DPP raw vs LR3 raw.

Hi guys,

I still consider myself very much a novice so please bear that in mind.

I usually use LR3 for my image editing for my 40D. A mate uses DPP and he has a 5D. I look at his images and think, wow, how good are the images direct from the camera. Mine always seem to be bland.

I decided the other night to load up DPP, update it, and import some images. I must say the image looks as though it has more life than it does in Lightroom. These images are straight after import. No adjustments have been made as yet.

Am I missing something about the way the two programs treat raw files

So I have a truckload of questions running through my mind, but I'll keep it brief here.
Does DPP apply settings automatically?
Does LR3 wash everything out on purpose? Is this a raw thing?
Is it just that they handle things differently?
Can I import to DPP then pick the file up with DPP settings/conversion in LR3 so I can make other adjustments?
[I'll stop now as that's probably too many ]

I really like the way the initial file looks straight into DPP. I've tried to emulate the look in LR3 so I can make a preset as a place to start from but have failed so far. I've been buggerising around with sliders and google for hours and really spinning the wheels getting nowhere.

Can anyone give me some pointers please?
I feel there's a simple answer, but I need an understanding and a place to start.

This is one screen shot with both applications open beside each other.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/png'

Give this a try: In Lightroom, add a bit of Recovery, change the Tone Curve from Medium to Strong, add a bit of Clarity and Vibrance.

Now see which one looks better.

I always thought because it applied the settings on what a .jpeg would be like in the camera to the RAW file. I mean if you look on the back of your LCD screen after you take a picture with a Canon camera, the display shows the .jpeg results.

Rimmer wrote in post #12974960
Give this a try: In Lightroom, add a bit of Recovery, change the Tone Curve from Medium to Strong, add a bit of Clarity and Vibrance.

Now see which one looks better.

Job for tonight,
Thanks Rimmer

contributor_M wrote in post #12975556
I always thought because it applied the settings on what a .jpeg would be like in the camera to the RAW file. I mean if you look on the back of your LCD screen after you take a picture with a Canon camera, the display shows the .jpeg results.

Truly, I thought (my downfall mostly) that the raw files were bland of any processing upon import, just an interpretation of data. And that unless a preset of some description was used on import, then the raw files should be basically the same.

swoffa wrote in post #12974546
Hi guys,

I still consider myself very much a novice so please bear that in mind.

I usually use LR3 for my image editing for my 40D. A mate uses DPP and he has a 5D. I look at his images and think, wow, how good are the images direct from the camera. Mine always seem to be bland.

I decided the other night to load up DPP, update it, and import some images. I must say the image looks as though it has more life than it does in Lightroom. These images are straight after import. No adjustments have been made as yet.

Am I missing something about the way the two programs treat raw files

In short, yes you are "missing something"! This gets asked repeatedly here in this sub-forum. I would really encourage you to check this forum regularly and keep up with the posts, because we do discuss and clarify a whole lot regarding Raw and post-processing in general.

In fact, I'm a bit surprised that your thread title didn't spark a forum mini search for threads with DPP, Raw and LR3 in their titles. Maybe it did a search and didn't find anything directly...

This is what you need to understand: a Raw file has no settings applied to it and so nothing about a Raw file matches your in-camera Picture Styles for things like Contrast, Saturation, Sharpening, and also White Balance, and various other settings people apply to make an out-of-camera jpeg "pop".

What DPP does, as you were wondering, is apply those settings according to what the camera is set at. For instance, many people leave the camera to shoot using the Standard Picture Style, meaning that for a jpeg the camera applies a moderate bit of Contrast, Saturation and Sharpening -- not a whole lot, but it's there and will show up in DPP. Of course, the Landscape Picture Style applies a lot more and it will show up in DPP,

If you want to see the difference, open a Raw file in DPP and, in the Raw tab, you will see a Picture Style drop-down list. Open that and choose either Neutral or Faithful. Watch what happens to that popping preview -- it should get pretty close to that "drab" Lightroom preview! And even after that you can get more "drab"! Pull back the Contrast and Saturation -- you won't change the Raw file, but you will get an idea of what goes on with DPP.

And, you may be surprised to hear that many of us actually set our cameras to shoot at a very "flat" Picture Style setting -- we choose Neutral and then we edit the PS to have the lowest Contrast and Saturation the camera is able to give, -4 on those settings. We do this as an assistance to special exposure considerations, another topic, but again if you realize that this does not affect your Raw file data but only how the camera or DPP uses those settings, and in DPP again you are free to change things around with Raw files (not with jpegs, though).

And, again answering part of your question, "Does LR3 wash everything out on purpose? Is this a raw thing?"

Well No and Yes. As I hope you see, it's DPP that "spikes thing up" on purpose. Lightroom does not "read" a Canon Picture Style (they are proprietary in nature) but what it does is apply its own process to the Raw data to render it into an "RGB image". This means LR will apply its own default values -- a bit of this and a bit of that, not meant to give you a knock-down final image but a "starting point" -- it's up to you to make creative choices in how to get the best final result.

There is one feature in LR3 -- Camera Calibration Profiles have been added to the Calibration panel, found at the bottom of the right hand part of the Develop module (you see the Basic panel, scroll all the way down below that and you will see the Calibration panel with a drop-down list to select from.

The profiles there have been provided by Adobe to do some of what the Canon Picture Styles do, although typically there is still choices you will want to make even if you do like one or more of the profiles. I tend to just leave mine on the default Adobe Standard setting, the default, because it doesn't "do much" -- I like the freedom to tweak and control my developing to my own tastes.

And yes, it's a "Raw thing". Jpegs get "cooked" in the camera. Raw is of course not "cooked"! That is part of the nature of Raw and the power of Raw processing.

Well, no, you can't share Raw processing between DPP and LR (or Photoshop either). This is because the Canon and Adobe (and other third part Raw processors) use different values in their developing and also different ways of storing those values. DPP, because it "owns" the CR2 format, has its proprietary ways of developing the Raw data and then writing their develop "metadata" into the file itself if you do a Save. The Raw data itself has not been changed though. But, that metadata is only useful to DPP when you want to re-open the file, process it more, then do a Convert on the file -- the metadata is then used to produce a jpeg or tiff, which are actually RGB image files, totally different from a Raw file. And it is only a jpeg or tiff that can then be opened in Photoshop or another app and have the settings that have been "cooked in" visible. Otherwise, a Raw CR2 that has been "worked on" in DPP will be just a Raw file like any other to Photoshop Camera Raw or Lightroom -- the metadata values will be meaningless.

I hope this does answer you questions and actually contributes to your understanding!

I'll stop now as that's probably too many

Actually, I consider it a good thing for people who, like you are new to all this to get and use DPP along with a program like Lightroom, and learn this stuff as you go. DPP may quickly become something on the side, a "reference" or you may find like me it's a fun way to do a quick conversion when, for a given shoot, I may be perfectly happy with the "like a jpeg" look that DPP gives. Just try to understand a bit of what is going on with the two programs.

I've tried and hope I've helped!

^^^

Awesome job of explaining the diff between the 2..

Wow Tony.
I can't begin to thank you, not only for the content , but more so the time you have given me.

I virtually never shoot in jpeg, mainly raw and I was thinking the DPP image just gave me a headstart on pp. It now makes a lot of sense as to why my mates images always look "better" on initial import.

Going to take a few shots tonight with different camera settings to see it in action.

Thanks again.

Well, good for you for doing meaningful experimentation, and I'm glad I got some useful info across!

yeah really that was great, thanks tony.

just starting out...I have been quite happy with DPP.
With that said I usually have a tendency to run out and buy buy buy.
I figured I should learn how to use DPP first...heck it's free with the camera
understand what I'm doing then go if i wish.

Awesome job tonylong on that explanation. I rarely shoot RAW and have LR3 in my mac. I have to clear the hurdle to start shooting RAW without too much PP, etc.

Lou857 wrote in post #12975785
yeah really that was great, thanks tony.

just starting out...I have been quite happy with DPP.
With that said I usually have a tendency to run out and buy buy buy.
I figured I should learn how to use DPP first...heck it's free with the camera
understand what I'm doing then go if i wish.

DPP is great -- it's like a "starter kit" for Raw shooting!

coldcuts113 wrote in post #12975837
Awesome job tonylong on that explanation. I rarely shoot RAW and have LR3 in my mac. I have to clear the hurdle to start shooting RAW without too much PP, etc.

Well, you can do as much or as minimal as you like -- one of the powerful things with Raw is you can do as much as you like without damaging the original Raw data! Programs like LR ad DPP keep all your processing in Metadata and don't mess with the Raw "stuff"

That means you can work on a file, do something with it (like convert/export and send a jpeg to a printer or the Web) and then, some time later, maybe next year, you can come back to that Raw file and it's "just like new"! It's like a roll of film that you develop in a dark room and make a print of, but when you are done you still have the same "raw" undeveloped film that you started with and you can create a whole new version/vision of your images!

It's a combination of marketing necessity and design philosophy. Canon was the first maker to market consumer priced DSLRs and they brought to the field the belief inherited from the days of pros only, that anybody who was serious enough to invest in a DSLR would want to do at least some post-processing, so in the 10D, 20D, 300D and 350D the image was bland enough to be a good platform for pp. When Nikon moved into the consumer area, their cameras output jpgs that were finished products, no pp required, and they outsold Canon. So Canon jazzed up their jpgs. DPP replicates that jpg processing by default. Adobe, however, says that obviously anybody who opens a RAW in LR/ACR intends to process it, so they continue to have defaults that provide a bland starting point. There are a few compromises, however. The defaults for Black Point, Contrast, and Brightness are 5, 25 and 50 and a contrast curve is active, which does give a little boost to the default image. But there are some photographers (myself included) who have customized the defaults to zero out those values also, because of a feeling that this gives a better view of what we have to work with.

This blog post by Mike Ricca shows how he improved LR's color reproduction an look:
http://focalmatter.com​/2011/07/good-kind-profiling/

for a while I was shooting RAW + jpg...all those files were a pain.

now i just shoot raw...convert whatever I need/want.
totally like it better that way


tony....DPP starter kit for RAW........How perfect is that.

Thanks to everyone for their input here.

with no-one in the house in the mood for being a test subject, I took some shots of a colourful bill (Do these companies think that by jazzing up their bills I'll be happier paying. Moving on).

I took shot with each of the different picture styles then imported them into LR3 and DPP. As expected (due to the information in this thread) each image preview in LR was exactly the same but the same images viewed in DPP were different based on the style. I'm sure no-one is surprised by this but I thought I share what I did anyway.

Interestingly the standard profile in DPP was more closely matched by the LR profile landscape.