Software Question

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Distinctly Average Contributing Member • Posts: 902
Re: Software Question

jrkliny wrote:

Ray UK wrote:

DPP is the best raw converter to use because it is designed to work with Canon cameras, it will allow you to take full advantage of all in camera settings and provide a very comprehensive range of lens corrections for Canon lenses. Third party software producers do not have access to the full details of Canon's raw format or their lens correction requirements.

DPP does not have some of the more advanced editing facilities of other software but that is not what it is designed for. It easy to do the necessary corrections in RAW then convert to TIFF or JPG to do any advanced editing with photoshop or similar software.

I have tried to make this point numerous times on this forum, but no one wants to hear this. They often have paid big money for Photoshop and want to believe it does a great job. DPP4 is slow and few of us have the patience to wait a minute to process a single raw file on a slow older computer. Personally I have decided the wait is worth it. The default noise reduction works great and in addition I often shoot macro at f/20 and really appreciate DPP4's diffraction correction. I combine DPP4 with Elements.

Choice of software depends on what you want to do with it. Years ago I was fascinated with what you could do with Photoshop. Shock and awe photography with pumped up saturation and contrast was just the starting point. Software allows all sorts of "creative" editing and image manipulation. If that is your thing then as a minimum you need to start with the full Lr and Photoshop versions, plus all the major plugins such as Topaz and Nik. Personally I moved away from the digital manipulation and the digital "arts". I do straight photography, not digital arts.

It is your opinion that DPP4 is best. It really isn’t for the vast majority of pros that want and need a fast workflow and anyone who needs to do more than basic editing. It is easy for those with lots of time and are doing this as a hobby to use DPP to work on one or two images a week, but for me I want to be out taking images, not sat in front of a computer wasting away my evenings for DPP to do anything. I will PP 40-50 images a week and spend no more than two hours doing so. If I was using DPP, and I have tried, that would almost certainly increase to 7-10hrs a week depending on what I was doing.

I also use Topaz Denoise AI and very occasionally Sharpen AI, which can be called from within PS and LR, That luxury is not afforded by DPP so it adds a whole load more to the workflow. Then we have additional things inPS that are so easy, such as selections, background blurring, content aware fill and cropping, luminosity masking all of which take seconds.

People moan about the cost, which for me is under a tenner a month. Bearing in mind my hourly rate and the extra hours I would need to put in using DPP that to me is a no brainier. And finally, I would challenge anyone to look at two images side by side, assuming I do not need to clone out stuff etc, and tell me which package I used, PS/LR vs DPP. And if you haven’t used the latest iterations of PS and LR, a lot changed. I don’t do digital arts as you call it, I lack the imagination to do anything more than get the best out of my meagre photographic skills that I can. PS/LR allow me to do that very quickly

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