Canon EVU vs DPP (pic) -- DPP flawed?

Started Nov 14, 2004 | Discussions thread
JupiterMoon Forum Member • Posts: 61
Re: Thanks for posting

this is why i'm chomping at the bit for the new C1.

c1's raw conversion algorithms > all in my opinion. the only company who's been doing raw conversions longer t han phase one is imacon. we're talking 10 years of raw conversion experience here, folks.

also if you get the pro version (mucho $$) you can resize during the actual raw conversion - ie. interpolate in a linear space. it yields better results than a standard bicubic in photoshop.

C1 and adobe will also pull out quite a bit more detail from your raw files than evu, dpp or breezebrowser. anything using the sub par canon libaries wont be all that great.

so far i've done some great landscape work with my new 20d that wasnt possible with the 10d or d60 or d30 i had before because of the lack of fine detail - however i know c1 will take what i'm seeing now a step further and i sooo wish they'd hurry up

cantspellfortoffee wrote:

I think you're all kind of missing the point.

It's interesting to see that there is a difference between the two
post processing programs for one thing, and, as has been
mentioned, this can be used as a basis for choosing which one you

EOS view has other issues that need to be fixed before it can be
used reliably, such as weird banding effects at high ISO.

One comment was that Canon isn't known for it's software
excellence, I couldn't quite understand this as there is plenty of
software in the camera, and some of it provides just this sort of
functionality when producing jpeg output.

Surely this is all interesting information and one of the reasons
this forum is so beneficial.

It would be really interesting if someone could post comparisons of
ALL of the available raw conversion programs, so that we can

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow