Canon's DPP software

[AlbertP]

Is anyone using this to process their RAW files with? I've seen mention of it here and there, but it seems most of us are not using it. Yet I read a post from some lady today who said that the color of her files when processed using DPP is waaaaay better. So maybe I'm missing out?

[dc2]

I tried canons software when I got my old 10D and it was awful but still have not tried this DPP ,I will get around to installing it on another computer and when I do I will let you know what I think of it

[rnyholm]

I have read that the last version Canon DPP ver. 2.0.3 is really good compared to the earlier versions.

Changes from Digital Photo Professional 1.6.1

2-1. EOS 5D, EOS-1D Mark II N, and EOS D30 were added as supported models.
2-2. It now supports Picture Styles.
2-3. A Quick Check Window that shows half-sized images was added.
2-4. Three types of check boxes were added so that you can select images easily.
2-5. A Sharpness function was added for adjusting the sharpness by checking it on-screen in real time.
2-6. Apple RGB and ColorMatch RGB color spaces were added.
2-7. A function was added to clean up unwanted spots or dust on the image.
2-8. A "Colorimetric" option was added to the color-matching mode in CMYK simulation function.

[JDArt]

Can someone supply a link to the download?

[rnyholm]

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/con...categoryid=111 under downloads drivers

[RobAmy]

I only use the canon dpp software and have liked it, there are things I would change just like any program. I just loaded the new version that came with the mk11n and I really like the changes that are there.

[Gbee]

I think it is a wonderful program. And I do have choices, it’s the best I’ve used over all. I can agree with the report about the colours, I was very comfortable with the workflow and the speed and when I compared the results with other programs I was more pleased with the DPP colours too.

The program may not be very extensive and other users may demand more features but it a powerful little beast for me, I like it.

[JDArt]

Originally Posted by Gbee

I think it is a wonderful program. And I do have choices, it’s the best I’ve used over all. I can agree with the report about the colours, I was very comfortable with the workflow and the speed and when I compared the results with other programs I was more pleased with the DPP colours too.

The program may not be very extensive and other users may demand more features but it a powerful little beast for me, I like it.

The latest version of DPP crashes my Photoshop CS2 every time I choose the "send to Photoshop" option. Am I the only one?

[CamelToe]

I found the DPP is the over all best comparing it w/ ACR (PSCS 1), and RSE when it comes to color, sharpness (w/o degrading) and noise performance. I haven't had a chance to play around with my upgrade of PSCS 2 yet; I'm hoping I'll get even better results with ACR's great new control it should give me.

[Sherry Young]

I have been using CS2 for some time now and generally prefer it.* However, I did load the newest version of DPP and was impressed with the new picture styles as a starting point for color.* "Faithful" got to a beautiful interpretation of fall foliage scenes with lots of reds and yellows very quickly. CS took lots of time and ultimately was not as satisfying on the take from this particular shoot. RSP (without Color Engine) was just awful.

I have always felt that something a little "funny" was going on with the 1DMark II color tone curve, and the Canon software seems to handle it automatically.* "Click white" was also dead on for an outdoor portrait shoot where I included a grey card in a reference shot.* As many have noted "portrait" and "landscape" are horrid. I have no idea what Canon was thinking on them.* "Standard" is usually horrid, but I have had a couple of shots where it worked well.* "Neutral" appears to be truly neutral and to give exceptional headroom for post processing.

The workflow isn't great since I have the problem of PS crashing when I try to transfer the converted image from DPP.* I was also taken aback by the complete lack of documentation. I have seen some lousy help files in my time, but this is the first one with nothing but the version number. Even the pdf user guide doesn't explain the basics, like whether there is any difference when using similar commands on the two different pages. On balance, it needs a lot of work, but the price is right and the color really is beautiful.

[JDArt]

Sherry, you make an important point. I'm not sure whether it's a curse or a blessing (I suspect the former), but the fact that different raw conversion software programs provide different results -- sometimes widely different results -- means that we're tempted to try out two, three, or more raw processing packages in our efforts to obtain the best image. This ends up being a huge amount of time spent at the computer. Sometimes I wish we had fewer choices, as then we would have more time to photograph and less desire to fiddle.