Advised to use DPP over LR by Canon

I gave up with LR, I use DPP now and my work flow goes 50% faster. I use lightroom for creative editing and effects and retouching on the few finished images the client asks for. But for getting 50-100 pics done quick for a gallery proof, DPP is great. The sharpening is awesome too (compared to LR)

I did a quick comparison conversion of a 7D shot, ISO 6400, manual exposure approximately one stop above "centered". Both the DPP 3.8.1 and ACR 6.2 conversions were "zeroed out" on everything except the camera neutral profile; in particular, no noise reduction in either. These are 100% crops, DPP on the left and ACR on the right. I can't see too much if any difference between the two other than the slightly darker look to the ACR conversion.

EDIT: When I have time over the weekend, I'm going to run an under-exposed one through noise reduction to see whether DPP or ACR has an advantage in producing a usable image versus just a test image.

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

I have never installed DPP, but based on this thread I decided to give it a shot last night. I then did a similar test as the poster above, but under different circumstances. I had a shot that was taken at night, with some lights, and was exposed for the light. So the dark parts of the image were severely underexposed. It was taken at either iso 800 or 1600. When I tried to either increase exposure or apply fill light in Lightroom, the dark parts became very grainy. I thought just one of the issues with the way I took the shot - I'm still pretty much a rookie at some of that stuff. However, when I took the same image and did the same thing in DPP (well at least the exposure thing), I did not get the same grain - much smoother conversion. Very interesting.

However, I do have one question. Remember this was my very first exposure to DPP. I am used to Lightroom's underlying metadata philosophy - no changes made to the actual Raw image. But when I was done with the changes in DPP, it asked me if I wanted to save them. Is DPP making alterations to the Raw image? I know that even if it was, I could 'save as' and retain the original, but I'm assuming that if I just 'save', the original is modified. Is that right? Thanks

Colin

When, in DPP, you choose to "Save", the edits are, I believed, saved in the metadata section of the file so that DPP can retrieve them although other processors cannot. This is typical of Raw processing softeare.

just because canon installs software filters in DPP to overcome known shortcomings in their cameras image sensor family (like the grainy 18MP 7D photos caused by an overly-dense ASP-C sensor) by applying a generous dose of NR and other manipulations does't mean LR is inferior like some canon rep told you at a canon seminar. did they also crap on third party lenses?

all that really means is the LR image is what you see before all that initial processing DP does for you so you don't start to cry, post all over the interwebs how the 7D sucks, and send your camera for service to canon, covered in tears of shame.

unless you believe that canon has some proprietary mods it does to its RAW files that would make them "incomplete" if viewed by anyother PP software. which would be kind of crappy and defeat the whole RAW idea. we already have that, it's called a jpeg.

i'm really not one to believe that DPP knows something special about the canon RAWs, i just think its tailored to the specific shortcomings of the 7D photosensor noise issue.

Thanks, Tony. So just to be clear, if I process in DPP and save, if I open the same CR2 file in Lightroom, I will get the original Raw image, not the one with the DPP changes 'saved'?

Colin

colinm85 wrote in post #11057207
Thanks, Tony. So just to be clear, if I process in DPP and save, if I open the same CR2 file in Lightroom, I will get the original Raw image, not the one with the DPP changes 'saved'?

Colin

Technically, yes! If you match the DPP in Neutral with no Noise Reduction and no Sharpening you should get pretty much the same image -- check it out for yourself, and then mess with it!

colinm85 wrote in post #11057207
Thanks, Tony. So just to be clear, if I process in DPP and save, if I open the same CR2 file in Lightroom, I will get the original Raw image, not the one with the DPP changes 'saved'?

Colin

A RAW file is divided into two parts; image data and metadata. The iron-clad rule of all RAW converting is that the image data is never changed. The metadata contains the Exif information whose content and form is subject to a convention agreed upon by the camera makers, IPTC info that the user can insert and the Maker's Notes. By reading the metadata DPP sees exactly how the camera would have processed a jpg had that output been requested and replicates that processing as its default settings. When you change the settings and do Save, DPP writes a record of the new settings into the metadata together with a note to itself to give the new settings priority. The old settings from the camera are not deleted and you can return to them at any time. Lightroom, on the other hand, only reads part of the metadata from the camera and is blind to the rest, supplying its own defaults. It is also blind to any new data DPP may have put there, so from LR's point of view it's as though the file had never been opened in DPP.

Wow. You guys know your stuff. Thanks to both for clear, concise and understandable replies. Fast too. Now, if you'll just process these 1000 images for me, I'll be all set.......

Colin

colinm85 wrote in post #11057369
Wow. You guys know your stuff. Thanks to both for clear, concise and understandable replies. Fast too. Now, if you'll just process these 1000 images for me, I'll be all set.......

Colin

Heh! Sure -- just a doble-click and we're there!

Honestly, DPP is an excellent quicl processor/converter, and Lightroom has great controls for more in-depth processing, and both are great for batch-processing, so you can knock your lights out!

Does ACR read the custom white balance of Canon cameras?

CannedHeat wrote in post #11057608
Does ACR read the custom white balance of Canon cameras?

By default, ACR applies the white balance "As Shot," which presumably would include a custom white balance.

CannedHeat wrote in post #11057608
Does ACR read the custom white balance of Canon cameras?

Yes, it will put it up as the "As Shot" WB, but the rendering may be different from the camera/DPP version because of the difference in camera profile used. However, the target grey should be rendered as neutral in any conversion.

colinm85 wrote in post #11057207
Thanks, Tony. So just to be clear, if I process in DPP and save, if I open the same CR2 file in Lightroom, I will get the original Raw image, not the one with the DPP changes 'saved'?

Colin

Lightroom can't/doesn't "read" the DPP settings, and even if it could, DPP and Lightroom use significantly different demosaicing algorithms.

I prefer Lightroom for a multitude of reasons. I feel the workflow is way better, AND I like how the LR "edits" are stored in a seperate sidecar (XMP) file so my backup process takes less time. I only have to back up the big .cr2 file the first time I load it onto my hard drive. If I go back and make edits later, only the modified XMP files need to be backed up (I run an automated backup every night at 3 AM)

Dont think I'd give up Lightroom. I just processed some images with overexposed sky (no graduated filter) using the Lightroom graduated filter feature. While I'm no expert with DPP, I cant see an easy way to get that type of effect (not saying it cant be done, just not easy). As Tony said, DPP loks great for 'touch-ups', and as another contributor said, I'm sure it will shorten your workflow, but not sure I want to give up the creativity. But I think the 'better' discussion is missing the point. It seems more like 'under these circumstances I'll use this, under other circumstances I'll use that', unless you have DPP for free and dont want the outlay for Lightroom.

Colin