Canon RAW file conversion: DPP vs ACR/LR

Hi,

For those of you shooting Canon CR2 RAW files, which RAW converter is your favorite?
Specifically, in the case of DPP vs ACR/LR, which one would you choose?
The reason I am asking is since I started shooting with 40D and G9, I have come to realize that the LR conversions of LR are not to my satisfaction, whereas the 400D & the 5D conversions of LR were rather good. I now find that the DPP delivers better results than the LR, for the 40D & G9 RAW files that is. The problem is, DPP is such a clunky program and it misses many of the nice features of LR. It also disturbs my established workflow which was built around LR as the main RAW converter.

I am also curious whether any one of you actually convert the CR2 into DNG as advised by Peter Krogh in his DAM workflow.

Cheers,

DPP

I use DPP to convert. It takes longer but I find the image quality is better. When I first started shooting RAW I went to a Canon sponsored workshop for professionals for two days which included image processing. For me, I think it's a better way to go.

Hi Cem
for fast editing (for online low re slideshow for clients) I use LR2.
For hires I use Capture One Pro. When you come to know it, there's nothing that LR2 does that you cannot achive with C1 Pro… and the IQ is muuuuuch better.
Note I wrote about the pro version, (3.7.9) the V4 pro should be out on October 15 as I have been told on Phase stand at Photokina.
You can give a try for free for a 30 days period…

I don't like that much the non pro V4 which is out already for a long time…

Hi Nicolas,

I keep on hearing it from die-hard fans like you or Bart that C1 Pro would be the one.
So I guess I'll have to give it a go, when/if the version 4 comes out in time ;-)

Cheers,

I use LR a lot these days, and continue to resent eveery minute of it! Because it's a very nice workflow tool you get sucked into the raw converter, to the extent that testing otehrs becomes hard work. I've used and like both DXo and DPP at times. It would be nice to have a LR type DAMM package that allowed you to call other raw converters to deliver a tiff/demosaiced DNG, rather than sending a tiff out as at present.

This is one of the reasons I want to revamp my workflow this autumn.

Mike

Cem,

My short answers:

- I use ACR/LR for virtually all of my raw conversions.
- I convert ALL of my CR2 files to DNG immediately before importing to LR, then discard the CR2's.

This is coming from a rather bitter idiot who has licensed and genuinely used every major (and many minor) converter over the years, often in response to some other idiot posting something like "Oh dude, XYZ ver 2.8949 is SOOO much better than RawToCooked 3.520a!" on some photo board like this.

If you're really interested in reading the justification for my choices, please ask. Otherwise, that's my vote for whatever it may be worth to you.

Mike Shimwell said:

I use LR a lot these days, and continue to resent eveery minute of it! Because it's a very nice workflow tool you get sucked into the raw converter, to the extent that testing otehrs becomes hard work. I've used and like both DXo and DPP at times. It would be nice to have a LR type DAMM package that allowed you to call other raw converters to deliver a tiff/demosaiced DNG, rather than sending a tiff out as at present.

This is one of the reasons I want to revamp my workflow this autumn.

Mike

Click to expand...

Hi Mike,

That is also one of the reasons why I started this thread. I am rather happy with LR and it forms a major part of my workflow but it doesn't play ball with DPP or other RAW converters.

Ken Tanaka said:

Cem,

My short answers:

- I use ACR/LR for virtually all of my raw conversions.
- I convert ALL of my CR2 files to DNG immediately before importing to LR, then discard the CR2's.

This is coming from a rather bitter idiot who has licensed and genuinely used every major (and many minor) converter over the years, often in response to some other idiot posting something like "Oh dude, XYZ ver 2.8949 is SOOO much better than RawToCooked 3.520a!" on some photo board like this.

If you're really interested in reading the justification for my choices, please ask. Otherwise, that's my vote for whatever it may be worth to you.

Click to expand...

Hi Ken,

I honestly appreciate your input and will definitely ask more questions

Hi,

I use LR for my 20D - mainly for the toolset and workflow it offers rather than a preference for it de-mosaicing algorithm.

I occasionally download a trial of another raw convertor and wonder if it's got 'better' image quality, but in truth whilst I may see a difference on the screen I am more than happy with prints from LR conversions. I think careful use of the sharpening controls in LR can make a big difference.

As Mike mentioned, having an option to choose between converting alogrithms (like RAWTherapee does) would be ideal.


Cheers,