Lance Lee wrote:
I've been using DPP for about 3 years now, since I first went digital, and it is a very nice program, can give wonderful results. I also like the way you can work on many images quickly, it is like having a Camera RAW toolbar attached to Bridge.
Right now I'm in the process of switching to Lightroom. So far I'm loving it, it just has more useful tools than DPP, mainly: much better cropping control, more fine-tuned control of RAW, the fill and recovery sliders. Those alone are worth the switch for me.
Jerry,
Lance made some good points that didn't even cross my mind. THe highlight recovery tool in LR is very useful in itself. Given that your original app is no longer usable you might want to consider the others. However, I think most all of them do everything the same. *To me* it's a matter of one getting used to where the controls are located.
I was once a C1 Pro user. You couldn't tell me anything different. I then played with Bibble. I didn't care for the controls. I went to ACR...didn't like the controls. I finally ended up with RAW Shooter Premium. I loved it, but Adobe bought them out Today I use both LR and ACR.
Again, they all do the same things in very similar ways. As suggested, play with the demos and see what you like.
Thanks for the advice.... I'll have to see if I can get another DPP disc from Canon somehow and I'll try free previews from the other ones that were mentioned.
As stated earlier in the following posts, my Canon DPP software is not working properly. I let my disc go when I sold my other Canon camera on this forum. So since I wasn't getting the full availability of options with the disc, I wasn't satisfied with it.
In the advice offered by other members, they stated that DPP was a good system.
So, would anyone have a DPP disc that they no longer need?
I didn't get another one when I bought my current used Canon.
I just downloaded the latest update and the compressed 80MB file took perhaps three minutes to download, so clearly Canon has its act together, at least in this area.
Before I upgraded from the original Creative Suites, I utilized DPP since the Camera Raw with that version did not recognize 5D RAW CR2 files. I was a bit frustrated initially, but quickly found a work-flow with DPP that was fine for my purposes. Files that needed further processing were transferred to Photoshop as TIFF files. More recently, I registered for a class at a local community college and took advantage of educational discounts and bought both CS3 package and Lightroom. DPP has been replaced in my work-flow. I love Lightroom and do very little processing in Photoshop. Of course, these new products are not inexpensive even with an educational discount. CS3 Standard Design package was $389 and Lightroom was $95. These products are not supposed to be used for commercial purposes, which is fine with me. I'm not a pro and don't sell my images.
For someone on a limited budget DPP is well worth exploring. Certainly the price is right.
CGrindahl,
Thanks for the advice to download latest DPP version.
Now I know why I wasn't satisfied with my screwed up version.
It's much better now.
Thanks to everyone for the advice. I'm going to try the other ones also.
I want to do a bit more sophisticated raw photography with my EOS 20D and am considering Adobe Lightroom and Capture One 4. These days I am using iPhoto and this puts very serious limitations on what you can do.
Am going to download them both and try them out. The actual processing will all be a bit of a patience game as I have on older Mac laptop. I hesitate with Aperture because from what I have read I understand it is not very good at getting quality imagery out of the raw data files.
Now my main question: why would I want Photoshop at all with any of the above? What I'd like to do is some colour adjustment, flexible conversion to monochrome, sharpening and noise reduction. In a way I think these are all more or less covered in Lightroom and Capture One, no? I am not very interested in sophisticated image editing features. Am I missing something fundamental here?
HerrB wrote:
I want to do a bit more sophisticated raw photography with my EOS 20D and am considering Adobe Lightroom and Capture One 4. These days I am using iPhoto and this puts very serious limitations on what you can do.
Am going to download them both and try them out. The actual processing will all be a bit of a patience game as I have on older Mac laptop. I hesitate with Aperture because from what I have read I understand it is not very good at getting quality imagery out of the raw data files.
Now my main question: why would I want Photoshop at all with any of the above? What I'd like to do is some colour adjustment, flexible conversion to monochrome, sharpening and noise reduction. In a way I think these are all more or less covered in Lightroom and Capture One, no? I am not very interested in sophisticated image editing features. Am I missing something fundamental here?...Show more →
My outlook is similar to yours. If I can avoid using Photoshop then I will.
Other than dust spotting and red-eye correction, Lightroom is a GLOBAL correction tool - that is, you cannot, for the most part, select specific areas of the image to make a correction on - and the sharpening, while much improved in ver 1.1, is for initial capture sharpening only - and here, the need for localized sharpening (think eyes, hair....) is apparent.
Another thing, there are no layers in Lightroom - many blending effects are impossible. The list goes on......
That said, being lazy, 98% of the processing I do is all accomplished in the RAW converter.
Thanks for pointing it out -- I am aware of Lightroom's (and Capture One's) global way of doing things and the lack of layers etc. This was in fact the angle I was coming from.
The point is this: can I do without or will there just always be a need of Photoshop-like post-processing. Even, if I have a sophisticated raw processor like Lightroom or Capture One? Or Aperture, for that matter, which I only realized minutes after posting earlier today got a new release -- it might be on par with the other two now.
For me as an amateur Photoshop is heavy on the budget. If I only use 5% of what it can do, then buying it is extra painful.
Also, I tend to not manipulate my photos much. I like to see my camera as a little collector of light and once that light is collected I tend to not want to poke about in it much. Not being a professional I can afford being that way as I have no customers breathing down my neck.
Today I use both LR and ACR.