tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post2116414462533676381..comments2024-02-12T03:21:03.402-08:00Comments on Ron Martinsen's Photography Blog: Canon RAW Conversion Test–Nov 3, 2015ronmartblog.comhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06815090271742112506noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-38421946905478832462015-11-12T22:10:32.746-08:002015-11-12T22:10:32.746-08:00On reflection, using a DNG to send the image back ...On reflection, using a DNG to send the image back to Lightroom from DXO may have short-circuited the color rendition advantage, by bringing it in as a DNG to be interpreted by Lightroom!<br /><br />But I do like what its output looks like.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04657432635526079851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-62624195893799127162015-11-08T02:36:58.999-08:002015-11-08T02:36:58.999-08:00I'm buying both DXO OpticsPro Elite and Viewpo...I'm buying both DXO OpticsPro Elite and Viewpoint 2, its plugin for wide-angle lenses. I get great RAW processing - and it has rescued my EFS 10-18 lens, which otherwise gave me so much geometric distortion that it wasn't very useful - this combo makes its output very nice.<br /><br />I tried both choices in exporting DXO's output back to Lightroom, since you have the choice of TIFF or DNG. Both give you 16 bit RGB with full metadata (I had Lightroom send them into Photoshop to be sure), but the DNG result looks nicer to me - the TIFF looks a bit too contrasty, while the DNG has a smoother tonality, with more detail in both shadows and highlights.<br /><br />To enable you to tell the various versions apart, it appends DXO to the end of the filename (before the dot DNG or TIF). Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04657432635526079851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-66546020129401283152015-11-06T11:19:01.020-08:002015-11-06T11:19:01.020-08:00My experiments with DPP last night showed me that ...My experiments with DPP last night showed me that neither version lets you create a 16-bit TIFF that includes the shot's EXIF information - that's only allowed if you let DPP knock the color bit depth down to JPEG's 8 bits.<br /><br />That means you have to choose between Lightroom and Photoshop knowing the details about the shot's creation or giving them a full-quality image to work on. Until that Hobson's Choice is removed, DPP is disqualified from being anything more than a quick way to make JPEGs when you're in a hurry.<br /><br />Since Ron's post showed that DxO does RAW file processing that preserves the colors just about as well as DPP, I downloaded the one-month trial of DXO Optics Pro 10 Elite today.<br /><br />It's optimized to act as a plug-in alternative to Lightroom's Develop module. Seems comfortable enough if you've adapted to Lightroom's catalog approach, and would preserve the virtual copy system of Lightroom if you've implemented that (someday, someday).<br /><br />You *can* open a RAW file directly with standard file tree navigation inside DXO, and then export the result to Lighroom (pre-configured) or, with some fiddling, directly into Photoshop (unfortunately, to preserve full-quality, you need to define that kind of TIFF save and then open the result in Photoshop - the "send to other program" option doesn't let you configure it to send a full quality TIFF).<br /><br />However, using DXO as a front-end file browser and RAW file processor is hobbled by its lack of the contact sheet grid of lots of photos both Bridge and Lightroom have, which lets you scan through lots of pictures at once - so DxO really functions best as a Lightroom plug-in. That means the best way to use it is: <br />1. Import all your images into Lr's catalog, <br />2. Find a picture to work on with Lr's browsing tools, <br />3. Have Lr export it to DXO for basic RAW file development (it has most of the tools ACR has), <br />4. Have DXO ship the result back into Lr, and then <br />5. Do your fiddling with things like the healing brush, clone stamp, etc. in Lr (or have Lr send it to Ps for that, plus layer work).<br /><br />I really, really, really have to take the time to read through the Andrew Gibson ebook I bought about Lightroom's advanced virtual image management!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04657432635526079851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-6667308908166947072015-11-05T20:06:36.770-08:002015-11-05T20:06:36.770-08:00So I tried using DPP 3.15 as if it was Bridge + AC...So I tried using DPP 3.15 as if it was Bridge + ACR.<br /><br />Opened a standard 70D RAW file, used DPP's lens correction tools to remove geometry distortion and chromatic aberration, and on the Tools menu chose Transfer to Photoshop.<br /><br />After a little while, I got a popup notifying me not that it couldn't find Photoshop but that Encoding has Failed. This happened repeatedly. Closing all other applications and all closable system tray processes made no differences.<br /><br />So I had DPP 3.15 save it out as a TIFF - but there's a big problem: if you want it to save a 16-bit TIFF (to maintain the image's status as a RAW equivalent), it won't save any EXIF information. It will only do that for 8-bit TIFFs. So when I open the TIFF up in Photoshop, it has no shooting data: not the shutter speed, not the ISO, not the aperture or the focus distance, not even what lens and camera were used.<br /><br />In frustration, after closing even my browser and email, I tried the Transfer to Photoshop menu item again, this time by means of the keystroke equivalent, Ctrl-P.<br /><br />No error message, and Photoshop opened! The image came in as a TIF, and it even knew what kind of camera it came from, the shutter speed and f/stop, the ISO and metering mode,and that it was aperture priority - but not what lens was used!I suppose that since the lens corrections will have already been done by this point, it doesn't much matter - but it's galling - and it suggests that the transfer used an 8 bit TIFF, to include what EXIF info it did.<br /><br />I tried the same thing with DPP 4 and ran into exactly the same shortcomings: the Convert and Save As dialog only saves EXIF with 8-bit TIFFs, and the Transfer to Photoshop routing omits the lens information.<br /><br />Arrgh!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04657432635526079851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-75743490491683970822015-11-05T15:38:41.787-08:002015-11-05T15:38:41.787-08:00A short postscript to my comment: 32-bit DPP 3.15 ...A short postscript to my comment: 32-bit DPP 3.15 supports all of my Canon lenses, including last summer's 10-18 EF-S IS STM, and my EOS 70D body, as well as all my older bodies and Powershots. 64-bit DPP 4 supports all my lenses, but snubs my XTi, G9, and G12 Powershots, displaying only the embedded JPEG thumbnails in those cameras' RAW files. <br /><br />3.15 doesn't support the very latest xD cameras, stopping at the Mk II models of the 1D and 5D, but just about all other EOS bodies are supported, including the 7D II. Similarly, its support for the Powershots stops just short of the recently released G5X and G3X.<br /><br />Canon needs to include its newer cameras in DPP 3.15 and/or make DPP 4 more color-consistent with its JPEGs and support its older cameras.<br /><br />Or give Adobe the recipes to let ACR accurately mimic DPP 3.15 for all of its cameras!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04657432635526079851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5826231802859523569.post-40049406476594071692015-11-05T13:29:27.645-08:002015-11-05T13:29:27.645-08:00Interesting.
I'm assuming at the outset that...Interesting. <br /><br />I'm assuming at the outset that the camera and all five RAW processors were set to default processing including lens geometry and color fringing correction. <br /><br />It looks like the closest color match to the JPEG - and thus to the LCD review image - comes from the 32-bit "Ides of March" (3.15) version of DPP (followed closely by DXO 10.5.1), while the newer, 64-bit version of DPP (4.3.31.0) is fairly-well matched by ACR 9.2.486, but neither looks like the camera JPEG.<br /><br />(The Piccure+ is a complete outlier, much darker and more saturated than any of the others.)<br /><br />The main difference between the JPEG, DPP 3, and DXO is the differing amounts of distortion correction done by DPP 3.15 and DXO. <br /><br />Since Canon knows its own lenses better than anyone else, if your goal is accurate distortion correction and faithful color rendition of Canon RAW files, I'd stick with the 32-bit DPP.<br /><br />You could mimic the pre-Lightroom "Bridge image browser to Photoshop for editing with a stopover in ACR" workflow by using DPP 3.15 as the image browser and RAW file processor, and have it ship the image as a Wide Gamut TIFF into Photoshop." No stop in ACR needed, since DPP combines Bridge and ACR's capabilities.<br /><br />For those coming from Bridge who hate Lightroom's requirement to explicitly import images into its library, that makes the 32-bit DPP 3.15 the winner.<br /><br />For those who're comfortable with importing new images into Lightroom, in order to get Lightroom's library and virtual copy capabilities, DPP 3.15 is still the winner, since the main reason for using DPP in an Adobe workflow is to get color rendition that matches Canon's intent and distortion correction by those with access to the lenses' designs. Only DPP 3.15 meets both objectives.<br /><br />I see little reason to bother with DPP 4 at all. DPP 4 may get you better lens correction than ACR but it doesn't get you accurate color as your starting point.<br /><br />Adobe needs to make DPP 4's color rendition more like 3.15 - otherwise the only thing that recommends DPP 4 as a pre-processor is that it might be marginally-faster than the 32-bit DPP 3.15, but at the price of losing consistency with Canon's color intent.<br /><br />PS For shots taken with non-Canon lenses, DPP, not having information about the lenses in its database, disables geometry and color fringing correction, so those will have to be done inside Lightroom or Photoshop.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04657432635526079851noreply@blogger.com