Is there any image data lost in this process? My thinking is just to convert to DNG, then use ACR to convert.
I have been looking at some RAW converters for my 5D2, and I'm totally underwhelmed by Capture One and DPP... I suppose I could invest the time into getting Capture 1 to do what I need, but I typically do all my adjustments in PS anyway, so I don't get what value is added by doing curves/etc or other adjustments during the conversion process.
I have CS2, and don't want to spend any money to upgrade at this point. I like ACR, but obviously CS2 doesn't support the 5D2's RAW file.
There should be no problem with dng - perfectly sensible option (although the Raw converter in CS4 is probably worth the upgrade cost from CS2). That is the only reason I bothered with the expense. Another option is to buy Lightroom for the conversions
benchase wrote:
Is there any image data lost in this process?
Nope, none, zero, zip, nada.
My thinking is just to convert to DNG, then use ACR to convert.
Probably a good idea!
I have been looking at some RAW converters for my 5D2, and I'm totally underwhelmed by Capture One and DPP... I suppose I could invest the time into getting Capture 1 to do what I need, but I typically do all my adjustments in PS anyway, so I don't get what value is added by doing curves/etc or other adjustments during the conversion process.
Just the GUI layout facilitates pumping the files thru - that's really the main advantage to these photo-editors. That and maybe the tagging and sorting that CS2 can't do well yet with that version of Bridge.
In terms of tagging, etc - I have found Idimager pro to be by far the best DAM out there, at least for me. The scripting support and features included for the cost is amazing. Best piece of software I've had the privilege of using in a very long time.
Interesting post since I just got a 5Ds also and am thinking about the same thing.
Would one of you experts please expain the exact step by step process to take a raw file and convert to dng ( where is the convert to dng done ) and then process in cs3 raw, then on to my normal pp editing in cs3 ?? I don't want to buy the cs4 upgrade right now if I don't have to.
Thank you very much to anyone who might help
Mike
Data may not be lost (I do not know myself if this is the case) but check on how the raw convertors you are considering do with your Canon files. For Nikon files, the Nikon software clearly does a superior job of converting the files. Nikon of course does not support DNG files, so converting to DNG you potentially end up with an inferior conversion.
I have not heard as many complaints from Canon users on the conversion quality of Canon vs other software, so this may not be an issue in your case. Check before you switch.
Well I have been a DNG fan from word go. Till now. I'm divided on the issue because the 5DMkII has extra data in the RAW that is potentially useful such as perimeter illumination. To answer the question frankly there are two issues at work - #1 straight DNG conversion - yes you lose the camera metadata except for white balance and exposure. Any picture styles, focus points or other metadata that the camera puts in there is toast. #2 - DNG with option to store the original. Get a big drive and prepare to spend a lot of time sucking in that image. You'd have to extract the original file to get at the metadata but the option is there. Adobe has stated that they are almost ready to release a new DNG spec that would keep more of the camera metadata - exactly what data is currently unspecified.
My original reason for using DNG is that I hate the sidecar files (XMP) that is used to keep the Lightroom editing info - with DNG it is saved as part of the DNG. Now potentially I have metadata that I might like to keep - so until they release the new DNG standard I'm once again filing the original RAW files. It ain't never as straight forward as we'd like is it?
BubbaJon wrote:
Well I have been a DNG fan from word go. Till now. I'm divided on the issue because the 5DMkII has extra data in the RAW that is potentially useful such as perimeter illumination. To answer the question frankly there are two issues at work - #1 straight DNG conversion - yes you lose the camera metadata except for white balance and exposure. Any picture styles, focus points or other metadata that the camera puts in there is toast. #2 - DNG with option to store the original. Get a big drive and prepare to spend a lot of time sucking in that image. You'd have to extract the original file to get at the metadata but the option is there. Adobe has stated that they are almost ready to release a new DNG spec that would keep more of the camera metadata - exactly what data is currently unspecified.
My original reason for using DNG is that I hate the sidecar files (XMP) that is used to keep the Lightroom editing info - with DNG it is saved as part of the DNG. Now potentially I have metadata that I might like to keep - so until they release the new DNG standard I'm once again filing the original RAW files. It ain't never as straight forward as we'd like is it?...Show more →
No doubt - Part of me wishes that Canon could just write the 16 bit TIFFs with embedded metadata to the card instead of the RAW format, but there are drawbacks to that approach too (size and speed for example). At least my DAM allows me to preview everything I have so I can sort and then pick/choose which RAWs to convert and then open up as TIFFs in CS2.
I think I will just use DPP for now and do my major editing in CS2 after exporting to TIFF.
Well I have been a DNG fan from word go. Till now. I'm divided on the issue because the 5DMkII has extra data in the RAW that is potentially useful such as perimeter illumination. To answer the question frankly there are two issues at work - #1 straight DNG conversion - yes you lose the camera metadata except for white balance and exposure. Any picture styles, focus points or other metadata that the camera puts in there is toast.
Huh? What do you mean by "lose the camera metadata?" There is no data loss when converting from a proprietary RAW format to DNG. Thomas Knoll, the creator of Photoshop and Adobe Camera RAW, has stated this constantly. There is also no metadata loss; all your metadata is written to the DNG file even if it is not all subsequently used.
And in any event how is it any different from processing a CR2 file in ACR or Lightroom? Both ACR and Lightroom only apply ISO, shutter speed, aperture size and White Balance from all the available metadata in a CR2 file. Yet you wouldn't claim loss of metadata though in effect that is what happening since those applications don't read all in-camera settings.
By the way, only software based on Canon's SDK can read all the image metadata embedded in a CR2 file and that's a rather short list; DPP, BreezeBrowser Pro, and PhotoMe.
#2 - DNG with option to store the original. Get a big drive and prepare to spend a lot of time sucking in that image. You'd have to extract the original file to get at the metadata but the option is there. Adobe has stated that they are almost ready to release a new DNG spec that would keep more of the camera metadata - exactly what data is currently unspecified.
When and where did Adobe make a statement about "a new DNG spec that would keep more of the camera metadata."
My original reason for using DNG is that I hate the sidecar files (XMP) that is used to keep the Lightroom editing info - with DNG it is saved as part of the DNG. Now potentially I have metadata that I might like to keep - so until they release the new DNG standard I'm once again filing the original RAW files. It ain't never as straight forward as we'd like is it?
James_N wrote:
Huh? What do you mean by "lose the camera metadata?" There is no data loss when converting from a proprietary RAW format to DNG. Thomas Knoll, the creator of Photoshop and Adobe Camera RAW, has stated this constantly. There is also no metadata loss; all your metadata is written to the DNG file even if it is not all subsequently used.
And in any event how is it any different from processing a CR2 file in ACR or Lightroom? Both ACR and Lightroom only apply ISO, shutter speed, aperture size and White Balance from all the available metadata in a CR2 file. Yet you wouldn't claim loss of metadata though in effect that is what happening since those applications don't read all in-camera settings.
By the way, only software based on Canon's SDK can read all the image metadata embedded in a CR2 file and that's a rather short list; DPP, BreezeBrowser Pro, and PhotoMe.
When and where did Adobe make a statement about "a new DNG spec that would keep more of the camera metadata."
...Show more →
Jeez all these questions! Look - find the newsreleases on the Lightroom updates for the 5D2. In the Adobe release it is where they talk (briefly) on the new DNG spec. Now logic argument #1 - if you keep more then that means you were keeping less. Less and more by definition is not all.
Logic argument #2 - if (a) only programs using the Canon SDK (which I have and use being a developer) can read all the metadata and (b) the list of programs that do use the SDK does not include Lightroom then (c) Lightroom cannot read all the metadata (by your own argument - not mine). Listen all the data is there in the RAW and I'm quite sure Thomas knows better than just about anyone where to find it. Problem is they can't/won't make a special "slot" for Canon metadata in the DNG format - where do you draw the line with 1000's of proprietary RAW formats? No - they need something like a mass produced shoe that fits the bill for everyone. Right now they're trying to read the tea leaves as to what metadata will be common - at least for the big two, Canon and Nikon. Sony is showing it's serious about pro cameras and if it's one thing Sony is famous for it's creating proprietary formats.
Anyway - here is the quote from the article: In a future release Adobe plans to update the DNG specification to include an option to embed metadata-based representations of the lens compensations in the DNG file, allowing a mosaic DNG conversion. In the interim Adobe recommends only converting these files to DNG to allow compatibility with third party raw converters, previous versions of the Camera Raw plug-in or previous versions of Lightroom.
Metadata-based representations of the lens compensations? I'd figure that as long as any software manufacturer knows which lens is used, they can do their own lens compensations? So I kind of fail to understand the point Adobe's trying to make here, unless the lens ID is lost in the DNG conversion, which would be kind of - stupid. Note: I don't know, I've been using RAW all these years but am half-yearly contemplating switching to DNG. I haven't until this point as I kind of like the XMP files when backing-up: it takes way less time to synchronize those changed XMP's (1Kb a piece) than it does to synchronize changed DNG's (10Mb a piece).
If you include a JPEG preview in the DNG (another option) then all camera Metadata is retained! Date, focal length, lens, subject distance, picture style, etc. etc. PS and others will use the metadata from that.
Emile Gregoire wrote:
Metadata-based representations of the lens compensations? I'd figure that as long as any software manufacturer knows which lens is used, they can do their own lens compensations? So I kind of fail to understand the point Adobe's trying to make here, unless the lens ID is lost in the DNG conversion, which would be kind of - stupid. Note: I don't know, I've been using RAW all these years but am half-yearly contemplating switching to DNG. I haven't until this point as I kind of like the XMP files when backing-up: it takes way less time to synchronize those changed XMP's (1Kb a piece) than it does to synchronize changed DNG's (10Mb a piece)....Show more →
What they're talking about specifically is the adjustment the 5D MkII can make to correct lens falloff. I'd personally think that would be in a lens database in DPP - not in the camera. But - that was the quote...
What they're talking about specifically is the adjustment the 5D MkII can make to correct lens falloff. I'd personally think that would be in a lens database in DPP - not in the camera. But - that was the quote...
The adjustment of falloff can be done in JPEG in the camera and in RAW in DPP, so the database is in both places. Lens CA and barrel/pincushion distortion can also be corrected automatically in DPP.
I expect these corrections will become commonplace in the conversion software provided by each manufacturer, but will it ever be economically feasible for third party software to provide it for every different lens line? Or ever for just Canon and Nikon?
RDKirk wrote:
I expect these corrections will become commonplace in the conversion software provided by each manufacturer, but will it ever be economically feasible for third party software to provide it for every different lens line? Or ever for just Canon and Nikon?
Probably. If proprietary software supports it, customers will sooner or later demand the same from Adobe and the likes.
Might be a case of wishful thinking on my part though
Or--and this calls for a level of out-of-the-box thinking heretofore unheard of--Could camera manufacturers ever consider simply creating plug-in's for third party software.
Canon doesn't see theirs anyway (unlike Nikon), so they wouldn't be losing any money, and it might cost them less merely to create update plugins than to develop and support stand-alone software.
