LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


the latest Lightroom vs latest Canon DPP

FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing
Thread started 10 May 2012 (Thursday) 18:37   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
chuckmiller
Senior Member
Joined May 2012
159 posts
Tampa, Florida
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #1, May 10, 2012 18:37:37




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
tonylong
do I really have to respond?
tonylong's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
53,001 posts
Vancouver, WA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #2, May 10, 2012 19:10:42


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

LOG IN TO REPLY
chuckmiller
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined May 2012
159 posts
Tampa, Florida
[MORE/SHARE]

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?

Post #3, May 10, 2012 19:49:23 as a reply to tonylong's post 38 minutes earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
do I really have to respond?
tonylong's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
53,001 posts
Vancouver, WA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

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!

Post #4, May 10, 2012 20:48:33


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

LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
tzalman's Avatar
Joined Apr 2005
12,598 posts
Gesher Haziv, Israel
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #5, May 11, 2012 02:05:41 as a reply to tonylong's post 5 hours earlier.


Elie / אלי
I look at the world and I notice it's turning, while my guitar gently weeps.
With every mistake we must surely be learning, still my guitar gently weeps.
Paul Harrison
Siteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
chuckmiller
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Joined May 2012
159 posts
Tampa, Florida
[MORE/SHARE]

Yowza, I have never done the math.

Post #6, May 11, 2012 06:52:30 as a reply to tzalman's post 4 hours earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
Cream of the Crop
digital paradise's Avatar
Joined Oct 2009
7,681 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #7, May 11, 2012 07:10:00


Image Editing OK

Websiteexternal link ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
NYC2BGI
Senior Member
NYC2BGI's Avatar
Joined Feb 2005
846 posts
Brooklyn, NY USA
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #8, May 11, 2012 13:30:42


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/HightechPixexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
tzalman's Avatar
Joined Apr 2005
12,598 posts
Gesher Haziv, Israel
[MORE/SHARE]

NYC2BGI wrote in post #14416682external 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.

Post #9, May 11, 2012 15:54:32


Elie / אלי
I look at the world and I notice it's turning, while my guitar gently weeps.
With every mistake we must surely be learning, still my guitar gently weeps.
Paul Harrison
Siteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
do I really have to respond?
tonylong's Avatar
Joined Sep 2007
53,001 posts
Vancouver, WA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

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

Post #10, May 11, 2012 16:04:29


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

LOG IN TO REPLY
stealthdave
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2011
196 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

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)

Post #11, May 14, 2012 06:41:12




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
tzalman's Avatar
Joined Apr 2005
12,598 posts
Gesher Haziv, Israel
[MORE/SHARE]

stealthdave wrote in post #14428515external 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_lightroom_4​.shtmlexternal link

Post #12, May 14, 2012 07:19:27


Elie / אלי
I look at the world and I notice it's turning, while my guitar gently weeps.
With every mistake we must surely be learning, still my guitar gently weeps.
Paul Harrison
Siteexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
Cream of the Crop
digital paradise's Avatar
Joined Oct 2009
7,681 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

stealthdave wrote in post #14428515external 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.

Post #13, May 14, 2012 07:24:17


Image Editing OK

Websiteexternal link ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
René Damkot's Avatar
Joined Feb 2005
39,854 posts
enschede, netherlands
[MORE/SHARE]

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.

Post #14, May 14, 2012 07:59:56


"I think the idea of art kills creativity" - Douglas Adams
Why Color Management.
Color Problems? Click here.
MySpaceexternal link
Get Colormanagedexternal link
Twitterexternal 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
Senior Member
Joined Mar 2011
196 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Both really

digital paradise wrote in post #14428619external 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.

Post #15, May 14, 2012 08:27:47




LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
13,504 views & 0 likes for this thread
the latest Lightroom vs latest Canon DPP
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00076 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
782 guests, 549 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is diegovanetti

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.