Lightroom versus Canon Digital Photo Pro

[TooManyShots]

I just read a thread about DDP has better NR ability and fired up my DPP. Hasn't used it for a long time. Just updated to the 3.5 version. I am not sure which is better in PP work with bird shots. LR tends to produce natural look. DPP tends to be a bit, how can I put it, "loud." It still won't allow you to adjust shadows, lightness, and individual color saturation. That's very often important with bird shots. Which one you guys are using??? I want to stick with Lightroom but......... If DPP is better, I have to switch. That may change the "look" of my shots...

[andrewhuxman]

I think it is personal preference myself. I am a CS3 user.

[Roy C]

I use DPP for a few little tweaks and the RAW conversion and then send to CS2 as a tiff for the rest of the processing.

[Fiddlefingers]

I also do the intial work in DPP and then transfer to Photoshop as a tiff for further processing.

[snowyowl13]

I routinely use DPP and then tweak in CS2 if necessary.

[hollis_f]

I tried DPP yesterday for the first time in ages, being a total LR convert. Gads! Where were half the controls I'm used to in LR.

[Roy C]

I tried DPP yesterday for the first time in ages, being a total LR convert. Gads! Where were half the controls I'm used to in LR.
There is no way you can consider DPP to be an image editor Frank (which is why I do most editing in CS2) but it gives you a very good RAW conversion IMO.

[hollis_f]

There is no way you can consider DPP to be an image editor Frank
You can say that again! I thought I'd check it out as I had some group shots taken with my 10-22 and I was hoping the lens correction function would do something to stop the people on the ends looking quite so squashed. Didn't work.

but it gives you a very good RAW conversion IMO.Yes, I'd read several people whose opinion I respect say that. But I couldn't really see any advantage over LR, especially now it's got the camera profiles available.

[Roy C]

You can say that again! I thought I'd check it out as I had some group shots taken with my 10-22 and I was hoping the lens correction function would do something to stop the people on the ends looking quite so squashed. Didn't work.

Yes, I'd read several people whose opinion I respect say that. But I couldn't really see any advantage over LR, especially now it's got the camera profiles available.
Each to their own Frank, I have Light Room but do not like it at all as an image editor, preferring CS2.

[aligater]

When i saw this thread i thought id revisit DPP and im impressed with it, now i only use Lightroom for the odd tweak like fill light and recovery..Also think that the sharpening is better in DPP than Lightroom and CS3 unsharp mask.Workflow now is adjust RAW in DPP save as 16 bit Tiff, CS3 / Lightroom for tweaks, final RGB edit in DPP. The detailed print in DPP i find very good, which saves me having to go back to CS3.......overall i like it.

[Dave 1942]

I also use DPP and do any tweaking in PS. I find that DPP will do most of my editing and is user friendly..

Dave

[rgfrison]

I use both I like the sharpening in dpp and the NR in lightroom, being an editing
noob I have found going back and forth converting in each more than a couple
time tends to corrupt the image. By corrupt, I mean extreme crop for no apparent reason.

[snowyowl13]

DPP has one great thing going for it, besides being a good program. It's free (with the camera purchase). The big issue to me is that the Adobe products are outrageously over priced.

[highcountry]

I have LR, CS2 and Elements 6.0. My PC is way too slow converting raw files in DPP to TIFF. But I did do a test between DPP and Elements today and I guess that I am not sophisticated enough to discern the difference.:oops:

[stonyzmom]

Glad to see some of the opinions here. I used DPP last night for the first time and found the sharpening to be awesome. LR doesn't even compare in that department. However, I still prefer LR for all other work if needed.

[scrumpy]

Are you folk aware there is a new version of DPP? Version 3.6.1.0. Now you can tweak the highlights and shadows - awesome.

[Stealthy Ninja]

I did a comparison once between DPP, LR and Aperture.

The "quality" of the conversion, depends on what you want. Personally I found Aperture to be the worst, then LR then DPP.

That said, you can dial LR in to be just as good (if not better) than DPP by changing the default settings. This is a bit fiddly though.

So my conclusion is:
If you want your photos to look exactly like you shot them in camera (and don't mind the interface - I don't like DPPs controls over LR personally) then DPP will give you images that retain all the information and will give you nice grain/detail levels.

If you want something that does a good job and gives you more options for editing (and is much more convenient to use IMHO) go for LR. Though be warned. You'll have to dial in LR to get the same look at DPP.

Each has its disadvantages. Personally I use LR because of the presets and the ease of use. It also integrates very well with photoshop. IMHO it is a much better program for storing a lot of photos YMMV.

Some people like Aperture (Mac only) I don't, but this thread isn't about Aperture. :)

I have to agree on the LR sharpening in general. I like the way they do it, but the quality of the sharpen (also NR) seems a bit off some how. Oh well, if I really need to do a good sharpening job, photoshop can handle it. :)

[hollis_f]

That said, you can dial LR in to be just as good (if not better) than DPP by changing the default settings. This is a bit fiddly though.

But you only need to do it once.

When you've got the LR develop settings as you want them you hold the 'Alt' key and the 'Reset' button on the lower right changes to 'Set Default'. You can then save those settings to be used as the defaults on images taken with that specific camera/ISO combination.

[Stealthy Ninja]

But you only need to do it once.

When you've got the LR develop settings as you want them you hold the 'Alt' key and the 'Reset' button on the lower right changes to 'Set Default'. You can then save those settings to be used as the defaults on images taken with that specific camera/ISO combination.

I know, but it's still a bit fiddly. ;)

[TooManyShots]

I stopped using LR all together now for 2 months. For one thing, my shots don't have the yellow tint on them anymore. RAW sharpness setting seems to be easier to work with. I just relegated LR for anything that is not "sharpness essential." Street photography, low lighting shooting, and salvage operations. For normal shots with correct exposure under acceptable ISO setting, I use DPP and then exports the shots to CS3.

[digital_photog]

I use Light Room to correct metadata issues and convert to TIFF and modify the images in elements 7 or my old version of Photoshop (7). I only use DPP to convert some images to jpeg (for the web). LightRoom rocks and is non-destructive.

JMHO

Fred

[mjm80]

Are you folk aware there is a new version of DPP? Version 3.6.1.0. Now you can tweak the highlights and shadows - awesome.

News to me as I'm still on 3.4. Just checked Canon UK site which still has 3.4. Where can I download the 3.6 update?

EDIT:
Just answered my own question. Google has not caught up a search for canon dpp brings up 3.4 but serching for DPP 3.6 brought up the update - link below:
http://software.canon-europe.com/software/0033256.asp?model=

[artyman]

Here you go try this http://software.canon-europe.com/software/0033256.asp?model=

[Ken Nielsen]

I just read a thread about DDP has better NR ability

Doing is believing. Adobe has the free 30 day trial period on the latest version of Lightroom (2.3.)

Get it and use it. It is non-destructive to your files and you can back away from it if you don't like it. The reason I say this is because Lightroom is revolutionary, You have to see for yourself. Get linked up with the program, log on to Adobe forums for Lightroom and they will answer every question that comes along pronto, plus there are scads of very clear tutorials that will get you going in no time.

I think you're going to love it. I just bought it today after the 30 day trial. It's indispensable IMHO.

Ken

[lmans]

Are you folk aware there is a new version of DPP? Version 3.6.1.0. Now you can tweak the highlights and shadows - awesome.

Okay..where or how do you download this. I went to Canon USA site, library....plugged in my system and I got my camera...no download of this available. In fact I tried several systems just to see and none of them had downloads of this. What am I doing wrong that must be real obvious....sorry about the clunker of a question....

[artyman]

Look back a couple of posts!
http://software.canon-europe.com/software/0033256.asp?model=

[HYBEagle]

Look back a couple of posts!
http://software.canon-europe.com/software/0033256.asp?model=

Digital Photo Professional Updater for Windows

Version 3.6.1

Released on 21-04-2009

Description:

Digital Photo Professional 3.6.1 (for both Win/Mac)

* Adds supported models
Now supports RAW files from the EOS EOS 500D and PowerShot SX1 IS (with firmware v2.0 or later).
* New RAW adjustment function for shadow and highlights.
* Support for the following lenses added to the lens aberration correction function.
EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro, EF 50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro + Life-Size Converter, and MP-E 65mm f/2.8.
* Cautions on Use
If you use the Digital Photo Professional 3.6.1 remote capture function, it is also necessary to download the latest version of EOS Utility (2.6 or later).

Compatibility:
Operating system(s): Windows Vista, Windows XP SP2, Windows XP SP3
Language(s): German

Ich don't speak Dutsch.

[alohabob]

To me the photos just don't look so good when viewing with LR. I will edit in LR then send it to DPP to view, it looks so much better when viewed with DPP! Anyone else notice this??

[hollis_f]

To me the photos just don't look so good when viewing with LR. I will edit in LR then send it to DPP to view, it looks so much better when viewed with DPP! Anyone else notice this??

Er, no. Do you mean the jpegs or tiffs you export from LR look better in DPP?

[alohabob]

Yeah, usually jpg's. And it's quite noticable!

[hollis_f]

Yeah, usually jpg's. And it's quite noticable!

Hmm, so you're saying that you use LR to process the raw so that it looks as good as you can get it, export to jpeg, then view the jpeg in DPP where it looks better?

[alohabob]

exactly! ?????

Its just an over-all look. seems 'clearer' if you know what I mean. In LR its just doesn't seem as sharp, as bold of colors. I usually process a bit less sharp and contrasty because I know it will be there when I view it in DPP!

[Mike55]

Are you viewing the files in the library mode of LR rather than develop mode? Also, are you viewing the images in DPP and LR at the same size? I find that the size of the RAW edit window effects how it looks (smaller looks sharper, etc).

Also, I have found that the LR2 edit mode viewer does not really show the edited changes very well unless you save the jpeg and view it in Library mode.

[alohabob]

Hmm. I'll have to look into the develop/library diff., as well as sizes. Thanks Mike.