Factual comparison · Updated 2026-10-13
PhotoMentor vs FilterPixel for Photo Culling
These two workflows are closer than most. According to FilterPixel’s DeepCull page, it keeps original RAW files on your computer and sends low-resolution previews to the cloud for scoring, as PhotoMentor Bulk Culler does; both sort photos into Keep / Review / Reject groups, let you set a target count and give reasons for selections. FilterPixel is a Mac and Windows app with genre-specific models and Lightroom Classic star-rating export. PhotoMentor Bulk Culler runs in the browser, uses a free-text brief with Event and Creative modes, writes XMP sidecars that respect existing edits, and keeps culled shoots searchable.
Cull your first shoot freeSide-by-side criteria
| Criterion | PhotoMentor Bulk Culler | FilterPixel |
|---|---|---|
| Verified product scope | PhotoMentor Bulk Culler: browser-based culling of a whole shoot. The AI sort puts photos into Keep / Review / Rejected and groups similar frames; keepers are ranked into a shortlist with reasons, and a detailed critique is available for finalists. | AI culling app with Keepers / Review / Rejects sorting and DeepCull, a genre-based culling mode; the wider product also offers AI editing. |
| Where the workflow runs | In a desktop browser (Chrome, Edge, Safari or Firefox). Analysis runs on PhotoMentor servers, so an internet connection is required. There is no desktop app. | Mac and Windows app with cloud AI scoring, so an internet connection is required. The DeepCull page says only low-resolution previews generated on your machine are sent and original RAW files stay on your computer; the Culling page describes connecting a folder so that images “upload automatically as you shoot”. |
| Files and RAW input | JPG, PNG, WebP, HEIC/HEIF and camera RAW (CR2, CR3, NEF, NRW, ARW, RAF, ORF, RW2, PEF, SRW, DNG and more). For RAW, the browser reads the preview the camera embedded in the file; RAW+JPEG pairs count as one photo. Only a reduced copy (long side up to 1024 px) is uploaded: RAW and full-size files stay on your computer. | RAW (NEF, CR3/CR2, ARW, RAF, ORF, RW2, DNG and more), RAW+JPEG pairs, JPG, HEIC and PSD. |
| Handoff to your editor | Stars, colour labels, statuses and keywords as XMP sidecars for Lightroom Classic and Capture One. In Chrome or Edge they are written into the shoot folder and merged with existing sidecars: develop settings saved in them are never touched, and stars and labels saved in them are kept unless you choose to overwrite them. Save metadata to files in your editor first; changes kept only in the catalog are replaced when the editor reads the sidecars. Other browsers download a ZIP. Photo files are never modified. JPEG, HEIC and DNG get a file-name list for a Lightroom filter; CSV and HTML reports are also available. | DeepCull exports star ratings and metadata to Lightroom Classic; Photoshop and Capture One are listed as add-on export options, and the Culling page adds social media and a local folder. XMP is not mentioned on the reviewed pages. |
| Similar frames and shortlist size | Similar frames are grouped and can be compared side by side. You choose how many finalists you need, up to 100 (presets 10 / 25 / 50 or a share of the session), and can pin photos you want regardless of rank. | Groups near-identical frames and picks the strongest from each burst. DeepCull lets you set the exact number of keepers. |
| Selection context | Two modes for the AI sort, Event / reportage and Creative / personal work, plus an optional written brief (theme and audience, weights in %) that ranks the keepers before any critique. | Genre-specific models, each with ten scoring criteria; a Customizable Genre lets you edit the criteria yourself. |
| Deliberate creative choices | In Creative / personal work mode, silhouettes, motion blur, fog, grain and unusual exposure are treated as possible intent: at worst such a photo goes to Review and it is never rejected for that reason alone. The AI shows which deliberate choices it recognised. | The Culling page says the Review group holds “creative choices (intentional blur, motion, etc.)”. A separate creative mode is not described. |
| Decision explanation | Readable reasons for every finalist (“why this photo”). A detailed critique runs automatically for a plan-dependent number of finalists and on request for any other photo. | DeepCull gives individual scores across ten criteria and “plain-language reasons for its decisions”. |
| Photographer control | Every status is a suggestion. Review with keyboard shortcuts, stars, colour labels, multi-select and undo, and override anything; the photographer makes the final call. | Keepers, Review and Rejects stay recoverable with one click, any decision can be overridden, and originals are never deleted, moved or altered. |
| After the cull | Culled shoots stay searchable in All Photos by description or “find similar”; older shoots can be added to search without culling on the Workflow plan. Collections group photos across shoots, and in Chrome or Edge a package of the original files can be assembled from your own disk (SHA-256-verified copies; originals are never uploaded). | The reviewed pages describe AI editing of selects. Search across past shoots is not described. |
| Best fit | A browser workflow with a free-text brief, Event and Creative modes, XMP sidecars that preserve existing edits, and search across past shoots. | High-volume genre work (events, conferences, sports, concerts) that needs an exact keeper count and Lightroom Classic star ratings. |
When FilterPixel may be preferable
FilterPixel may be preferable for high-volume event, conference, sports or concert work where genre-specific models, scores across ten criteria, an exact keeper count, built-in AI editing and Lightroom Classic star-rating export matter most, or when you want a desktop app connected to your import folder.
When PhotoMentor Bulk Culler may fit
PhotoMentor Bulk Culler may fit when you want to start in the browser without installing anything, describe the theme and audience of the selection in free text, cull personal or creative work in a mode that does not reject deliberate choices on their own, keep existing Lightroom or Capture One edits intact when writing XMP sidecars, and search all your culled shoots later.
How to decide
Use a representative shoot, inspect both selected and rejected frames, and verify the current product terms before committing. No speed or accuracy result is claimed by this comparison.
Test Bulk Culler on your first shoot, freeOfficial sources and retrieval dates
Product pages can change; follow the sources for current details.
- FilterPixel Culling — official product page — Keepers/Review/Rejects with creative choices in Review, recoverable rejects, override control, Windows and Mac, listed RAW/JPEG/HEIC/PSD formats, folder-connected upload, export to Lightroom, Photoshop, Capture One, social media and a local folder (retrieved 2026-10-13).
- FilterPixel DeepCull — official product page — genre models with customizable criteria, exact keeper count, ten scored criteria with plain-language reasons, burst grouping, preview-only cloud scoring with RAW kept local, internet required, Lightroom Classic star-rating export (retrieved 2026-10-13).
Questions
Is PhotoMentor Bulk Culler a replacement for FilterPixel?
Not for every workflow. FilterPixel’s official pages describe a Mac and Windows app with genre-specific models, an exact keeper count and Lightroom Classic star-rating export. PhotoMentor Bulk Culler starts in the browser, uses a free-text brief with Event and Creative modes, writes XMP sidecars for Lightroom Classic and Capture One, and keeps culled shoots searchable.
Do both keep RAW files on my computer?
According to FilterPixel’s DeepCull page, only low-resolution previews generated on your machine are sent to its cloud for scoring, and original RAW files stay on your computer. PhotoMentor Bulk Culler works the same way in principle: the browser reads each RAW file’s embedded preview and uploads only a reduced copy. Both need an internet connection for scoring.
Are FilterPixel speed or accuracy claims compared here?
No. This page records verified workflow capabilities but does not reproduce vendor speed, accuracy, popularity, or superiority claims as comparative evidence.