The story behind Adobe and missing camera matching profiles

gium wrote:

RDKirk wrote:

I'm pretty sure Canon's attitude is, "We provide a free RAW processor for our customers, it's up to you to provide a RAW converter for your customers."

I hope they don't think like that. For many photographers, post-processing is as important and/or as time-consuming as taking the actual photos.

Adobe is market leader with their pp software, so a large amount of Canon photographers use Adobe software over Canon's own DPP (for good reasons) for post processing.

I have always found that to get the most in terms of IQ and capability from a camera (Nikon or Canon) it's best to start with a RAW file in the manufactures own software...make global adjustment ...then convert to 16-bit TIFF and finish processing in Adobe. Best of both worlds and I'm not affected by how Adobe may "interrupt" what the manufactures intended. Lots of ways to skin that cat with many Pros and Cons

That's starting to be a real problem though. I got an RP and can't process my images with anything but DPP4. Which is ok but very slow and I can't use my old presets. It's a real PITA. There are no advantages in using CR3 over CR2 which is even more insulting. I blame Canon more than Adobe though. It's a proprietary format it's not that 3rd party software companies should figure it out by themselves. A globally happy customer is important for Canon too. I love my RP and the Canon direction in ML, but I would not suggest an R/RP yet (or other ML bodies which use CR3) until the general issue about working on the RAW files is resolved.

coso dp wrote:

That's starting to be a real problem though. I got an RP and can't process my images with anything but DPP4. Which is ok but very slow and I can't use my old presets.

If I'm not mistaken CC/Lightroom both now load CR3 files, it was the camera profiles that are the problem.

I don't have lightroom loaded on my laptop, but I do know CC opens CR3 just fine, which usually means that CR3's load in lightroom.

CaptureOne supports CR3 as well.

So update your software perhaps?

It's a real PITA. There are no advantages in using CR3 over CR2 which is even more insulting.

sure there is. CR3 supports lossy and lossless compression, CR2 only supported lossless which was a lower compression rate.

I blame Canon more than Adobe though. It's a proprietary format it's not that 3rd party software companies should figure it out by themselves.

The same as every other camera company sans the one or two that also support DNG.

Mako2011 wrote:

gium wrote:

RDKirk wrote:

I'm pretty sure Canon's attitude is, "We provide a free RAW processor for our customers, it's up to you to provide a RAW converter for your customers."

I hope they don't think like that. For many photographers, post-processing is as important and/or as time-consuming as taking the actual photos.

Adobe is market leader with their pp software, so a large amount of Canon photographers use Adobe software over Canon's own DPP (for good reasons) for post processing.

I have always found that to get the most in terms of IQ and capability from a camera (Nikon or Canon) it's best to start with a RAW file in the manufactures own software...make global adjustment ...then convert to 16-bit TIFF and finish processing in Adobe. Best of both worlds and I'm not affected by how Adobe may "interrupt" what the manufactures intended. Lots of ways to skin that cat with many Pros and Cons

I do the same, partly because I shoot alot of infrared photos as well, and DPP handles those so much easier than lightroom.

If adobe actually got off it's keester and opened up the white balance range and added channel swapping, i could save so much time. alas, it's not there unless you use some ugly workarounds.

If I'm not mistaken CC/Lightroom both now load CR3 files, it was the camera profiles that are the problem.

I don't have lightroom loaded on my laptop, but I do know CC opens CR3 just fine, which usually means that CR3's load in lightroom.

AFAIK without the camera profiles the results are still sub par compared to DPP.

CaptureOne supports CR3 as well.

Don't know, I might try their trial but this one costs quite a lot to me right now to be a justifiable purchase.

sure there is. CR3 supports lossy and lossless compression, CR2 only supported lossless which was a lower compression rate.

Didn't know, thanks

The same as every other camera company sans the one or two that also support DNG.

So let's just hope it become more widely used..

henrikbengtsson wrote:

So, I started a thread over at the Adobe forums about the missing camera matching profiles, starting with EOS RP. (In fact, even the R which you will find out here)

I got reply from Adobe Staff saying that they are working on it since Canon has changed their file format (CR2->CR3).

Then I asked how come there's camera matching support for the EOS R (which also uses CR3) they admitted that they have not created any real profiles for that one, just a copy-paste from "a previous model". Likely the 5D4 due to the sensor design.

So that means that since the EOS R (which was released a YEAR ago) they still haven't managed to create real custom profiles for Canon. They seem to blame Canon for not being quick enough

Written on September 6th:

"The new sensors require a separate calibration method, and this is the part that is a lot more difficult with the file format change. As I mentioned previously, we're working with Canon to try to resolve this, but it's going to take time. We have already shared with Canon the sentiment that CM profiles are important to our mutual customers (such as yourself), so we're hoping we can get this taken care of. Unfortunately I can't offer a timetable for you"

Here's the full thread:

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2650451

Two major players and they can't get this sorted out? Since they repeat "it's going to take time" and finally "no timetable" after ONE YEAR I get the feeling that they just don't care anymore. Hey, they have the smartphone apps right?

Discussion: Do you think Adobe is right? Is Canon holding back or is Adobe "fat and happy"?

Thanks so much for digging out this story.  I agree with your assessment: not very satisfying status.

Lot's of finger pointing but none if it makes complete sense.  If they can decode a CR3 file (happened pretty quickly after R release) and they can map the old 5D4 camera profiles to the new file format, I don't totally get what the issue is.  On the other hand, I am shocked that both Canon and Adobe are not all over this issue.  This makes both companies look like amateurs for sure. It would be like Microsoft and Intel suddenly not supporting each other with the most recent processor release.  Massively self-destructive to both companies and just going to drive customers away from a very profitable business.

By the way, I don't know if you saw but there is a thread on here about an apparently similar set of RP camera profiles using the same technique derived from the 6D2 profiles (but this one was hacked together by a user rather than Adobe).  It actually takes a huge step forward for the RP in LR.  It isn't perfect but puts you at a familiar (and pretty good) starting point for RP captures.  You should try it.

coso dp wrote:

That's starting to be a real problem though. I got an RP and can't process my images with anything but DPP4. Which is ok but very slow and I can't use my old presets. It's a real PITA. There are no advantages in using CR3 over CR2 which is even more insulting. I blame Canon more than Adobe though. It's a proprietary format it's not that 3rd party software companies should figure it out by themselves. A globally happy customer is important for Canon too. I love my RP and the Canon direction in ML, but I would not suggest an R/RP yet (or other ML bodies which use CR3) until the general issue about working on the RAW files is resolved.

Why should Canon be helping the big boys to dominate the market even further?  Surely, it would make more sense to help the people behind the GIMP and RawTherapee so that Canon's customers have more money to spend on lenses and accessories.

henrikbengtsson wrote:

So, I started a thread over at the Adobe forums about the missing camera matching profiles, starting with EOS RP. (In fact, even the R which you will find out here)

I got reply from Adobe Staff saying that they are working on it since Canon has changed their file format (CR2->CR3).

Then I asked how come there's camera matching support for the EOS R (which also uses CR3) they admitted that they have not created any real profiles for that one, just a copy-paste from "a previous model". Likely the 5D4 due to the sensor design.

So that means that since the EOS R (which was released a YEAR ago) they still haven't managed to create real custom profiles for Canon. They seem to blame Canon for not being quick enough

Written on September 6th:

"The new sensors require a separate calibration method, and this is the part that is a lot more difficult with the file format change. As I mentioned previously, we're working with Canon to try to resolve this, but it's going to take time. We have already shared with Canon the sentiment that CM profiles are important to our mutual customers (such as yourself), so we're hoping we can get this taken care of. Unfortunately I can't offer a timetable for you"

Here's the full thread:

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2650451

Two major players and they can't get this sorted out? Since they repeat "it's going to take time" and finally "no timetable" after ONE YEAR I get the feeling that they just don't care anymore. Hey, they have the smartphone apps right?

Discussion: Do you think Adobe is right? Is Canon holding back or is Adobe "fat and happy"?

This is a bit hard to understand.

If the R profiles are a copy paste from a "previous model" why didn't they get them right the first time around and needed to come up with v2 versions?

PK

PhotoKhan wrote:

This is a bit hard to understand.

If the R profiles are a copy paste from a "previous model" why didn't they get them right the first time around and needed to come up with v2 versions?

It can be a "copy paste" type operation if you just need to be able to just open the files for editing....but way more involved if you want to open the files and apply accurate camera profiles and edit based on those profiles.

Not unlike the work around were you simply changed the file extension (to an older file type) to get Adobe to open a file that wasn't yet fully supported

Sittatunga wrote:

coso dp wrote:

That's starting to be a real problem though. I got an RP and can't process my images with anything but DPP4. Which is ok but very slow and I can't use my old presets. It's a real PITA. There are no advantages in using CR3 over CR2 which is even more insulting. I blame Canon more than Adobe though. It's a proprietary format it's not that 3rd party software companies should figure it out by themselves. A globally happy customer is important for Canon too. I love my RP and the Canon direction in ML, but I would not suggest an R/RP yet (or other ML bodies which use CR3) until the general issue about working on the RAW files is resolved.

Why should Canon be helping the big boys to dominate the market even further? Surely, it would make more sense to help the people behind the GIMP and RawTherapee so that Canon's customers have more money to spend on lenses and accessories.

Because software is not a market for Canon. Canon doesn't sell DPP, it's not their business model, they give it you for free for convenience.

But they should want their customers happy. And their customers are happy if they can use faster or alternative raw and photo retouching programs.

If I have a hard time finding a software to retouch my photos I won't buy more lenses and accessories, I will switch to another camera maker.

coso dp wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

coso dp wrote:

That's starting to be a real problem though. I got an RP and can't process my images with anything but DPP4. Which is ok but very slow and I can't use my old presets. It's a real PITA. There are no advantages in using CR3 over CR2 which is even more insulting. I blame Canon more than Adobe though. It's a proprietary format it's not that 3rd party software companies should figure it out by themselves. A globally happy customer is important for Canon too. I love my RP and the Canon direction in ML, but I would not suggest an R/RP yet (or other ML bodies which use CR3) until the general issue about working on the RAW files is resolved.

Why should Canon be helping the big boys to dominate the market even further? Surely, it would make more sense to help the people behind the GIMP and RawTherapee so that Canon's customers have more money to spend on lenses and accessories.

Because software is not a market for Canon. Canon doesn't sell DPP, it's not their business model, they give it you for free for convenience.

Up to a point.  Other manufacturers give Adobe products away with their cameras.

But they should want their customers happy. And their customers are happy if they can use faster or alternative raw and photo retouching programs.

If I have a hard time finding a software to retouch my photos I won't buy more lenses and accessories, I will switch to another camera maker.

Well I, for one, would be very unhappy if I were limitted to Adobe software because Canon had given their secrets to Adobe and no-one else.  Adobe need their arses kicking, so we need some competition around to do that.  For now, there's plenty of competition, long may it stay that way, if only to keep everybody on their toes.