Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 10 May 2012 (Thursday) 18:37
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

the latest Lightroom vs latest Canon DPP

 
chuckmiller
Senior Member
567 posts
Likes: 111
Joined May 2012
Location: Tampa and Daytona Beach Florida
     
May 10, 2012 18:37 |  #1

This is likely a frequent topic but since each app changes/improves with each release I would like to pose the question again.

When editing RAW files, to create pleasing pictures, be that with sharpening, noise reduction, WB, or the such, which app is doing the better job now? Such as .. Removing noise can soften an image. Which app causes the least softening? Etc.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,640 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 520
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
May 10, 2012 19:10 |  #2

Well, I use Lightroom as my "workflow manager" and so do my Raw processing there.

And, the Lightroom Raw processor, shared with the Photoshop Camera Raw processor, has a significantly more advanced toolset for Raw than DPP.

That being said, DPP is quite nice for Raw processing when you don't want the advanced Lightroom capabilities. It's great for quick in-out conversions. Plus, it has tools that replicate the in-camera tools for creating a jpeg -- the basics of Picture Styles and White Balance, plus enhancement tools that get added to DPP when new image enhancement functions are added to new Canon cameras -- pretty cool when those features can be made available to photos taken with older cameras.

For those reasons I'm not dismissive of DPP! In fact, on any given day I'll often have DPP open right alongside Lightroom, sometimes "messing" with something, sometimes doing a quick conversion for whatever reason.

But, DPP and Lightroom don't "share" Raw processing/metadata, so work done in DPP won't show up with a Raw file in Lightroom and vice-versa. So, since Lightroom is my Workflow manager as well as my "serious" Raw processor, in the end shoots that have "meaning" to me go through my Lightroom Raw processor.

As to which Noise Reduction handles detail better, well again LR has more advanced tools, and, when I'm dealing with high ISO images with noticeable noise I'll be in Lightroom automatically, but if I am in DPP sure I'll toss in NR if it's appropriate to get a working image out the door.


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chuckmiller
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
567 posts
Likes: 111
Joined May 2012
Location: Tampa and Daytona Beach Florida
     
May 10, 2012 19:49 as a reply to  @ tonylong's post |  #3

Using DPP I just opened an 18mp CR2 file, saved it as an 8bit and a 16bit TIFF, the TIFF files are 50 and 100 megabytes. Wow, do TIFF files grow like that in any conversion app?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,640 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 520
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
May 10, 2012 20:48 |  #4

That's pretty much par for the course. Jpegs get two kinds of compression, even Raw files get compression, whereas I don't believe DPP offers tiff compression, but even if you save a tiff out of Photoshop with compression you still get large files. The only "relief" is if you can save as an 8 bit tiff because you have done an ample amount working with your Raw file!

And, if you think that's scary, open a tiff in Photoshop, do some work involving a few layers, then save it with the layers intact, and check the file size!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,407 posts
Likes: 170
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
May 11, 2012 02:05 as a reply to  @ tonylong's post |  #5

18,000,000 pixels X 48 (16 bits per each RGB color channel) = 864,000,000 bits.

864,000,000 / 8 bits per byte = 108,000,000.

108,000,000 / 1.024 (1,024 bytes per kilobyte) / 1.024 (1,024 kilobytes per megabyte) = ~103 MB.


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
chuckmiller
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
567 posts
Likes: 111
Joined May 2012
Location: Tampa and Daytona Beach Florida
     
May 11, 2012 06:52 as a reply to  @ tzalman's post |  #6

Yowza, I have never done the math.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,916 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 5054
Joined Oct 2009
     
May 11, 2012 07:10 |  #7

I was a log time DPP user but just recently switched. I find LR/ACR far better for NR than DPP. DPP softens the image more.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NYC2BGI
Senior Member
Avatar
846 posts
Joined Feb 2005
Location: Brooklyn, NY USA
     
May 11, 2012 13:30 |  #8

I really like DPP and it is always getting better. Just always watch for when Canon puts out updates on it. It has really improved a ton since I bought my 20D years ago.


Canon 5D3, 5D2, 40D
EF 50mm f1.4, EF 85mm f1.8,
Canon EF 70-200 f/2.8L IS II
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L
http://www.facebook.co​m/HightechPix (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,407 posts
Likes: 170
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
May 11, 2012 15:54 |  #9

NYC2BGI wrote in post #14416682 (external link)
I really like DPP and it is always getting better. Just always watch for when Canon puts out updates on it. It has really improved a ton since I bought my 20D years ago.

Very true, but ACR/LR has improved much more.


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,640 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 520
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
May 11, 2012 16:04 |  #10

I love DPP for quick and easy conversions and for "messing with" photos, but for "serious" work LR/ACR have more powerful features...


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stealthdave
Member
199 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Mar 2011
     
May 14, 2012 06:41 |  #11

Using a canon 400d with 18-55mm lens I do the following:
Open all my raws in DPP and export to tiff
Then import to lightroom and work from there

I have tried but can never get my raw files to look as good just using lightroom (would be nice if I could as I could skip a step then)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,407 posts
Likes: 170
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
May 14, 2012 07:19 |  #12

stealthdave wrote in post #14428515 (external link)
Using a canon 400d with 18-55mm lens I do the following:
Open all my raws in DPP and export to tiff
Then import to lightroom and work from there

I have tried but can never get my raw files to look as good just using lightroom (would be nice if I could as I could skip a step then)

I used primarily DPP for four years. For the last three years it has been LR. I firmly believe I can get a much better conversion with LR, but I freely admit that it takes a lot more work - both on the level of overall learning and experience gaining and on the level of the time spent with each image. Today, with LR4 this is even more true. LR4 can do things with a Raw file that it can't do with a tif and that DPP can't even approach. Read this article for a taste of what LR4 does (and then run to the nearest software store):
http://www.luminous-landscape.com …_age_of_lightro​om_4.shtml (external link)


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
12,916 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 5054
Joined Oct 2009
     
May 14, 2012 07:24 |  #13

stealthdave wrote in post #14428515 (external link)
I have tried but can never get my raw files to look as good just using lightroom (would be nice if I could as I could skip a step then)

In which way? Colour, IQ? I was a long time DPP user and recently switched to LR/ACR. I have to agree with tzalman on what he said.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
39,856 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Feb 2005
Location: enschede, netherlands
     
May 14, 2012 07:59 |  #14

Do not use Luminance NR in DPP and you'll be fine. If you're using a fairly new camera, and expose well, you won't need it anyhow, unless you're shooting ISO 3200 and up.

Both DPP and LR4 are good raw converters, it mostly comes down to personal preference.
For some images, I still prefer DPP's sharpening.

LR does offer more options though.


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpace (external link)
Get Colormanaged (external link)
Twitter (external link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stealthdave
Member
199 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Mar 2011
     
May 14, 2012 08:27 |  #15

Both really

digital paradise wrote in post #14428619 (external link)
In which way? Colour, IQ? I was a long time DPP user and recently switched to LR/ACR. I have to agree with tzalman on what he said.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

19,546 views & 0 likes for this thread
the latest Lightroom vs latest Canon DPP
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.0forum software
version 2.0 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Angester
688 guests, 300 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.