Question on R5 Image Processing

noms78 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

noms78 wrote:

Chris_Chapterten wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Noogy wrote:

I have raw files from my EOS R with file size range of 40-45mb a piece, while my 32mp M6II would range from 35-40mb a piece. In my 12-core 9th Gen i7 desktop machine that runs on nVidia GT1050ti GPU and SSD, to batch process/convert to JPEG 5 raw files would take me approx:

• EOS R - 109 seconds
• M6II - 134 seconds
• 6D - 56 seconds
• All processed on SSD then later on moved to HDD

While my PC specs are just slightly above average, I was wondering if I would need to also start upgrading my machine in the event I purchase the R5. For obvious reasons, I did not have to upgrade more than a year ago when I moved from the 5DMIV to the EOS R.

What's the file size range of an R5 raw file and how long does it take to convert it into either TIFF or JPEG?

All figures here btw are using Canon's proprietary DPP (digital lens optimization on), landscape profile, all other settings at default). I also don't have any storage issue because I have more than adequate cloud subscription and 8TB of HDD that's only 40% full on a machine with an OS that runs on 512gb SSD.

I did have to build a new PC when I bought the 32 MP M6ii last year. DPP is definitely pokey, but my beef isn’t about the converting times (I just take a break and check my email). It’s the rendering delay as I make my initial adjustments. I’d love to see a more efficient software build!

R2

I completely agree. It’s difficult to make adjustments when there is so much delay in the rendering. I like to move the slider back and forth quickly to be able to eye ball the results. It’s a shame that the colours in Adobe software are so poor...

/rant on

I don't like the processing of the vast majority of the R5 / R6 / 5D4 photos I see on the web. Im still trying to find R5 samples on Flickr that would entice me to upgrade. Seems like most people who currently buy R5 are bird photographers.

I also hate the heavily edited images that are becoming commonplace in landscape photography. Hate instagram - the quality of photos is rubbish (low res/compressed) compared to Flickr. There is too much crap on Flickr and skyscrapercity now. Its getting harder and harder to find "inspiration" for the type of photography I am into.

/ rant off

In the interest of learning, would you mind sharing some examples of what type of processing and look that appeals to you ?

Thanks

Canon DPP 4, standard picture profile, desaturate colours to 85%. the desaturation makes images look less "digital" and closer to film/fuji look. I think any brand can produce nice colors when processed correctly

Thanks, can you share an example or two?