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 | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2017 · RAW Conversion questions

  
 
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · RAW Conversion questions


I'm one of the people who has PS6 that I own and don't use cloud, and don't plan to in the future.Especially If I get a newer camera that isn't supported in my current version of Photoshop.
So I'm looking for other options. If I use a different RAW converter, but still want to bring images into PS6, would I convert to DNG to do it?
Or is there a RAW to DNG converter I could use instead and just bring the DNG's into PS ?
Are DNG's the same quality as RAW images ?
If I was to get a RAW converter, which would be a good choice, and does it have a viewer like Bridge so I can look through my images without converting them first?
Would my workflow then involve say opening the images in my new RAW converter, then converting them to DNG or would it be to TIFF ?



Dec 01, 2017 at 09:57 AM
charlyw
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · RAW Conversion questions


Bsmooth wrote:
I'm one of the people who has PS6 that I own and don't use cloud

You don't have to use the cloud, it's purely an optional component in the photographers subscription! And you are missing out on a lot of helpful features in both LR and PS as of today...

Bsmooth wrote:
, and don't plan to in the future.Especially If I get a newer camera that isn't supported in my current version of Photoshop.
So I'm looking for other options. If I use a different RAW converter, but still want to bring images into PS6, would I convert to DNG to do it?

No, you would have to convert to TIFF 16-Bit. DNG support in CS6 is too old to handle newer cameras and would incur loss of image quality.

Bsmooth wrote:
Are DNG's the same quality as RAW images ?

Only partially. As soon as LR/PS know about a new camera they start to use embedded additional information from within the DNG to develop the images - as CS6 doesn't get any updates anymore DNG will be handled by generic algorithms which are of lower quality but can deal with anything...

Bsmooth wrote:
If I was to get a RAW converter, which would be a good choice, and does it have a viewer like Bridge so I can look through my images without converting them first?

That really depends on the camera - some RAW converters handle the RAW files from one camera better than others.

Bsmooth wrote:
Would my workflow then involve say opening the images in my new RAW converter, then converting them to DNG or would it be to TIFF ?

Definitely TIFF, DNG is a valid option only if you are committed to current and future Adobe tools!



Dec 01, 2017 at 10:35 AM
PhilPDX
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · RAW Conversion questions


Bsmooth wrote:
If I was to get a RAW converter, which would be a good choice


Many camera manufacturers provide their own RAW converters these days (like Canon's DPP), and oftentimes people seem to like the results better than the ones generated by Lightroom. From DPP you can tranfer the developed images directly to Photoshop as 16bits/channel TIF for example. There are many other options out there like the great freeware tool RawTherapee or commercial ones like On1 or DXO. Pick your poison; it doesn't have to be Lightroom.

Bsmooth wrote:
If I use a different RAW converter, but still want to bring images into PS6, would I convert to DNG to do it?


TIF

Bsmooth wrote:
...don't use cloud, and don't plan to in the future.


Storage is dirt cheap these days. Why waste time transferring terabytes of image data to and from the cloud when you could be outside taking pictures?


-Phil




Edited on Dec 01, 2017 at 11:13 AM · View previous versions



Dec 01, 2017 at 10:57 AM
charlyw
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · RAW Conversion questions


PhilPDX wrote:
Storage is dirt cheap these days. Why waste time transferring terabytes of image data to and from the cloud when you can be outside taking pictures?


True, and nobody requires you to do so unless you are a smartphone/tablet shooter - then the cloud is a god send. But there are differing products from Adobe available to suit your style. Don't get hung up on the CC in the names, it's just a "can use the cloud if one so wishes" not a "must use the cloud" except for the new Lightroom CC which is the smartphone/tablet shooter realm...



Dec 01, 2017 at 11:06 AM
PhilPDX
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · RAW Conversion questions


charlyw wrote:
True, and nobody requires you to do so unless you are a smartphone/tablet shooter


Why would a smartphone shooter need a tool like Lightroom in the first place? There's always Microsoft Paint to put a fancy frame around your JPG's.

But you're right: for the selfie generation, the cloud is probably a perfect solution.

-Phil



Dec 01, 2017 at 11:19 AM
Abbott Schindl
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · RAW Conversion questions


You don't say which camera(s) you have. Many cameras come with Raw converters, such as:
- Canon, it's DPP, which gets upgraded for free.
- Nikon provides Capture NX-D (I think it's free, but it may not be).
- Sony includes Capture One for Sony, which is worth upgrading to the "Pro for Sony" version (I'm amazed that none of my Sony clients has even looked at Capture One). The "free" version does excellent conversion, but provides limited other tools, while the "Pro for Sony" version has all the Capture One Pro bells & whistles, but limited to processing Sony Raw images.

I don't know about Pentax, Olympus or others, but so far every camera manufacturer I've looked into offers a Raw converter, so I'd look at that route first.

The manufacturer supplied converters I'm aware of are able to export TIFF, JPEG and perhaps other formats that other editors understand.

Converting to DNG has issues, such as:
- DNG may not include all of the EXIF data your camera embeds in the Raw file. I know I lost several bits during the brief time I used DNG with my 7D Mark II files.
- DNG color profile is not universally understood by other software, so you may encounter color interpretation problems. For example, older versions of Capture One Pro had a disclaimer that they didn't read DNG ICC profile.

IF you decide to go with DNG conversion, I'd encourage you to use the "Embed Raw" option, which includes the original Raw file in a way that can be extracted later. Of course this approximately doubles the file size.

Another option: consider weening yourself of CS6. Take a look at Affinity Photo, Acorn, Pixelmator and other editing programs that understand newer cameras than CS6 does.

Depending on the editing you do, even something like Sylum Luminar 2018 or OnOne Photo may work. I've been using Luminar 2018 on a Mac since it came out, and it works well, although I've read a number of negative comments from Windows users, so you'll want to investigate further.

Or [I hesitate to suggest this] look at PS Elements, which is very inexpensive, and there's a third party add-on (http://elementsplus.net) that can unlock many of the features CS6 has. What I don't like about Elements, though, is that it's mostly 8-bit, its UI isn't very nice (IMO), and it requires you to install a lot of Adobe "stuff" and makes lots of connections to Adobe servers in the course of installation and possibly during use. I'm really tired of all the outgoing connections I find Adobe software making to their servers, especially since I don't know what data is being transmitted.

Edited on Dec 01, 2017 at 01:19 PM · View previous versions



Dec 01, 2017 at 12:33 PM
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · RAW Conversion questions


I don't mind the Cloud for storage, I was speaking more in the terms of Adobe and the newer subscription method for Photoshop and Lightroom.
I just can't see paying a monthly fee to them when I have and bought a version that I thought was going to be updated.
At the same time nothing lasts these days, so I'm looking for other solutions. I'm trying Luminar and its OK, but its no Photoshop as far as a RAW converter, I can't even really see which image I'm opening.



Dec 01, 2017 at 12:33 PM
Abbott Schindl
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · RAW Conversion questions


CS6 WAS updated for a while. There aren't many programs that offer free updates forever, and Adobe gave plenty of warnings before they stopped upgrading CS6 (and LR6 for that matter).

Re Luminar: they've said they're adding DAM later this year, which may solve your "can't see the image" issue. However, I don't think Luminar ever claimed to be a Photoshop substitute: they're really 2 different beasts. Affinity Photo and Pixelmator have more PS-like functionality (Affinity has pretty much everything most people need, I think, but its UI can use some work).

The thing I don't think enough people have wrapped their heads around yet, though, is that we're using an ecosystem: computer + OS + pp apps + camera (+ maybe a printer and associated output software), and replacing/upgrading one element can have major trickle down effects. For example, upgrading to a "free" new OS version can break pp software, and you may need to upgrade the OS when you buy a new computer. And as you've noted, buying a new camera can obsolete your PP software—and upgrading that software may require upgrading the OS, which in turn might require a new computer. I think it helps a lot to think about the entire system rather than individual components.



Dec 01, 2017 at 01:28 PM
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · RAW Conversion questions


Yep exactly and very well put, it is a system, and its not easy once a component becomes essentially obsolete, which is what CS6 has now become. I have Affinity and was not impressed at all, it was very slow and as you said the UI was very clunky.
Thats the thing though about PS. Older versions could be used as long as the camera list and RAW converter were updated, which wouldn't have been that hard, but they chose not to.
So I'll get another RAW converter and still use CS6, just which one to choose, or maybe wait a bit on Luminar at least for now.



Dec 01, 2017 at 01:48 PM
Zenon Char
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · RAW Conversion questions


Bsmooth wrote:
I don't mind the Cloud for storage, I was speaking more in the terms of Adobe and the newer subscription method for Photoshop and Lightroom.
I just can't see paying a monthly fee to them when I have and bought a version that I thought was going to be updated.
At the same time nothing lasts these days, so I'm looking for other solutions. I'm trying Luminar and its OK, but its no Photoshop as far as a RAW converter, I can't even really see which image I'm opening.


I purchased earlier versions of LR and they stopped updating them as well. I had two choices. Walk or upgrade. So they and other software companies have been doing it forever. Same with PS. Got CS2 in 2005 and paid for 4 upgrades.

If I had purchasd Capture One Pro in September for $300 I'd be looking at an upgrade of another $100 if I wanted all the latest stuff. $400 is 33 months of subscription. I have been reading and it looks like Capture One Pro has been upgrading every year for the last several years. I did not do the research so I can't back that part. With 33 months of Adobe you get all the latest updates. By the way I paid for the whole year. I don't need a monthly reminder.

Also with the subscription you get free website with your own domain. I got rid of my Zenfilio account that cost me $150 a year.



Dec 01, 2017 at 05:45 PM
charlyw
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · RAW Conversion questions


Bsmooth wrote:
Thats the thing though about PS. Older versions could be used as long as the camera list and RAW converter were updated, which wouldn't have been that hard, but they chose not to.
So I'll get another RAW converter and still use CS6, just which one to choose, or maybe wait a bit on Luminar at least for now.


To update a RAW converter for new cameras often requires rewrites of central routines - and is very expensive as you even need to maintain a second development infrastructure!

Luminar is nothing more than a glorified filter set, I use it as a plugin, standalone it’s unusable, even on a Mac!



Dec 02, 2017 at 06:27 AM
Ernie Aubert
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · RAW Conversion questions


I also have CS6, and I also won't be subscribing to CC. I'm finding that I like to use either DPP (for CR2s from Canon) or DXO Optics Pro 11 (for ORFs from Olympus as well as CR2s from Canon) to process the raws and generate TIFFs to work on subsequently in CS6. DPP has the advantage of DLO for images generated with Canon lenses, but I really like DXO.


Dec 02, 2017 at 10:47 PM
Zenon Char
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · RAW Conversion questions


If I had no other choice but DPP I would not have any issues using it.


Dec 03, 2017 at 08:44 AM
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · RAW Conversion questions


Thanks Ernie for that, I was thinking of going DxO Optics Pro, when I noticed they have a newer version called DxO PhotoLab.
This looks good to me and I threw it casually on an email to my wife for a possible Xmas Gift. Will still bring it into PS for any fine tuning, but it looks very good.



Dec 03, 2017 at 10:55 AM
Zenon Char
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · RAW Conversion questions


The two most liked that I read about are Capture One Pro and DXO.


Dec 03, 2017 at 11:19 AM
Alan321
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · RAW Conversion questions


I reckon that if you are any good with Ps then you will take a long time to get on top of almost any new software. They're not Ps clones - they're very different. Adobe software is in a world of its own.

If you have separated image management from image processing, then the cheapest thing is to have the camera-manufacturers' free software take over the processing.

If you want the best from DxO PL then you need to ensure that it supports modules for every lens / camera combination that you care about. They're pretty slow adding old lenses to new cameras, and new lenses to old cameras, but it's keeps getting harder and harder for them to keep up with all possible combinations. Most alternatives seem to have lens modules separate from camera modules.

You may also need DxO ViewPoint because it is not built into the PL or OP programs.

Perhaps the old PTLens is still around for correcting unique camera/lens characteristics that DxO are not providing, but it may not handle 12 and 14 bpc data files.




Dec 14, 2017 at 06:17 AM
Bsmooth
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · RAW Conversion questions


I do keep my images cataloged in Lightroom, and do my processing in PS. Basically I do all my processing and sorting in PS, then import with changes into Lightroom, and those are kept on a seperate drive.
I'm a Canon user now, but the Nikon D500 and 200-500 look like a fantastic combination, that just isn't duplicated by Canon, at least not at present. So I'f I do go down that route sometime it would be nice to know my software can handle the files. Add in the fact that Bridge now just doesn't open files as fast as it used to and no help was received by Adobe for that very problem, I want to keep my options open.
If I have to open RAW files in another program and transfer them to PS say in Tiff, then I will, just have to find one first!



Dec 14, 2017 at 09:35 AM





FM Forums | Post-processing & Printing | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

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.