eclipse, and/or the equipment and techniques used in the Comments below.
This work is copyright ©2025 Terry A. McDonald
and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the written consent of the author.
Please SHARE this with other photographers or with your camera club,
and SUBSCRIBE to receive an email notice of new blogs.
Have a look at my work by visiting www.luxBorealis.com and consider booking a presentation or workshop for your Nature or Photo Club or a personal Field & Screen workshop at Workshops.
luxBorealis Blog 