Help understanding raw inside CR 5.0

Hello all, I have what is probably a simple question to some but not so simple to me. I finally got a real lens this weekend (70-200L 2.8 IS) and I am ready to start playing with images.
Here is my problem, my other lenses were all dull, soft, and at best flat, and this thing is very sharp and pops the colors............. so I thought!
I shoot everything in Raw with my 40D and my pictures came out looking snappy and sharp in EOS utility and in DPP, the problem is when I open them up in Camera Raw 5.0 (with PS CS4) they look HORRIBLE I mean realy bad. I understand that Camera Raw is reading just the raw data but the data that EOS Utility and DPP is using has to be somewhere right? Why can I have the sharp image available to me in CR5? No matter how much I play with CR 5 I can not get the image to look as good as it does in the Canon software with no editing at all.

Please help!! I want to PS some of these pictures but I can't even get then to look as good as they do off the camera and in DPP with editing.

They are not just reading the RAW data. They are reading it and then using it and their interpretation of it to create an entirely new and separate RGB image in which only 1/3 of the data comes from the RAW. That is what is done in the camera when it makes a jpg that is embedded in the RAW file (it is this jpg which is shown to you in EOS Utility). And this is what both DPP and ACR do. Because DPP is made by Canon, naturally its creation very much resembles the camera's. For several years, people who thought the camera version must be The Definitive Version complained because ACR's default version was different. That is why ACR now has a choice of camera profiles that can be applied, whose openly declared purpose is to mimic DPP's Photo Styles. So which one are you using?

PEBKAC.

If DPP looks better use DPP, output as TIFF, then edit in Photoshop. Easy.

The reason DPP looks better is it's reading the picture style embedded in the RAW file, but ACR isn't. Generally picture styles add contrast, saturation, and sharpening. I can't see why DPP would look WAY better, but better, sure. You can also change the defaults in ACR, see my ACR FAQ it you want.

If you want feedback or more detailed analysis put the RAW file on a web server and post a link to it so we can check it out. I've never used DPP so i'd just run it through CS4 RAW and show you how I make it look.

If you want to understand RAW click on the FAQ link in my sig, go go my book thread, and grab the real world camera raw book - whatever the latest version of the book is. That'll teach you the theory behind RAW. Even though the book's about ACR the theory and techniques apply to all raw converters.

I am using ACR V. 5.0 with and under camera calibration I am using camera profile ACR 4.4.

And I am not sure I fully understand your description, DPP reads just the Raw data, (I thought) and Zoom browser does show a converted sample but you can click on the show actually picture button and it will pull up the raw version.

Also i didn't have this much of an issue before, same camera ans same version of PS. the difference between the images are night and day now.

Also please explain the settings on the camera, how are they stored for view on DPP? If I add sharpening on the camera it reflects on my raw images in DPP, but not in ACR. The data has to be read from somewhere, why can't ACR read the data?

Another example, if I shoot a picture in B&W on the camera. (I would never use this method) it will pull up B&W in DPP but just the color version if it will be shown in ACR.
I mean the data is in the same .CR2 right? There is no magical hidden file that DPP can only read. I am lost.

BigAlz1 wrote in post #7576508
Also please explain the settings on the camera, how are they stored for view on DPP? If I add sharpening on the camera it reflects on my raw images in DPP, but not in ACR. The data has to be read from somewhere, why can't ACR read the data?

Canon hasn't told them how. At least post a small image showing the image from DPP and the image from ACR if you want more analysis.

Please where is best place to upload pics? And where in the world lets you upload a full sized raw file?
I would love to know how to share with the board. Please help.

Also I am a firm believer in editing in raw, I don't want to conver, then edit ,then convert again. I just can't believe how crappy ACR is all of the sudden.

Only thing I have done lately is update Canon software and install raw viewer for WINXP. Think aither of those could have an effect?

Al, the problem is user error, we just have to work out what you're doing wrong.

To put a RAW file online you'll probably need your own website. A better way is to 'develop' the image in dpp and acr, resize them down to 600 pixels on the longest size, save for web, then attach to your post here on POTN.

"Also I am a firm believer in editing in raw, I don't want to conver, then edit ,then convert again". I don't even know what you mean here, you're using some terminology incorrectly.

tim wrote in post #7576626
Al, the problem is user error, we just have to work out what you're doing wrong.

To put a RAW file online you'll probably need your own website. A better way is to 'develop' the image in dpp and acr, resize them down to 600 pixels on the longest size, save for web, then attach to your post here on POTN.

"Also I am a firm believer in editing in raw, I don't want to conver, then edit ,then convert again". I don't even know what you mean here, you're using some terminology incorrectly.

No, the user above you wanted me to open the raw file in DPP, convert it to a .tiff file then. open it up in PS and do my editing then, convert it to a .jpg to give to whom ever, (in this case my sister on a disk). So why in the world would I want to do all of that when I should be able to open the raw in ACR edit in PS and then convert?
Also I will have to look into this POTN, I am new I will have to find where to start with that.
Thanks

BigAlz1 wrote in post #7576717
No, the user above you wanted me to open the raw file in DPP, convert it to a .tiff file then. open it up in PS and do my editing then, convert it to a .jpg to give to whom ever, (in this case my sister on a disk). So why in the world would I want to do all of that when I should be able to open the raw in ACR edit in PS and then convert?

That's a perfectly valid workflow, I suggested it too. I rarely take an image into photoshop, 99.5% of my images only ever go through a RAW converter, so unless you edit heavily you'll rarely use photoshop anyway.

As I said if you want further help you'll need to post example photos. Just hit the "Post Reply" button at the bottom of the thread, then "manage attachments".

I am back, got some photos. These are just random shots I took today and I didn't choose anyone for any reason, just grabbed a couple to show what I am talking about.

Hope this works, First two are 100% crops no edit, second was just resized with no edit.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO | PHOTOBUCKET ERROR IMAGE

That's a pretty big difference. In ACR just change your contrast to 50, your saturation to 10-30, and perhaps adjust the blacks so the histogram touches the left hand side. You might need to sharpen as well.

Yes it is, it is very dis-heartening. Have no clue how to to correct. If that is indeed the actual raw data untouched, whats that say about my 1700.00 dollar lens I just purchased?

You're missing the point, especially since you can see it looks good in DPP and not so good in ACR. The key is in the processing, which DPP is doing automatically. I already told you how to do it in ACR in my previous post.