Do CC1 adjustments impact LR Catalog?

[digitaldog]

Both conversions should be identical if done by the same application, but are they also the same when converted by one application (e.g. DNG converter) and read by another application, e.g. Capture One?

Don't have C1. But ID behaves correctly, just like LR. IF C1 users find a difference between feeding it a proprietary raw and a DNG, C1 has to fix that bug. I can probably demonstrate with yet a 3rd raw processor that correctly handles DNG (like LR and ID) that there is zero difference if that's necessary. I don't think it is. Again, if C1 isn't handling the raw data in both formats the same, it's something they are doing wrong!

[brandon]

Don't have C1. But ID behaves correctly, just like LR. IF C1 users find a difference between feeding it a proprietary raw and a DNG, C1 has to fix that bug. I can probably demonstrate with yet a 3rd raw processor that correctly handles DNG (like LR and ID) that there is zero difference if that's necessary. I don't think it is. Again, if C1 isn't handling the raw data in both formats the same, it's something they are doing wrong!

It seems that C1 are making it more functional than less for those with DNG as David suggested higher in this post. Bart suggested in a response to a question I had on a separate thread why it may not be so straight forward which I'll simply paste here because he puts it far more eloquently than I could:

"In the case of Capture One, it possibly is another reason. C1 supports the original camera Raws of a huge number of cameras. They invested time and money to decode the files and maybe even figured out some of the secret stuff that's hidden in the file, to allow even better quality conversions. The support for DNGs, is not as extensive, and may yield lower quality conversion. There is little incentive for Phase One to recode the work they did years ago, and run the risk of screwing something up in the conversion process.

They also would have to redo some of that (like adding code to initialize the new fields, or changing the way the Raw conversion uses that data) if the DNG standard is changed in the future even though the original camera Raws didn't change since they were recorded. Since the DNG can also be created by others than the Camera maker (e.g. LR/ACR panoramas, or HDRs, or other sources), they cannot be certain either that the converter gets fed valid Raw data that can be used by Capture One (encoding errors or abnormal sizes), so they are suddenly forced to add validations to the converter code to avoid problems for which they would also need to ramp up support.

So it adds (future) cost to redo past work and to support a standard they do not own, and thus cannot plan resources for. And there is no real benefit for them to fully support DNG, because they still need to create camera profiles or specific decoding (e.g. Fuji X-trans) for new cameras that require support, and in addition supporting DNGs will only lower the threshold for users that for some specific feature want to switch to Adobe products (who try to lock in customers from switching back) and drop future C1 upgrades at any time they choose.

So there is more of a benefit for Adobe than for Phase One in fully supporting DNGs."

I have to say C1 seems to be always adding compatibility and retaining legacy features with each dot and version upgrade, and to date at least the support of any proprietry raw format doesnt seem to be in doubt even when there are processing engine changes. I guess thats because they are professionally focused and know that pros wouldnt tolerate (and amateurs have the same interest of what we shot with our earlier gear) if there was ever loss of functionality because the software company making the raw converter decided to drop what they formerly supported.In fact being able to redevelop raws from earlier equipment is a definite enhancement when a new processing engine is available (Im amazed how good my Canon 1Ds Mk1 come up in for example C1vers8 for example)

[digitaldog]

It seems that C1 are making it more functional than less for those with DNG as David suggested higher in this post.

Then they are not treating DNG's as first class citizens like other converters that properly support DNG.
Again, the raw contained within a DNG is the raw that existed outside it, before conversion. Two different manufacturers of raw converters treat the proprietary raw and the DNG exactly the same, which is what should happen.

[Schewe]

It's not just an opinion, but many people confirm that (given a choice) the native Camera Raw files convert differently than the DNGs (especially when converted with the Adobe DNG converter or Lightroom).

If you are talking about C1, perhaps...if you are talking about ACR/LR, it is completely false. As the first stage of loading a raw file into ACR/LR the proprietary raw file is converted to DNG as a first step. That's the only way ACR/LR can access the raw file data. So, whether or not the original raw file is original raw or DNG, the end results should be identical. If they are not, it's user error, not a difference in the software handling of proprietary raw files vs DNG files.

The Internet is filled with misinformation...this is not misinformation. In ACR/LR, proprietary raw = DNG exactly since one is the same as the other. Care to prove me wrong?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

If you are talking about C1, perhaps...if you are talking about ACR/LR, it is completely false.

Hi Jeff,

Of course I am talking about C1, it's a C1 forum thread.

As the first stage of loading a raw file into ACR/LR the proprietary raw file is converted to DNG as a first step. That's the only way ACR/LR can access the raw file data. So, whether or not the original raw file is original raw or DNG, the end results should be identical. If they are not, it's user error, not a difference in the software handling of proprietary raw files vs DNG files.

Obviously, and I also answered that to Andrew:

I would not have expected anything less, since the conversion to DNG was also done with LR, the results should also be the same. Reading the original Raw and converting it on the fly, or converting it to DNG first in a separate step should not change the resulting data upon which the raw conversion in LR is based.

Just out of curiosity, I took a 5DS R Raw file from DPReview and converted to a DNG (with DNG converter 9.1.1), and opened both the original camera 1C3A4708.CR2 file, and the DNG version, in Capture One 8.3.2. Now I know that the EOS 5DS R support may still undergo changes as Phase One might tweak the profile a bit more, but given that the CR2 and the DNG conversions are done with the same profile, it should not play a role.

Attached is a zoomed out screen print showing both results and, lo and behold, they are different. Just like I warned to not blindly assume that things are going to be equal, even when I expected they would be equal. I'd rather test before assuming, and apparently that cautious approach pays off occasionally.

Is it an error on the part of Capture One? I don't know. Some people are quick to lay blame where it suits their agenda, I'd rather keep an open mind that maybe there is something happening in the DNG conversion that either is misinterpreted by Capture One and needs to be fixed, or the (modified?) instructions in the DNG prohibit to make the exact same conversion as from the camera original. I compared and saw some camera settings are missing from the EXIF in the DNG. Again, it may be Capture One not picking up e.g. the vendor specific White Balance info in the DNG, i don't know, but its strange that even a manual WB setting won't override any prior defaults. Guess I'd have to file a support request if I'd wanted Phase One to investigate, and maybe I'll find some time to do so.

It may well be possible to achieve similar looking results, by using different (WB) settings for both files, but that's not the point. The point is that the exact same settings, and I double checked them all, produce different results, for whatever reason.

And for those who like to defend Adobe and diss Capture One, my perpetual licensed Photoshop CS6 Extended just warned me that my trial period had 0 days left. Huh Upon restarting Photoshop it warned that my 30 day trial period has started, and I need to accept that to even use Photoshop.
WTF !!!!!!!!!!

Cheers,
Bart

[brandon]

It may well be possible to achieve similar looking results, by using different (WB) settings for both files, but that's not the point. The point is that the exact same settings, and I double checked them all, produce different results, for whatever reason.



Cheers,
Bart

That is pretty clear empirical evidence. So Im left pretty clear thinking there is NO value in converting to DNG. (and now I don't ). No conspiracy as I know its just an option from ADOBE, and Im willing to believe alturistically motivated: but what is the reason to? (I think Jeff Schewe, close to the ADOBE thinking has posted he doesnt do it anymore but I may need correction there). Maybe keeping a DNG converter "in case" compatibility is lost is a more reasonable insurance (assuming the platforms of the future will run it), it seems to me future guarantees from ADOBE of forward compatibility of products is perhaps the weak link in the chain not the lack of a standard for all. That said it would be great if C1 could see DNGs as LR does (but with the better conversion it offers eg detail etc.)

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

That is pretty clear empirical evidence.

Well the test is a sample size of one file ..., so who knows what happens with other files. And it may well be an error on the part of Capture One, or caused by the Graphics card driver update from last night, I just don't know, but I do know enough to not assume blindly without verifying.

So Im left pretty clear thinking there is NO value in converting to DNG. (and now I don't ). No conspiracy as I know its just an option from ADOBE, and Im willing to believe alturistically motivated: but what is the reason to? (I think Jeff Schewe, close to the ADOBE thinking has posted he doesnt do it anymore but I may need correction there).

If I recall correctly, Jeff's issue was with the fact that any change to the parametric settings in LR, would be written to the DNG and thus forced his file mirroring setup to copy the entire DNG, while only a few bytes had changed (maybe even just after changing one control a bit and back to the prior settings again). By using much smaller XMP sidecar files, that burden is reduced a lot if not eliminated alltogether, depending on what (file modification date or actual contents) triggers the mirroring. Of course an original Camera Raw file should remain unchanged, so would never trigger a new mirroring event for those reasons.

Capture One writes its parametric settings to small separate settings files that are associated with the original Raw file, so with a similarly low impact on data mirroring as XMP sidecars would have.

But as far as I am concerned this is not a thread specifically about DNGs and their benefits or drawbacks, but rather a warning that conversions may have (unexpected) consequences, and one should test before diving in.

That said it would be great if C1 could see DNGs as LR does (but with the better conversion it offers eg detail etc.)

I agree, although differences in demosaicing will always create differences between Raw converters, but ideally two versions of a single file should be rendered the same in a single Raw converter.

Cheers,
Bart

[digitaldog]

But as far as I am concerned this is not a thread specifically about DNGs and their benefits or drawbacks, but rather a warning that conversions may have (unexpected) consequences, and one should test before diving in.

There are no consequences when the software treats DNG's correctly, appears C1 isn't. I just tried a THIRD raw converter that supports DNG correctly (RPP) and guess what? It treats the CR2 and DNG exactly the same, like LR/ACR and ID!
Three different products produce pixel per pixel identical renderings from either a CR2 or the DNG converted from that CR2. Again, I don't have C1. I don't plan to ever use it IF it doesn't act the same and correctly as these other products do with respect to DNG. End of story. 

[digitaldog]

Is it an error on the part of Capture One? I don't know.

That answer by now should be obviously clear.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

That answer by now should be obviously clear.

It's not clear, unless you use an unscientifically biased logic.
Maybe the other applications just ignore part of the DNG data, which C1 faithfully uses (as suggested by Adobe to do?) ?
That's at least one other possible explanation that first needs to be proven right or wrong, before more clarity can be declared...
Also many more different source files need to be checked, from different cameras, and possibly with different DNG versions (because older conversions may be hanled differently). But that won't stop some people from blaming whomever they can, as long as it's not Adobe.

Very unprofessional conduct, and clearly not intended to find answers or a solution. I'm disappointed by such 'contributions' when trying to solve other people's issues.

Cheers,
Bart

[digitaldog]

It's not clear, unless you use an unscientifically biased logic.
Maybe the other applications just ignore part of the DNG data, which C1 faithfully uses (as suggested by Adobe to do?) ?

I thought you were a smart fellow...

Three (actually four) different products produce identical results, one presumably doesn't.
What's the old saying about insanity?
Maybe the other applications just ignore part of the DNG data, which C1 faithfully uses? Are you kidding?
Maybe four applications just don't ignore part of the DNG data, which C1 does, which is a bug.

[Doug Peterson]

There is no bug. Phase One's Capture One simply doesn't provide full support for DNG.

[digitaldog]

It's not clear, unless you use an unscientifically biased logic.

Very unprofessional conduct, and clearly not intended to find answers or a solution. I'm disappointed by such 'contributions' when trying to solve other people's issues.

Bart, perhaps you are a scientist by trade or training, I'm not. But the statement you've provided is rather disappointing for a number of reasons. You wrote:

But since you are so confident that it makes no difference, and all those who reported those differences are wrong, feel free to demonstrate that fact.

First off, you didn't state you observed differences, you provided reports from others which could or should be considered hearsay. You asked for proof. I provided data from three different products I own that support DNG (four if you count ACR). All produced the same expected results; DNG and proprietary TIFF renderings were identical from each. The one company that produced the DNG spec and tells us that DNG and proprietary data should be treated the same do as they suggest as well as two other companies who one would expect is also following the spec. One company's product presumably doesn't, C1. I say presumably because I don't own it, didn't test it. And I don't have to, the burden of proof is on you and fellow C1 users to prove scientifically it's operating correctly!

In terms of science and interpreting the results thus far, if the company that provides the format spec produces a result it says it should AND two other companies do as well, how can you state with those current data points that It's not clear, unless you use an unscientifically biased logic?

Did I test every raw converter that says it supports DNG? No. Did you test any? No, just C1. Did all the products I tested that support DNG produce the same expected results? Yes!

At this point, the burden of proof doesn't fall on Adobe and the other two companies, it falls on C1. That you would suggest Adobe and those other companies are treating DNG incorrectly and C1 treats the correctly and that's why it's rendering is different has zero science to back up that hypothesis. That concept IMHO is unscientifically biased logic if I can be so kind as to use that word.

[digitaldog]

There is no bug. Phase One's Capture One simply doesn't provide full support for DNG.

There's an old saying among software engineers which what you wrote supports: It's not a bug, it just doesn't behave as designed.
Now perhaps you can tell us why C1 doesn't provide full support for DNG while others do. That's useful to end users in just what way?
Why doesn't C1 treat DNG's as a first class citizen like three other products?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

There is no bug. Phase One's Capture One simply doesn't provide full support for DNG.

Okay Doug, good to know. That answers the initial question about impacts of adjustments.
Not that it's necessarily satisfying, but it saves time spent/wasted on testing, and explains the recurring reports about issues with DNGs in Capture One.

I can now get back to processing a large number of images taken yesterday, original camera Raws (CR2s) of course...

Cheers,
Bart

[digitaldog]

Okay Doug, good to know. That answers the initial question about impacts of adjustments.

Right, you got it from the horses mouth, we can now accept that C1 doesn't handle DNG's as designed unlike other products. WHY it doesn't would be a good question.

Not that it's necessarily satisfying, but it saves time spent/wasted on testing, and explains the recurring reports about issues with DNGs in Capture One.

Not satisfying is for a potential C1 customer like me, an understatement! Saves me time not looking at that product, continuing to edit DNG's in products that do so correctly. Good to know my choices of alternate products that do support DNG do so properly and as designed.

My advise to C1, which will likely fall on deaf ears is this: Support DNG fully and properly or don't 'support' it at all. I've got no issues with software companies that don't want to support DNG. I have no issue with those that support it correctly (I applaud them). A company that has a half baked so called support? Seems rather silly.

And now Bart, you're off the hook in terms of your dismissal of my science. It was sound and provided pretty accurate evidence of what Doug just provided: C1 doesn't support DNG "fully" (IMHO correctly). As to why you guys can debate.

Very unprofessional conduct, and clearly not intended to find answers or a solution. I'm disappointed by such 'contributions' when trying to solve other people's issues.

No apologies necessary Bart.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Right, you got it from the horses mouth, we can now accept that C1 doesn't handle DNG's as designed unlike other products. WHY it doesn't would be a good question.Not satisfying is for a potential C1 customer like me, an understatement! Saves me time not looking at that product, continuing to edit DNG's in products that do so correctly. Good to know my choices of alternate products that do support DNG do so properly and as designed.

My advise to C1, which will likely fall on deaf ears is this: Support DNG fully and properly or don't 'support' it at all. I've got no issues with software companies that don't want to support DNG. I have no issue with those that support it correctly (I applaud them). A company that has a half baked so called support? Seems rather silly.

And now Bart, you're off the hook in terms of your dismissal of my science. It was sound and provided pretty accurate evidence of what Doug just provided: C1 doesn't support DNG "fully" (IMHO correctly). As to why you guys can debate.
No apologies necessary Bart.

I do apologise, for the mistake of believing that the level of discourse on Luminous Landscape rose above that of DPreview. Apparently I was too optimistic.

Cheers,
Bart

[digitaldog]

I do apologise, for the mistake of believing that the level of discourse on Luminous Landscape rose above that of DPreview. Apparently I was too optimistic.

At least we know why there's reported disconnect but as yet, not why C1 operates this way.

Would you agree, it wouldn’t be a bad idea if they treated DNG's as others do and as intended by it's designers? Or at least some preference IF C1 engineers can explain why their current behavior is 'useful'?

There's always room on the ignore list for one more, I'd love to keep it only at two.

[digitaldog]

That is pretty clear empirical evidence.

Still think so?

Is it an error on the part of Capture One?

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.”
― Søren Kierkegaard