Home News Buyers Guide About Advertising
 
 
 
   
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: LR vs DPP

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amherst, MA
    Posts
    3,249

    LR vs DPP

    I've been playing around alot lately in LR. I really like the interface, local editing, etc, but I must admit that overall I like the DPP results better as a RAW converter. This is even after downloading the Canon profiles for LR.

    In LR I seem to have particular difficulty with skin tones - I seem to get alot of yellow/orange skin tones that I can't really fix with WB adjustment.

    As of now I'm doing most of my RAW conversions in DPP, then using LR to make special adjustments on jpegs. I admit that sounds like a crazy workflow, but it seems to yield the best results.



    Here's an example between DPP and LR...

    DPP conversion...(with my standard settings)...


    LR conversion...(using Canon profiles and making typical LR edits)...
    Last edited by michaelb; 12-01-2008 at 06:40 PM.
    Michael B.
    Canon 5D2, 550D, Sony NEX 5N, Sigma 15mm fish, 24L mkI, 35L, 40mm f/2.8, 50 1.8 II, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro, 60mm macro, 100mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 200 f/2.8 mk I, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 430EX. Growing list of MF lenses!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,565
    Hmmm, interesting. I'm going to have to check that out! I need to upgrade my version of DPP first thoguh.
    5D MK III, 50D, ELAN 7E, 17-40mm 4, Sigma 10mm 2.8 fisheye, 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS, 30mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 580 EX, 430 EX speedlight, Pocket wizard flex and mini.
    Canon G10

    Pentax P30, 50mm 2.0

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    358
    It's quite possible they are in different colour spaces! I don't think Lightrooms default colour space is sRGB., whereas DPP is sRGB!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Dubai, UAE
    Posts
    2,889
    I still use DPP...I prefer making those general adjustments there....and after that I transfer the jpeg or tiff file to photoshop to get those perfect colours, fiddle with levels and possibly use the highlights/shadows option....
    Film
    Nikon EM, Series E lenses 50mm f1.8|28mm f1.8|100mm f2.8, Sigma 80-200mm f4.5-5.6
    Minolta Riva 100AF, Sinpo PQ-3, Olympus mju-III wide 100, Yashica 635
    Digital
    Sony cybershot W90, cybershot T90
    Canon A720i|400D|7D|5DMKII|85mm f1.8|24-105mm f4|135mm f2|40mm f2.8|430EX II*2|BG-E3|BG-E7
    Sigma 24mm f1.8|50mm f2.8|105mm f2.8 Samyang 8mm fisheye
    Portfolio

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amherst, MA
    Posts
    3,249
    I really love LR for its adjustment capabilities, both global and local, but it seems that I am better off doing the RAW conversion in DPP and making the adjustments in LR on a jpeg or TIFF file. Its kind of a pain, but at this point that seems to yield the best results.
    Michael B.
    Canon 5D2, 550D, Sony NEX 5N, Sigma 15mm fish, 24L mkI, 35L, 40mm f/2.8, 50 1.8 II, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro, 60mm macro, 100mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 200 f/2.8 mk I, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 430EX. Growing list of MF lenses!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,292
    imo LR is really not a "pro" tool.. for instance, it's curves control is TERRIBLE! for something so basic as curves to produce such horrible results, I just don't think it speaks highly of it and I can't take the program too seriously. It does what it does well - it's NR for instance is very good! I wasn't a believer in it at first but it's quite good. It has other good controls and features, I like its crop and straighten tool a lot, especially the latter for which I can't believe there still isn't a quick solution in Photoshop! For now I mainly use it to catalog, organize, mark and crop photos. Then I export and take them all into Photoshop for the real fine-tuning.

    imo they *CAN'T* let it be "too good", or it will cut too much into Photoshop sales. IMO.

    The curves tool in Photoshop = INSANELY GOOD
    Last edited by Rasidel Slika; 12-02-2008 at 05:12 AM.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amherst, MA
    Posts
    3,249
    Quote Originally Posted by delobbo View Post
    ....imo they *CAN'T* let it be "too good", or it will cut too much into Photoshop sales. IMO.
    ...
    That may be true.

    I really like the ND grad tool and the local adjustments tool though. I've compared the local adjustments tool with manual blending and I usually get better results with the local adjustment tool.

    I like LR's NR as well.



    Here's an example of what I do like about LR.....

    RAW file converted to jpeg with no adjustments....



    Adjustments in LR....
    (The local adjustment brush was used to fix the distracting blown out area in the front right, increase the blue in the sky, as well as many other quick and easy fixes)....
    Michael B.
    Canon 5D2, 550D, Sony NEX 5N, Sigma 15mm fish, 24L mkI, 35L, 40mm f/2.8, 50 1.8 II, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro, 60mm macro, 100mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 200 f/2.8 mk I, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 430EX. Growing list of MF lenses!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,565
    Quote Originally Posted by delobbo View Post
    imo LR is really not a "pro" tool.. for instance, it's curves control is TERRIBLE! for something so basic as curves to produce such horrible results, I just don't think it speaks highly of it and I can't take the program too seriously. It does what it does well - it's NR for instance is very good! I wasn't a believer in it at first but it's quite good. It has other good controls and features, I like its crop and straighten tool a lot, especially the latter for which I can't believe there still isn't a quick solution in Photoshop! For now I mainly use it to catalog, organize, mark and crop photos. Then I export and take them all into Photoshop for the real fine-tuning.

    imo they *CAN'T* let it be "too good", or it will cut too much into Photoshop sales. IMO.

    The curves tool in Photoshop = INSANELY GOOD


    I dunno, Photoshop is a different tool all together. I don't think it's in direct competition.

    One thing I don't like about LR is it's sharpening tool. And the curves tool could be a lot better like you said.

    Overall I like LR, it's just so easy and simple.

    And I did look at a few different pictures in both LR and DPP and indeed they do look different. DPP has more of that classic Canon look to the images. Nice looking skin tones etc.... but to be honest my high ISO images are without a doubt better looking in LR because of the NR.
    5D MK III, 50D, ELAN 7E, 17-40mm 4, Sigma 10mm 2.8 fisheye, 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS, 30mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 580 EX, 430 EX speedlight, Pocket wizard flex and mini.
    Canon G10

    Pentax P30, 50mm 2.0

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,153
    I use LR2 mostly now, every so often i'll go back into canon to adjust the white balance on a particular raw, but lightroom gets most of them right, note though that by right i mean i usually manually adjust the temperature and tint in lightroom manually to get the exact tones i want. I can then proced to cs to do the dirty funky.

    I also find that most of the time, the AWB in LR2 is better then the AWB in my camera.

    I dont really like -any- of the white balance presets in either canon's profiles or LightRooms2, they work so/so for me, so i usually just get the closest preset and then manually adjust.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Amherst, MA
    Posts
    3,249
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickcanada View Post
    .....but to be honest my high ISO images are without a doubt better looking in LR because of the NR.
    I agree with this Nick. I like LR's NR much better than DPP's - the luminance NR in DPP seems to cause more IQ degradation. I've had good results so far converting my RAW's in DPP and then performing NR on the TIFF or jpeg files in LR. Its a bit of a pain, but that seems to be giving me the best results at thus point.
    Michael B.
    Canon 5D2, 550D, Sony NEX 5N, Sigma 15mm fish, 24L mkI, 35L, 40mm f/2.8, 50 1.8 II, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 50mm f/2.8 macro, 60mm macro, 100mm f/2, 70-200 f/4, 200 f/2.8 mk I, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, 430EX. Growing list of MF lenses!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •