Raw Image Task 2.7

After getting fed up with Adobe Camera Raw's colour output, I have gone back to Canon's Raw software, and I really like it. Well, I like the output, but hate the workflow.

I'm using the latest Zoombrowser 6.3.1, and it includes Raw Image Task 2.6, however, I have noticed that I am unable to load Picture Styles made with the Picture Style Editor, as well as any of the new Canon Picture Styles.

Well, after looking closely at Canon's Picture Style website at
http://www.canon.co.jp …estyle/file/dow​nload.html

I realized the picture styles that won't load on Raw files in RIT are STUDIO PORTRAIT and SNAPSHOT PORTRAIT.

Below that it says

"“Studio Portrait” and “Snapshot Portrait” are only supported by...
and RAW Image Task Ver. 2.7, or later."

I've looked high and low and cannot find Raw Image Task 2.7 anywhere.

The latest I can find is Raw Image Task 2.6 that is installed with Zoombrowser.

Any ideas?

Do you want to hear something funny? I opened a tab and typed "raw image task 2.7" into the google search window and rather than give me a list, it opened up a specific page, and guess what that page is? drisley, you could become famous!

LOL! Did it bring you back here?
Google is crazy fast now.

I sent off a trouble ticket to Canon Canada, with a link to the Picture Styles Editor page showing the above mentioned RIT 2.7. I'm curious to hear what they say.

drisley wrote in post #8716670
I tried Google and couldn't find a thing....
Don't tell me you found the 1D Mk4?!

Heh! I just googled that, and it sent me right back to this thread!

First thing I thought is "OMG, there is a 1D Mk4" on that, but then came to my senses, and changed the post. LOL

From what I can tell, the Raw Image Task Plugin that comes with the 1D MkIII is only ver 2.6.

The 40D and newer cams which came out afterward, includes the Raw Image Task 2.7.
The Zoombrowser updates from Canon's website do NOT include the Raw Image Task plugin.

So the only way it appears for me to get RIT 2.7 would be to find somebody with a 40D, or if somebody here wishes to send me the Raw Image Task 2.7 plugin folder from their 40D or newer install disk.

I think all I need is the RAWTASK folder zipped up and sent to me (from Software Folder on the cd).

I'm starting to realize the way Canon "supports" it's software is rather bizarre and convoluted.

Damn, I hate free software!

I don't have the slightest clue where any of my Canon disks are, but my newest body is the 1D3, so I couldn't help you anyway!

What I always do is make a "backup" disc of my install cd's that come with my camera, then put the cd's back in it's pristine packaging, and back into the camera box, and stored away in like-new-shape for the future if I ever sell the camera. (yes, I'm obsessive/compulsive )

I keep the "backups" at my workstation, so that if any point I need them, say after a new OS install, I have them right where I need them and I don't need to go through my storage to get my discs.

I don't really consider the Canon software as free, because I'm certain it's worked into the price of the camera. Then again, I prefer it being included as opposed to having to buy the Raw software seperately, ala Nikon AFAIk.

Drisley, I will put the ZB executable from my 40D disc on Yousendit and P.M. you the link.

Thanks Tzalman!
What I actually need is the folder called RAWTASK from the cd since it's the RAWTASK plugin that needs updating... unless that is what you mean.
That would be fantastic!

BTW, what was your problem with ACR's color output?

The recent ACR updates have made great strides now that they have the Adobe Standard, and Camera-matching profiles.

Davidcrebelxt,

I agree, the new ACR profiles are a huge improvement. But, I still don't like the way Adobe Standard renders some colours, like red. I find the Camera Standard to be quite close to the Canon RIT/In-Camera colours, but still not quite. It tends to oversaturated reds, and make skin tones a bit too "ruddy" too... even more than the Canon software.

But, more than that, ACR can't match RIT for high ISO image quality, especially when using FlexNR on my MkIII files, which is optimized for the 1D MkIII using in-camera processing, or Canon RIT software.

Then there is workflow... ACR is much faster, and much more intuitive for major adjustments.

BUT, what I'm trying to do is nail my colours/wb in-camera now, and if I do that, I find that I can get better output, quicker, with RIT than with ACR when processing large numbers of files under similar conditions. Granted, the Raw conversion takes 2 seconds on ACR vs 20 seconds in RIT per file, but it's not the conversion that bothers me, it's the fiddling around on each image to get them to look right in ACR.

Thanks Tzalman for sending me the updated RIT plugin! It installed and worked perfectly (just a matter of copying the new exe and dlls in the current RIT folder).

However, even RIT 2.7 won't open the new Picture Styles from Canon, or the custom ones made with their Picture Styles Editor. It will allow upload to the camera though, and if that style is selected in camera, will work in RIT, but I don't think that should have to be the case.

Anyway, this is why I prefer the output from RIT vs ACR. Both images set to Daylight WB, ACR is using the newest Adobe Standard profile. The reds are way off, much more magenta, and the skin is more pink. If I set the profile to Camera Standard, the result is closer, but it still takes more fiddling with WB (since the ACR Presets like Daylight and Cloudy seem way off).

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

Ok, I see what you're talking about... just making sure you were aware of those profiles.

Really, it does come down to what works best for you. If there is a consistent change needed in ACR, you can for instance have vibrance or red saturation always boosted a notch, and set that as a new default, just a thought.

David, yup you are correct. As an ACR user for many years now, I have seen the improvement, and with the new Camera Standard profiles, Adobe has come VERY close to matching the Canon colours.

However, my problem lies more with other things, like noise at high ISO's and White Balance. White Balance out of RIT for example, exactly matches what I get out of camera, plus I can use Picture Styles (rare but sometimes useful). With ACR, I have to go through a big ordeal to get my White Balances where I want them because the presets are way off of what the camera is seeing.

Recently I tried the new Bibble 5 pre-release, and I must say, the colours, especially skin tones, are EXTREMELY good, maybe better than out of camera. The workflow is exceptional too, much like Lightroom, and the conversions are even faster than ACR/LR. However, it lags behind in the noise department, even on lower ISO's in the shadows (in my experience).

I guess every converter has it's weaknesses. For RIT it's weakness is it's interface and slow conversions, but it's IQ is worth it for me I think.

Drisley, I imagine you have already compared RIT to DPP, but DPP will load the ,pf2 style files. Also, are aware that Adobe has a free profile editor, similar to Canon's PSE, with which you can customize a Camera Profile?