Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
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 11 May 2015 (Monday) 04:23
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

DPP works better then ACR?

 
rapurimanka
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
     
May 11, 2015 04:23 |  #1

So, i'm here with old theme, trying to push shadows and kill noise.

Let's lake some underexposed picture from dpreview:
https://dl.dropboxuser​content.com/u/5020311/​6D_IMG_0644.CR2 (external link)

And open it in ACR:

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32aa5/vWQNxdOb_3g.jpg

And then give it +3 on exposure:

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32aaf/rtZcvPX7pao.jpg

You can see some color spots that were not removed from picture? First question - Why?

Then we open same raw file in DPP and do absolutely nothing there. Faithful profile, no sharpness, just +3 on exposure:

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32ab9/BbJ_XZUndmU.jpg

Save in tiff and then open in ACR, kill color noise and we are done:

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32ac3/ypFzfuRQQos.jpg

No noise despite we pushed +3

6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
rapurimanka
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
Post edited over 4 years ago by rapurimanka.
     
May 11, 2015 04:33 |  #2

Let's repeat test with image with 5 stops underexposure:

ACR + 5

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32acd/ekPhneWs518.jpg

DPP + 3 >> ACR + 2 (since DPP cant do more then +3)

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32ad7/M-AVjQXdbzQ.jpg

6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rapurimanka
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
     
May 11, 2015 04:44 |  #3

And two more extreme samples, -5 undersxposure.

ACR +5:

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32ae1/YwwvAqSzKIY.jpg

DPP +3 >> ACR +2:

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32aeb/-V34u_mtO-s.jpg

6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,845 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 643
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
Post edited over 4 years ago by kirkt. (3 edits in all)
     
May 11, 2015 08:44 |  #4

Did you make a comparison with all noise reduction turned off first? Here is a 100% crop of the first image, with about 3 stops push - all of the noise reduction in DPP and ACR was turned off - Raw Photo Processor does not have noise reduction. Sharpening was also disabled in the converters that have sharpening. The noise is pretty similar across all three renderings. Any comparison (visually speaking) should be made at 100% zoom. You can also select an area in the image and compute the standard deviation as a representation of the noise, if you want a quantitative assessment of the differences across raw converters.

What you may be observing is a difference in the amount of noise reduction being applied by default in each raw converter. Adjust to taste.

kirk


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rapurimanka
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
     
May 11, 2015 09:18 |  #5

Wrong. You need to enable basic noise reduction in ACR (25/50).

I don't know right names for noise types, but speaking simple languare there color dots and color spots. First are small and they are all over the picture, second one are big.

When we kill noise in ACR, it get rid of color dots:

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32bfd/FigGqLEHmP8.jpg

IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/32c05/5qO5kbERKQw.jpg

See this shadow from plant? There are these big colored spots. On some other images they are more obvious. And that's exactly what ACR and get rid off...

But if we open this image in DPP first, it somehow clean image from these spots, so we could clean dot noise in ACR later.

That's my idea.

Try darker one, noise there is more obvious https://dl.dropboxuser​content.com/u/5020311/​6D_IMG_0646.CR2 (external link)

6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agedbriar
Goldmember
Avatar
2,622 posts
Likes: 352
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Slovenia
     
May 11, 2015 16:07 |  #6

Canon raw converter doing a better job on undocumented Canon raw files than universal third party software?

That should be expected, IMO.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rapurimanka
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
     
May 11, 2015 16:37 as a reply to  @ agedbriar's post |  #7

Well, Adobe could try better


6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BigAl007
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,003 posts
Gallery: 542 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 1616
Joined Dec 2010
Location: Repps cum Bastwick, Gt Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK.
     
May 12, 2015 06:42 |  #8

rapurimanka wrote in post #17551825 (external link)
Wrong. You need to enable basic noise reduction in ACR (25/50).

I don't know right names for noise types, but speaking simple languare there color dots and color spots. First are small and they are all over the picture, second one are big.

When we kill noise in ACR, it get rid of color dots:

QUOTED IMAGE

QUOTED IMAGE

See this shadow from plant? There are these big colored spots. On some other images they are more obvious. And that's exactly what ACR and get rid off...

But if we open this image in DPP first, it somehow clean image from these spots, so we could clean dot noise in ACR later.

That's my idea.

Try darker one, noise there is more obvious https://dl.dropboxuser​content.com/u/5020311/​6D_IMG_0646.CR2 (external link)


But this is NOT a good test of the RAW processor, it is just a test of the default NR settings. To make a valid comparison of the RAW converter, as Kirk says, you need to turn off ALL sharpening and NR and any other similar effects such as Clarity and Vibrance. If you don't all you are really seeing is the difference in default NR/Sharpening etc settings. Given that ACR/LR has far more control over both NR and sharpening, including local adjustments, I would expect that given some work LR/ACR would produce better results than DPP. It's also important to remember that in that situation familiarity and experience with one application over another can also make significant differences in the results. For example I am far more likely to make better use of ACR/LR than DPP, because I have been using that software since before it was acquired by Adobe.

Alan


My Flickr (external link)
My new Aviation images blog site (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kirkt
Cream of the Crop
5,845 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 643
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA USA
Post edited over 4 years ago by kirkt. (2 edits in all)
     
May 12, 2015 09:04 |  #9

It seems like you are describing the very low frequency color blotches (usually patches of reddish and bluish) that remain, even after aggressive noise reduction. Some raw converters handle these better than others. I found DPP4 to make a complete mess of the image, and its NR in particularly is awful. Here is ACR 9.0, PV2010 (where exposure is actually related to exposure) with Exposure +5EV and the NR settings shown. If you really need to boost shadows 5stops to make the image you like, then the Color Smoothness control appears to address the issue you are describing, if I understand your description.

The detail dynamic range of this image is not huge (where you would need to boost shadows a lot) - the experiment is on an image which is several stops underexposed.

Kirk


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Kirk
---
images: http://kirkt.smugmug.c​om (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rapurimanka
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
     
May 12, 2015 13:42 |  #10

Strange, i don't have color smoothness


IMAGE: https://pp.vk.me/c625619/v625619184/3327e/kJgD1zKkzdY.jpg

6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rapurimanka
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
140 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Moscow
     
May 12, 2015 14:14 |  #11

Wow i found this thing in lightroom and it solves all problems!


6D | Canon 85 1.8 | Canon 24-105 4 | Lightroom 4
https://www.flickr.com​/photos/27393138@N08/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,767 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 8075
Joined Oct 2009
     
May 13, 2015 11:56 |  #12

I was a DPP die hard for years but switched ACR/LR about 2 years ago. I never liked ACR colours but they made some major improvements a few years back so I switched. NR is far better IMO. I miss a few things about DPP but I'm sold on Adobe now. I always said if Canon came out with versions of ACR/LR and it's adjustments with DPP's RAW converter I'd pay for it.

I did a bunch of tests several years ago. 7D @ 12,800

Here is DPP. I don't have any examples of DPP NR process. Sorry

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i33.photobucket​.com …DPP-no-NR_zps1323f110.jpg (external link)


Here is ACR. Less white speckles but DPP may be better these days. More colour noise with ACR but it seems to smooth out better at the end.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i33.photobucket​.com …ACR-no-NR_zpsd4e3af68.jpg (external link)


I first applied colour noise

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i33.photobucket​.com …lor-noise_zpsf65d9e7d.jpg (external link)


Then luminance

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i33.photobucket​.com …luminance_zps0f​c9d39e.jpg (external link)


Final product

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i33.photobucket​.com …/_MG_2542_zps3c​7cf2c9.jpg (external link)


I still use DPP for some things. I vary between it and ACR for my hobby shots. Even if I use DPP it still winds up in PS for final resizing and sharpening. LR saves me so much time for mass edits.

Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

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

2,042 views & 1 like for this thread
DPP works better then ACR?
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?
Register to forums
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 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Charlieb84
2187 guests, 354 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

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.