RAW's in DPP are much richer than DNG's in LR4

[JClishe]

Since Lightroom doesn't yet support the 5D3's RAW's, I'm using the Adobe DNG converter and bringing DNG's into LR. But I've noticed that the original RAW's are displaying much richer in DPP than the DNG's in LR. Does DPP do some default processing on RAW's? I rarely use DPP and am not at all familiar with its behavior.

 

[KmH]

Each Raw converter uses it's own conversion algorithms, so they all look somewhat different from each other.

Camera maker Raw converters have access to camera settings info unavailable to other Raw converters.

 

[Big Mike]

It may be possible that DPP is showing you more of an 'as shot' version, with the in-camera image settings, as opposed to LR4, which might default to baseline settings, rather than in-camera settings. In either case, I don't think the actual image is really much different, just different default settings to start with. Just a theory...I can't confirm.


But Keith is correct, different RAW processing software, will process files differently. I've read a few articles that compare 3, 4 or 5 different Raw processors...and each seems to do one thing or another, better or worse than the others. There were no clear winners. If anything, there is an argument that the camera maker's software is best (DPP in your case), but Adobe is never far behind and the vastly better workflow gives Adobe the upper hand.

 

[pgriz]

Which then brings up the question whether one should use DPP to convert Canon's RAW (CR2) into 16-bit TIFF or another loss-less format before bringing into LR or PS?

 

[jaomul]

Canons raw files have a picture style associated with them when opened in DPP. Faithful and neutral open up kind of subdued like photoshop opens a raw where you have to process every setting yourself. If landscape or standard are selected in camera the raw opens in DPP with some default contrast and sharpening etc. These styles only effect the way the files open in canons software, adore doesn't see these settings

 

[Garbz]

Why would you? You have access to the RAW file and some 50 adjustment sliders to make the image look the way you want, and if you still don't like it then create your own camera profile and you have access to an unlimited number of adjustments. Well not unlimited. On a 12 bit camera you have 12280 different colours you can adjust .

You also lose a lot when you convert to TIFF, the key one being accurate and usable white balance adjustment.

Pick a program you like and make it work for you, bastardising your workflow with other programs is not a good strategy.