Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

    I do most of my editing in Elements having "grown up" with it. As I take most of my pictures in RAW format I import them into Elements using ACR. As I've read through the posts here and the generally positive comments on DPP is there any benefit in opening my images up in RAW in DPP before then editing them in Elements as JPEGs?

    #2
    Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

    Hello and welcome Colin.

    Adobe make some very good RAW converters and mostly, they do more than just convert from RAW to Jpeg or TIFF. Light Room is great if you don't have Photoshop CS, or Elements, but the parts normally covered by those programs are a bit "Clunky" in Lightroom.

    I prefer DPP because it is a Canon product for Canon equipment, with no compromises need for other manufacturers. It is quick, quite intuitive, easy to use and there are plenty of Canon learning resources to get the best out of it. You also get a free copy with every Camera.

    When I have got the best I can out of the RAW conversion, then I import it into Photoshop CS for some final polish.
    Colin

    Comment


      #3
      Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

      I will just add to Colin's reply.

      DPP is always able to handle the RAW from new Canon cameras (it's on the CD that comes with the camera) whereas with ACR you may to wait a few months (or go via DNG format) if you buy a new camera at its launch date or soon afterwards. Also Adobe tie in versions of ACR to certain versions of their imaging software. So I guess if you use an older (not that much older) version of PS, PSE or LR the ACR version it supports may not be the latest and hence you'll eventually be unable to get RAW support for new Canon (or others) as they come to market ... without upgrading your Adobe Imaging Software (i.e. The Adobe Tax). Again I think you can use the DNG route.

      Comment


        #4
        Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

        To add my personal slant on this, we all strive to get things as "right" as we can in camera, and this includes some of the raw settings (white balance, picture styles, electronic filtration for example). Canon raw files have a sidecar file which includes some set up data which is transferred to DPP, however the data isn't always transferred into Adobe camera raw.

        A demonstration of this is if you shoot in mono mode (I find that seeing a mono live-view image or a mono review image helps me set myself in mono-mode far better than shooting in colour and then converting in PP), if you subsequently open raw images in DPP they'll be monochrome (but all the colour data is still there and you can convert them back if you so desire), however if you open them in ACR the images will be in colour and any filtration or other effects you've used will be lost. Another demonstration is when shooting IR, DPP can import a wider custom WB range than ACR which can lead to ACR raws being too red and impossible to subsequently correct.

        DPP imported raws can give you a head-start if you've set your camera up how you want it to be, settings which ACR may ignore.

        I also suspect that ACR applies its own "best guess" adjustments to raws at import as I often see a raw image change significantly from first opening until a few seconds later.

        Having spent that time explaining why I think DPP raw aspects are better than ACR's I have to admit that I almost invariably use Lightroom, just because it fits in with my workflow. When I'm doing something which I know will benefit from using DPP (IR or monochrome for example) then I use DPP instead. It's all a question of using the appropriate tool for the job and that is down to individual preference, however good a tool is, if you're not comfortable with it you won't get the best from it!
        Steve's kit - Canon 6D/EG-D/BG-E13/60D/EF-D/BG-E9/600 EX-RT/17-40L/24-105L/40/100L/70-200L/70-300/2x iii/Sigma 8-16/Yongnuo YN-568EX (x2)/YN560EX II/YN622C-TX/YN622C (x4)

        Comment


          #5
          Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

          Thank you for the welcome Colin and for the considered replies from you all.

          I think S_J_P has got to the root of my problem very well when he says
          It's all a question of using the appropriate tool for the job and that is down to individual preference,
          I want to process my images in the best but most productive way possible. For me - so far - that has been RAW images opened in ACR, some adjustments made, and then processed in PEL. However I recognise that may not be the best way but taking on learning new software/workflow can be a bit of a challenge. There is something very comforting about knowing exactly what it is you are doing and not changing. But maybe I'll try using DPP for a while and see how I get on.

          What is the best source of learning material for DPP in your opinions?

          Comment


            #6
            Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

            See the Canon DLC - http://www.learn.usa.canon.com/galle...utorials.shtml

            Or just ask on here ... someone is bound to know how to do something. Like using (DPP) recipes to improve your workflow efficiency.

            Comment


              #7
              Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

              Could I ask what a DNG file is and how do I find it if I want to use it? I shoot RAW all the time, and have never come across a DNG file before. Is it possible to have an explanation, please?

              Comment


                #8
                Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

                DNG=(Adobe) Digital NeGative Format (a suzerainty standardized RAW format)

                See http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/pho...splayTab2.html
                Last edited by MX5; 06-02-2013, 14:32.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

                  Originally posted by colin.smith18 View Post
                  I want to process my images in the best but most productive way possible. For me - so far - that has been RAW images opened in ACR, some adjustments made, and then processed in PEL
                  One thing which annoys me about Elements is it's instance on converting to 8-bit before performing most editing tasks, at least both DPP and LR work in 14bit.
                  Steve's kit - Canon 6D/EG-D/BG-E13/60D/EF-D/BG-E9/600 EX-RT/17-40L/24-105L/40/100L/70-200L/70-300/2x iii/Sigma 8-16/Yongnuo YN-568EX (x2)/YN560EX II/YN622C-TX/YN622C (x4)

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

                    Originally posted by MX5 View Post
                    DNG=(Adobe) Digital NeGative Format (a suzerainty standardized RAW format)

                    See http://www.adobe.com/uk/products/pho...splayTab2.html
                    Thank you for that. I still have a question if I may. I'm thinking of getting a new camera, and am concerned that the files may not be compatible with my CS5. If Adobe are sluggish in updating CS5 for my new RAW files how will the DNG converter pick up the RAW files? Adobe won't update two systems separately will they, and if the converter will accept any RAW files at any time why does CS5 not do so?

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

                      Adobe supply a RAW to DNG converter although there is some delay between a camera being announced and Adobe getting their software updated. This converter (the latest) is here http://www.adobe.com/support/downloa...jsp?ftpID=5519 and as far as I'm aware is standalone (i.e. no dependencies on other Adobe products). Each release of ACR is tied to release of PS ... so older PS's can't use the latest ACR (which may be the only ACR that supports your camera) ... so you have to go via DNG (or upgrade your PS) ... nice marketing model Adobe use !!

                      So CS4 and 5 probably (I haven't checked) can't use ACR 7.x and so can't import 6D RAW files for example. CS6 does use ACR 7.x and so can import 6D RAW files.

                      Now with DPP you could convert to TIFF then use PS if you wanted.
                      Last edited by MX5; 06-02-2013, 16:38.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

                        Thank you for your answer. So it seems to me that if Adobe don't update the converter then RAW files from my possible new camera won't be read in either CS5 or the converter. That's a pain. I'm not a great fan of DPP. I find it very clunky and somewhat basic compared to ACR. But then it is free so that's the trade off. Most of my editing is done in ACR; it's a pity that I cannot open TIFFs in ACR but can open JPEGs. That seems a little bit odd to me.

                        I'll have to do some research. Thank you for your help.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

                          MX5, if there any benefit in using DNG over TIFF, is there any information which the DNG file contains which is missing in the TIFF?
                          Steve's kit - Canon 6D/EG-D/BG-E13/60D/EF-D/BG-E9/600 EX-RT/17-40L/24-105L/40/100L/70-200L/70-300/2x iii/Sigma 8-16/Yongnuo YN-568EX (x2)/YN560EX II/YN622C-TX/YN622C (x4)

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

                            Before Adobe I think we had Aldus? Who 'invented' TIFF (or what became Adobe TIFF) a subset of this went in for standardization (alas I was doing Character Sets [Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz] and Open System standards at the time) with ISO as TIFF/Electronic Photography (TIFF/EP). Adobe DNG is curiously based on TIFF/EP ... so there's always been an Adobe interest. As far as I am aware everything about DNG is open and free (no IP no licenses). Technically I'm not sure of the benefits (never delved that deep) ... but one of the main drivers behind DNG is long term digital archiving (because it is an open standard). So in theory the more paranoid of us would convert all our CR2's/CRW's to DNG for archiving on archive quality DVDs.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Re: Adobe Camera Raw versus DPP

                              Andrew Gibson's eBook: Understanding DPP helped me to learn DPP in a bit more depth. I still use it as a reference guide when I need to refresh my understanding.

                              Linky thing

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X