Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
  

Archive 2014 · Canon DPP 4 Software

  
 
rattlebonez
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Canon DPP 4 Software


Dan,

Excellent image quality, clean images (sky, no pattern noise), correct colors and skin tones, lens corrections, etc, is the reason to use DPP 4, or v3.
Some of us do like DPP Especially with 64bit V4


Just use the software that works for you



Jul 22, 2014 at 12:15 PM
runamuck
Offline
• • • • • •
[X]
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Canon DPP 4 Software


It could be a bad RAM chip. I had one on a Dell, and it crashed randomly. It went anywhere from a couple hours to several days. I finally downloaded a memory checker that tested all RAM functions. Finally, after 27 hours I got a failure. Dell sent out a new RAM chip and told me which one it was.

No more crashes.



Jul 22, 2014 at 12:45 PM
Lan11
Offline
[X]
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Canon DPP 4 Software


runamuck, it happens on 3 different Macs including the newest 3.5 GHz 6-core with Apple only memory.

rattlebonez, thanks for suggestions.
Because I like Canon DPP and the DPP 4 even more, I did all you suggested a year ago for the DPP 3 running under 10.6.8 checking manually for any DPP leftovers. It didn’t help.
Then, I wiped the disk clean and had only OS10.6.8 and the DPP re-installed. No cure.

A well designed application should clean up the earlier garbage automatically.
The problem may only show up on some computers and may be related to the multiprocessor machines or multithreading implementation. I can only speculate :-(


Here are extra comments for the DPP users.
In addition to the DPP 3 and 4 instabilities the DPP 4 certain operations seem slower than in the DPP 3. This may be attributed to the “maiden voyage” of the DPP4 and improved later.

An annoying behaviour is the cropping operation. The DPP image sharpening is slow even on a very fast, multiprocessor computer. If one starts dragging the cropping rectangle before the sharpening is done, the cropping rectangle will be displaced. Getting out and returning to the cropping mode shows the crop correctly.

Despite these shortcomings I’m using Canon DPP and like it best. It is easy and very efficient in my workflow. Overall the DPP 4 UI is excellent. Quality of conversions are tops among many converters that I use which shouldn’t be surprising. Canon knows their processors best, so the DPP produces superb results. Finally, the edits are imbedded in the RAW file, as they should be. No more extra .xmp junk polluting the disk space or fickle “archiving schemes” concocted for the 3rd party converters.

As to the alternatives which I use:
- Aperture, which I never liked, is discontinued.
- Overpriced Adobe PS, which I used since PS 3 and LR, are out of question. Adobe was always the most greedy company and their subscription scheme is another way to milk customers.
- For geeky and brave the darktable is excellent, very sophisticated, free and a steep learning curve pays good dividends. You don’t need to use every of its many modules. Just a basic set which works for you.
- Finally, the Hasselblad Phocus is also free. Excellent results. Works with all cameras supported by Apple iPhoto/(Aperture). Some modules only work with Hassy, but all essential operations are available.




Jul 22, 2014 at 01:13 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Canon DPP 4 Software


rattlebonez wrote:
Dan,

Excellent image quality, clean images (sky, no pattern noise), correct colors and skin tones, lens corrections, etc, is the reason to use DPP 4, or v3.
Some of us do like DPP Especially with 64bit V4

Just use the software that works for you


But you get all of that in the other apps, too...

I occasionally marvel at photographers for whom hundreds or even thousands of dollars for a single lens is no obstacle, who are undone by the idea of paying $10/month or less for what is essentially a good portion of an entire digital darkroom, and one with far more power than the traditional darkroom ever had.

YMMV,

Dan



Jul 22, 2014 at 01:43 PM
15Bit
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Canon DPP 4 Software


gdanmitchell wrote:
But you get all of that in the other apps, too...

Not entirely - the Lens Optimiser module is only available in DPP and when i tested it out it made a noticeable difference to images. And i also sometimes struggle with Adobe skintones too, and rather than fight ACR/LR to get them right it is easier to switch to DPP or C1 for specific images.



Jul 22, 2014 at 01:59 PM
rattlebonez
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Canon DPP 4 Software


Dan,

No, it is not the cost of the Adobe rental-ware. I am personally just not impressed with the RAW conversions from Adobe Camera RAW. I try ACR from time to time.

To each their own solution ...



Jul 22, 2014 at 03:28 PM
ggreene
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Canon DPP 4 Software


I switched my desktop over to a new Mac Pro last month and one of the things I've been looking for is a Breezebrowser Pro replacement. I'm trying to avoid having to load up a Windows VM or dedicate space to boot camp as BBPro is the only Windows app I really need. DPP4 is a nice substitute for this and free. I really don't need it for conversions I just need the fast preview, ability to see the RAW file at 100%, and the left side folder view for organization. So far it has worked out well. I do all my culling with this and then import into LR.

Tried Photomechanic and Adobe Bridge but they are not quite as nice as DPP4. I was pleasantly surprised.

I wish the LR Library Module was faster for previewing and culling RAW's but Adobe just isn't there yet.



Jul 22, 2014 at 08:21 PM
Lan11
Offline
[X]
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Canon DPP 4 Software


Unfortunately, for a person who stated: “Back in the day, I recall trying the DPP software a few times…” the only thing left is to “occasionally marvel at photographers for whom hundreds or even thousands of dollars…. etc.”

FYI only :-) - those photographers often experiment without getting addicted to hyped products or following a trend.
Instead of marveling, how about giving the DPP, or any other application, a chance? Like 6 months of solid learning and using it? Then comparing results.
Or better yet, posting your best files made with your current converter, whatever it is, along the original RAW files, so people proficient with other converters can show you their results?

And, please don’t take this reply as offensive. It is so common to read falsehood. There are “experts” who publish reviews about equipment which they “used” in the camera store and write reviews based on the user manual.

I’m posting in hope that someone from Canon will read my posts and make an excellent converter even better.



Jul 22, 2014 at 08:42 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Canon DPP 4 Software


Lan11 wrote:
Unfortunately, for a person who stated: “Back in the day, I recall trying the DPP software a few times…” the only thing left is to “occasionally marvel at photographers for whom hundreds or even thousands of dollars…. etc.”

FYI only :-) - those photographers often experiment without getting addicted to hyped products or following a trend.
Instead of marveling, how about giving the DPP, or any other application, a chance? Like 6 months of solid learning and using it? Then comparing results.
Or better yet, posting your best files made with your current converter, whatever it is, along the original RAW files,
...Show more

Well, I have tried it more than once. (I've given quite a few applications "a chance." I was a late stage beta tester for Aperture, which I used for several versions, really wanting to like it. I was also in on the late stage betas of Lightroom, and before that I used Photoshop for some time. I used DPP enough to understand how it operates and what its weaknesses are relative to the other programs I've used. (I actually used my first digital camera all the way back in the mid-1990s.)

I don't doubt that DPP can convert raw images quite well, since most raw converters can do much the same things once you master their interfaces. I also concede that it comes free with your camera. And, knowing that taste is a subjective thing, I can't quarrel with individuals who have used a range of program and come to settle on DPP. That is their/your prerogative.

Aside from my issues with the interface and compatibility with more standard software, t just plain would not work for my workflow. DPP converts files to tiff, which then come into (for me) Photoshop as tiff files. My workflow is almost entirely non-destructive, meaning that my Photoshop files maintain a "live" connection back into ACR so that I can return there at any point in the post-processing workflow to fine tune my conversion later on while retaining all other edits I have done. For example, I prefer to clone out dust in ACR. If I miss a spot and discover it while in Photoshop it is an easy matter to reopen in ACR, clone out the spot, and go on from where I was.

In addition, because of the tight integration of ACR and Photoshop (which is conceptually similar to what Lightroom does internally) I bring converted files from ACR into Photoshop not as static tiff files but as so-called smart layers. This allows me to do do essentially anything (with a very small number of exceptions) in a editable/reversible manner. For example, I can apply more than one type of sharpening and even constrain it to selected areas of the image. I can apply the sharpening early in the post process, assured that it will be trivial to come back later and change the settings if necessary.

These other programs (the Bridge component of ACR and Lightroom itself) also offer very powerful tools for organizing and searching your files in a wide range of ways.

Despite what you may think, I am no particular fan of Adobe the company. I spoke out against their software rental model, and it still makes me very uneasy — though the terms have changed radically since they were originally announced. What was going to be Photoshop for $30/month is now Photoshop and Lightroom for $10/month. In terms of price that is not a bad deal at all, especially if you are the sort who prefers to use up-to-date software.

The issue of "“occasionally marvel[ing] at photographers for whom hundreds or even thousands of dollars" on lenses is no biggie while a few hundred on software is, is sort of a separate issue. There are a few reasons that folks cite to explain their preference for DPP.

1. Some think that it improves their raw conversions. I'm sure I can't convince them otherwise, but there is scant evidence that this is the case — and if it was the case, a whole bunch of serious photographers would certainly choose to use the free and better tool rather than pay for an inferior one, right? But they don't.

2. Some just like DPP. This is that subjective thing I mentioned above — some folks just feel differently from others about such things. Where you find a DPP interface that is powerful and flexible, I find one that is awkward and difficult. And it is hard to move from a familiar application to one that is unfamiliar, even if the new one is objectively better. I know. I've made such moves and felt awkward at first.

3. Some choose to use DPP because it is free, just like some choose to use The Gimp for the same reason. This is a different group from those who might feel that either program is actually better than the commercial alternatives. This is the subset I was thinking of when I made the "marveling" remark — those among them who think it is reasonable, as I do, to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on photography hardware, but who feel that $10/month is an outlandish expenditure for the thing that replaces (except for the actual printer) an entire darkroom. (A number of people I've know rethought their objections to the cost of software once they looked at it that way.)

Take care,

Dan

Regarding "my best files," my photographs are pretty easy to find online. Almost all were converted using ACR and then post processed in Photoshop. Some, including some of my photographs of musicians, came through Lightroom, sometime with further post-processing in Photoshop.



Jul 22, 2014 at 09:45 PM
gbaren
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Canon DPP 4 Software


Concurring again w Lan11 & 15Bit. I HAVE an adobe subscription. I have used other pro software. Skin tone for me is everything and I process over 10,000 images a week. I have found nothing better than DPP for THAT. This version of DPP4 IS buggy (at least on a Mac). I hope they fix it.


Jul 23, 2014 at 12:41 AM
ronno
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Canon DPP 4 Software


We used to have crashing issues on our macs, and solved it by only putting 400 or so files maximum in a directory.
We had been shooting more than 1000 frames per day in the fashion photo studio, and all those files in the same directory/folder caused issues with DPP.



Jul 23, 2014 at 02:07 AM
gbaren
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Canon DPP 4 Software


ronno..Thanks. I will try sorting folders w raw files in Photo Mechanic (crazy fast for that!) Smaller number of files in DPP.



Jul 23, 2014 at 03:52 AM
Lan11
Offline
[X]
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Canon DPP 4 Software


gdanmitchell wrote:
“I can't quarrel with individuals who have used a range of program and come to settle on DPP.”

- I do not quarrel and didn’t settle on anything. I expressed personal views based on long experience with various products which contradict yours.

“most raw converters can do much the same things once you master their interfaces.”

- Open RAW files in different converters. Compare histograms. Surprised? Do you understand the implications? Luckily, most camera makers didn’t fall for the ploy of standardizing on the .dng format - “one size fits all”.

“DPP converts files to tiff, which then come into (for me) Photoshop as tiff files. My workflow is almost entirely non-destructive….”

- Do you mean the TIFF is destructive or did you mean something else? Are you aware of the DPP option: “Transfer to PS”? You can choose various output formats in most converters.

“The issue of “occasionally marvel[ing] at photographers for whom hundreds or even thousands of dollars" on lenses is no biggie while a few hundred on software is, is sort of a separate issue.”

- Agree. But you implied that a cheap skate, who attempts to save $10/mo. after buying expensive equipment, is getting short changed by side stepping Adobe products, which is false. I don’t enjoy being screwed by any monopolistic company and I particularly detest Adobe attitude toward customers, which was my point.

If people were smart the “snake oil” and “ointment for rats” salesmen would starve to death, but they prosper. So is Adobe with their subscription to “pie in the sky”. A friend, pro photog, likes it because…..“the updates are automatically installed”! They can also de-install, disable or copy anything from the computer. Now Adobe products will allow opening RAW files, edited with their s/w, after subscription is terminated. Who could ever suspect such an incredible generosity?

“it is hard to move from a familiar application to one that is unfamiliar, even if the new one is objectively better.”

- Yes, that’s pretty common. Also true with old maps, habits and personal convictions :-)

“Some choose to use DPP because it is free…..”

- It is priced into the equipment. All Canon buyers pay a small share.

“my photographs are pretty easy to find online.”

- Are these RAW files? If they’re post-processed, then you didn’t understand my suggestion.

“a whole bunch of serious photographers would certainly choose to use the free and better tool rather than pay for an inferior one, right? But they don’t.”

There are many reasons why. Many people, serious or funny, with a huge photo library edits will continue using their current tools despite newer and better options. Photo gear reviewers use ARC as a benchmark, but not necessarily for their personal work. Unfortunately, the PS became the industry standard which was a free ticket to ripoffs. That’s what monopoly is all about.

“Despite what you may think, I am no particular fan of Adobe the company.”

- Previous and current comments suggest you are.
If you truly believe in superiority, of the application you’re using, what are you doing on this forum? I can only conclude that you convictions are pretty brittle.
To conclude, I’ll repeat: the native converters deliver best results.




Jul 23, 2014 at 09:22 AM
skibum5
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Canon DPP 4 Software


Hmm it has terrible 4k monitor support for the Windows version. UI is miniscule and in ways that are a lot more bothersome than Photoshop on Windows (which also doesn't scale), at least at first glance.

I wonder why they don't offer the deep ProphotoRGB working space yet either. Maybe Wide Gamut RGB is good enough, need to look into that space.



Jul 24, 2014 at 09:41 PM
Lan11
Offline
[X]
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Canon DPP 4 Software


For the DPP users - follow up :

I reinstalled Mavericks and DPP4.0 again and experienced 2 crashes.
Today, I carried out a small experiment. I reviewed files I shot today by trashing some or assigning ratings to the keepers. No other edits. Only the Maverick, the Activity Monitor - monitoring RAM usage, and the DPP were active.
As I suspected all the time, the DPP is gobbling up RAM and never releasing any.
I can't post the Activity Monitor screen shots, so here are the relevant numbers:

1. Mavericks & AM launched: Memory used: 3.09 GB, File cache: 1.31 GB.
2. DPP launched: Memory used: 3.70 GB, File cache: 1.63 GB.
3. After assigning star ratings to 22 pictures: Memory used: 6.98 GB, File cache: 3.92 GB.

If I edited files more extensively the memory usage would grow faster leading to the DPP crash.



Jul 25, 2014 at 04:07 PM
Andrew J
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #16 · p.2 #16 · Canon DPP 4 Software


So on a windows box you would solve this by running MaxMem by AnalogX. Maybe someone will take the time to find the work around for Apple.


Jul 25, 2014 at 05:41 PM
Chumma
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #17 · p.2 #17 · Canon DPP 4 Software


Lan11 wrote:
For the DPP users - follow up :

I reinstalled Mavericks and DPP4.0 again and experienced 2 crashes.
Today, I carried out a small experiment. I reviewed files I shot today by trashing some or assigning ratings to the keepers. No other edits. Only the Maverick, the Activity Monitor - monitoring RAM usage, and the DPP were active.
As I suspected all the time, the DPP is gobbling up RAM and never releasing any.
I can't post the Activity Monitor screen shots, so here are the relevant numbers:

1. Mavericks & AM launched: Memory used: 3.09 GB, File cache: 1.31 GB.
2. DPP launched: Memory
...Show more

Earlier you posted some diagnostic information. That doesn't seem to be related to memory usage.



Jul 25, 2014 at 07:16 PM
Lan11
Offline
[X]
p.2 #18 · p.2 #18 · Canon DPP 4 Software


Chumma: it is related.

There is also another issue, probably co-related.
In the course of file editing the Edit menu becomes partially disabled (all copy & paste items) preventing copying recipes. The solution is to quit and restart the DPP.

To avoid loosing all edits I save after each file edit. If I have a crash, I only loose one edit.
For now, I don't expect any better solutions.

The DPP isn't widely used, but the DPP 4.0 has a chance to change that if Canon fixes the bugs.



Jul 26, 2014 at 08:37 AM
Chumma
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #19 · p.2 #19 · Canon DPP 4 Software


I just did a test. On a Windows 7 machine with 16 GB memory, I ran the test shown on the Examples section here:


link

It shows the peak memory statistics of a program. The example is given for the Notepad application and the results are printed to the screen in the code shown in the link above. I made two changes to the code. Instead of Notepad, I changed the process name to Dpp4Main.exe (which is the main DPP). Instead of outputting to the screen I output the results to a text file. The test automatically starts DPP and runs until the user exits DPP.

I ran the test for about 3 minutes. DPP started at a blank folder which had no photographs. I then navigated to a folder that has over 1800 5DIII images. I opened one image, did a little editing (to simulate heavy memory usage), then closed the image, navigated to a blank folder, and exited DPP. I got about 13 pages of results in a text file.

Entries from the beginning, during editing when memory use was high, and the last entry before exiting DPP are given below. Also peak memory use is given at the end. Notice memory use went up during editing, but it went down (as expected) towards the end when I stopped editing and closed the image. In other words, no memory leak or anything unusual is seen here.

1.
System.Diagnostics.Process (Dpp4Main) -
-------------------------------------
physical memory usage: 16052224
base priority: 8
priority class: Normal
user processor time: 00:00:00.0468003
privileged processor time: 00:00:00.0624004
total processor time: 00:00:00.1092007
PagedSystemMemorySize64: 267480
PagedMemorySize64: 21536768
Status = Running

2.
System.Diagnostics.Process (Dpp4Main) -
-------------------------------------
physical memory usage: 1275555840
base priority: 8
priority class: Normal
user processor time: 00:03:05.5007891
privileged processor time: 00:00:25.1161610
total processor time: 00:03:30.6169501
PagedSystemMemorySize64: 790392
PagedMemorySize64: 1252741120
Status = Running

3.
System.Diagnostics.Process (Dpp4Main) -
-------------------------------------
physical memory usage: 608727040
base priority: 8
priority class: Normal
user processor time: 00:03:06.2339938
privileged processor time: 00:00:25.5841640
total processor time: 00:03:31.8181578
PagedSystemMemorySize64: 790776
PagedMemorySize64: 601051136
Status = Running

Process exit code: 0
Peak physical memory usage of the process: 1830658048
Peak paged memory usage of the process: 1957269504
Peak virtual memory usage of the process: 2781601792



Jul 26, 2014 at 12:07 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #20 · p.2 #20 · Canon DPP 4 Software


Oh, boy.

And, oh, bye... ;-)

Lan11 wrote:
gdanmitchell wrote:
“I can't quarrel with individuals who have used a range of program and come to settle on DPP.”

- I do not quarrel and didn’t settle on anything. I expressed personal views based on long experience with various products which contradict yours.

“most raw converters can do much the same things once you master their interfaces.”

- Open RAW files in different converters. Compare histograms. Surprised? Do you understand the implications? Luckily, most camera makers didn’t fall for the ploy of standardizing on the .dng format - “one size fits all”.

“DPP converts files to tiff, which then come into (for me)
...Show more




Jul 26, 2014 at 12:20 PM
1      
2
       3       end




FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.