Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
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 15 Jul 2007 (Sunday) 11:44
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

DPP vs. Lightroom

 
davidcrebelxt
Goldmember
davidcrebelxt's Avatar
3,016 posts

Joined Dec 2006

Missouri, USA
MORE INFO

lowcrust wrote in post #3607927external link
Obviously "initial conversion". That's what people were talking about, right? All that talk about Adobe reverse-enigeneering and that. I asked for examples of straight conversion without post processing so that I can see this for myself. I've only used DPP briefly but never experienced or noticed this phenomena.

Sorry, wasn't sure what you meant... I based my reply on this part of the question:

"But if someone makes a statement that "my cr2 file will be better processed by DPP than LR" "

When people make those statments I take it to mean they like the final output better from one or the other.

That garyjean link was good... I see an even bigger colorshift with my camera using ACR than what they show... Candy apple reds sometimes go dull orange using the default settings.

Jul 25, 2007 12:38

David C.
Equipment: Canon Dig. Rebel XT; 18-55mm EF-S; 28-105mm EF; 50mm 1.8 EF
Sigma ef-500 DG ST, Elements, Gimp, Lightroom
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/dcrebelxtexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
René Damkot's Avatar
39,854 posts

Joined Feb 2005

enschede, netherlands
MORE INFO

lowcrust wrote in post #3607954external link
Yeah, I actually mentioned in my first post that I did see your thread, René.


Oops. All the LR vs. DPP threads must have gotten me confused ;)

Jul 26, 2007 11:39

"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
Collin85
THREAD ­ STARTER
Cream of the Crop
Collin85's Avatar
8,164 posts

Joined Jan 2007

Sydney/Beijing
MORE INFO

Guys, I'm back.

Went and got CS3. Now I understand it uses ACR 4.0+ for it's RAW files, which is pretty much exactly what Lightroom boasts, right? I'm VERY pleased with the abundance of tools available, especially the highlight recovery tool.

I went and did a few tests to see ACR vs. DPP myself, and now I get what people meant by 'punchier results' and 'better colours' with DPP. I straight converted some RAW files with CS3 and did it with the same files with DPP (made sure to negate all those PS settings prior to converting) and the result differences are definitely noticable.

A few silly questions:

1) Does the ACR 4.0+ RAW plugin in CS3 contain more tools than Lightroom? I'm very impressed with the ACR plugin in CS3.

2) Suppose I wanted to use tools like highlight recovery which are not available in DPP. Assume I have CS3 and DPP, but not LR.

What should I do? Should I do the all the necessary adjustments in DPP, do the initial conversion to TIFF/JPEG and then use the highlight recovery tool in CS3..
or should I just bite it hard and not use DPP at all for that particular shot. In other words, do all the work with ACR and then do the RAW conversion there instead?
Pretend time isn't an issue here. For instance, I know the former process mentioned would be pretty damn time-intensive, but I'm just looking for advice at the moment regarding methodology.

3) From my trip, there were some shots which were just blown highlights galore (mainly skies). I guess some shots I didn't view valuble enough to bother with bracketed exposures for HDR composition later on, but now that I think about it.. I shouldn't of been so negligent.

My question is, is there some function/tool in CS3 which just allows me to select/highlight all the areas of an image which is pretty much white. I thought perhaps I could even just apply a consistent light blue over all of those areas.. would atleast look much much better than pure white.

Thanks guys.

Jul 27, 2007 07:50 as a reply to René Damkot's post 20 hours earlier.

Col | Flickrexternal link

Sony A7 + Leica 50 Lux ASPH, Oly E-M5 + 12/2
Canon 5D3, 16-35L, 50L, 85L, 135L

LOG IN TO REPLY
Curtis ­ N
Master Flasher
Curtis N's Avatar
19,130 posts

Joined Apr 2005

Northern Illinois, US
MORE INFO

Hopefully this will clarify, rather than confuse.

In2Photos wrote in post #3553579external link
While DPP offers the Picture Style adjustments I find that I don't use them (mainly because I use an XT and they were not available to me).

You can use DPP's picture styles, whether or not your camera supports them. So I could make a 20D file look like a 30D file, simply by choosing the picture style.

Regardless whether you have a "picture styles" camera or the older models with separate adjustments for contrast, sharpness and saturation, DPP's initial rendering will use the camera's settings. A DPP conversion without adjustment will be theoretically identical to a JPEG produced by the camera.

Since non-Canon software ignores these camera settings, their output will always be different if you're doing a straight conversion without adjustment.

What makes Lightroom worth the $$$ (to some people) is not its RAW conversion quality or its wholesale editing capability. Any decent RAW converter will do these things. It's the extra wiz-bang features for printing, slideshows and web presentation that are incredible time-savers. The other day it took me only a few minutes to print a contact sheet and create a PDF slideshow for a client. Time is money.

Jul 27, 2007 10:15

"If you're not having fun, your pictures will reflect that." - Joe McNally
Chicago area POTN eventsexternal link
Flash Photography 101 | The EOS Flash Bible external link| Techniques for Better On-Camera Flashexternal link | How to Use Flash Outdoors| Excel-based DOF Calculatorexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
René Damkot's Avatar
39,854 posts

Joined Feb 2005

enschede, netherlands
MORE INFO

Collin85 wrote in post #3618570external link
Should I do the all the necessary adjustments in DPP, do the initial conversion to TIFF/JPEG and then use the highlight recovery tool in CS3.

That's what I do: Do a 'base' conversion in DPP, then use ACR for a darker version, recovering the highlights. Then I blend the two in PS, masking the darker layer, so only the highlights are visible.

Jul 27, 2007 14:00

"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
johnj2803
Senior Member
855 posts
Joined May 2009

Miami, FL
MORE INFO

sorry to revive this thread :D but i am new to all these, I have been using DPP 3.6.1 with all my RAW files and have been pleased with it. the only bummer i have is the ability of organizing my photos. I am a mac user and I am fond of iphoto and the way it organizes my pictures.

that is why i tried lightroom 2.4.

the question here is, with the updated versions of these 2 softwares, what is "better" for our images. or do all the comments stated here still hold true. DPP good output than LR. but more options in LR. or did i get them all mixed? :D

Jul 15, 2009 12:22

My flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
René Damkot's Avatar
39,854 posts

Joined Feb 2005

enschede, netherlands
MORE INFO

IMHO, DPP is better, at least where sharpening and NR is concerned.
LR might have an edge color wise, but that would be just in some very difficult circumstances. Otherwise, both are fine.

If you don't do sharpening / NR in the raw converter, then I wouldn't hesitate to say: go for LR.

Why not download the trial?

Jul 15, 2009 12:59

"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
johnj2803
Senior Member
855 posts
Joined May 2009

Miami, FL
MORE INFO

René Damkot wrote in post #8285356external link
IMHO, DPP is better, at least where sharpening and NR is concerned.
LR might have an edge color wise, but that would be just in some very difficult circumstances. Otherwise, both are fine.

If you don't do sharpening / NR in the raw converter, then I wouldn't hesitate to say: go for LR.

Why not download the trial?


i have the trial on now and i'm liking it! I even have plug ins for flickr and facebook! :D but the one thing that really is annoying is the sharpening, i would really like to do it easily with LR. is there a way to do it by batch? can't seem to find the sharpen tool! :D

Jul 15, 2009 13:17

My flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
"Amazingly attractive"
tonylong's Avatar
53,413 posts
GALLERY: 19 photos

Joined Sep 2007

Vancouver, WA USA
MORE INFO

Sharpening and noise reduction are in the Details panel a ways down the Development module. LR also has "output sharpening" that can be applied to prints as well as exported files, although not with the controls you can use in the Develop module.

LR2 also has some ability to localize sharpening using adjustment brushes.

It's probably pretty accurate, though, that better sharpening and noise reduction results can be gotten either through Photoshop or specialized applications. Photoshop has excellent sharpening tools and noise reduction apps have been developed that work well with LR2. For me, I use LR noise reduction and sharpening for most of my Web images but have Photoshop and Noise Ninja on hand for critical needs.

Jul 15, 2009 13:46

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
René ­ Damkot
Cream of the Crop
René Damkot's Avatar
39,854 posts

Joined Feb 2005

enschede, netherlands
MORE INFO

LR > Develop Module > Detail tab. Here's how it works:
http://lightroom-news.com ...oom-11-update/sharpening/external link

Jul 15, 2009 13:56

"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
philmar
Cream of the Crop
philmar's Avatar
5,103 posts

Joined Jan 2007

Toronto, Canada
MORE INFO

Disclaimer - I use CS4, not LR.

I assume LR has the same ability to do local adjustments to files with exposure, clarity, saturation, sharpness ect.

THAT alone would be a reason to use it over DPP (I haven't used DPP in 3 years so I apologise if it now has that ability). The ability to do local adjustments directly to the RAW file is a HUGE advantage. Highlight recovery is another reason why I never look at DPP any more (I once prefered it to CS2, but that changed with CS3). The ability to tweak individual colors is HUGE as well.

But still - think about it...LOCAL ADJUSTMENTS to files...NON-destructively.

DPP has the overwhelming price advantage tho....but you still will need at least Elements.

Jul 15, 2009 16:07

A photo I took HERE published in National GeographicTime on your hands? Then HERE'S plenty more photos to nibble onexternal link:
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/phil_marion​/sets/external link
MY STUFFS 5DIII, 30D, 24-70 L, 24-105 L, EF 10-22, 70-200 f4 IS L, 100 mm f2.8, macro, Tamron 150-600, Nifty 50 mm f1.8, Canon 1.4x TC, 430EX AND A HUGE CREDIT CARD BILL!!!

LOG IN TO REPLY
philmar
Cream of the Crop
philmar's Avatar
5,103 posts

Joined Jan 2007

Toronto, Canada
MORE INFO

oh...it's an old revived thread? OK - disregard my previous comments.

Jul 15, 2009 16:11

A photo I took HERE published in National GeographicTime on your hands? Then HERE'S plenty more photos to nibble onexternal link:
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/phil_marion​/sets/external link
MY STUFFS 5DIII, 30D, 24-70 L, 24-105 L, EF 10-22, 70-200 f4 IS L, 100 mm f2.8, macro, Tamron 150-600, Nifty 50 mm f1.8, Canon 1.4x TC, 430EX AND A HUGE CREDIT CARD BILL!!!

LOG IN TO REPLY
johnj2803
Senior Member
855 posts
Joined May 2009

Miami, FL
MORE INFO

philmar wrote in post #8286365external link
But still - think about it...LOCAL ADJUSTMENTS to files...NON-destructively.

you can do this with the new DPP

Jul 15, 2009 16:12

My flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
tzalman's Avatar
12,896 posts

Joined Apr 2005

Gesher Haziv, Israel
MORE INFO

I assume LR has the same ability to do local adjustments to files with exposure, clarity, saturation, sharpness ect.

THAT alone would be a reason to use it over DPP (I haven't used DPP in 3 years so I apologise if it now has that ability). The ability to do local adjustments directly to the RAW file is a HUGE advantage. Highlight recovery is another reason why I never look at DPP any more (I once prefered it to CS2, but that changed with CS3). The ability to tweak individual colors is HUGE as well.

But still - think about it...LOCAL ADJUSTMENTS to files...NON-destructively.

Yep, that's why I bid a tearful farewell to DPP.

you can do this with the new DPP

YOU CAN? I have 3.6.0. I've heard that there is a 3.6.2 but didn't realize that such an enormous addition would be accompanied by such a modest version number change. Is it easy to apply the masks?

Jul 15, 2009 17:13

Elie / אלי

LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike55
Goldmember
Mike55's Avatar
4,206 posts

Joined Jun 2007

Chicago, Illinois
MORE INFO

Collin85 wrote in post #3618570external link
Guys, I'm back.

I went and did a few tests to see ACR vs. DPP myself, and now I get what people meant by 'punchier results' and 'better colours' with DPP. I straight converted some RAW files with CS3 and did it with the same files with DPP (made sure to negate all those PS settings prior to converting) and the result differences are definitely noticable.

Really? I've run endless tests on landscapes and notice no difference when DPP and LR2 are set to neutral or faithful picture modes. See the examples here:

In this test, the latest version of LR2 beats DPP with default settings in detail:

http://camerablognetwo​rk.com ...-dpp-3610-with-canon-50d/external link

and in this one, I really don't notice any color weakness:

http://camerablognetwo​rk.com ...sus-canon-dpp-showdown-2/external link

What was your subject matter?

Jul 16, 2009 00:13

6D | 70D | 24-105 L IS | 17-40 L | 300 F4 L IS | 50 1.8 II | 1.4x II | LR5 | HV30 | bug spray | wilderness
Gallatin National Forest, Montanaexternal link/Lassen Volcanic NP Campgroundsexternal link

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

16,122 views & 0 likes for this thread
DPP vs. Lightroom
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing

NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO THE FORUMS
Registered members get all the features: search, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, own reviews...




Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

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 browsers' data storage methods.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.33version 1.33
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00088 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
Latest registered member is aussirose
503 guests, 517 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 5175, that happened on Jun 16, 2015