• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Canon processing software vs photoshop etc (1 Viewer)

V

Viv Connett

Well-known member
Hi all, have only fairly recently got into this photography lark ;).

I've got a Canon EOS500d plus a Sigma 120 - 400 plus a macro and a kit lens.

I'm beginning to get some quite nice shots but I find I lose it in the edit somewhat. I see people getting better results with the same camera/lens so I'm sure it must be me.

I am using the Canon DPP which came with the camera and also have the Photo Style editor which to be frank I can't understand the instructions of.

Can some kind soul either point me in the right direction using these or advise whether I'd be better off with Photoshop - I'm sure Elements will be fine as I suspect the full-blow version would be far more than I need (or could reasonably afford).

Many thanks for your help

Viv
 
It's hard to suggest anything without knowing a bit more about what you're doing, Viv - could you let us know what your workflow is please?
 
sorry am I being a bit thick here, not too sure what you mean. I'm very much a hobby photographer, take mainly wildlife photos, shoot in RAW and then download using Canon EOS Utility. I then edit using Canon DPP, which I don't always find very satisfactory. Would I be better off using Photoshop Elements (which has been recommended to me) and does this have moer "tools" in it than I have at present. I also have Picture Style Editor (again Canon, came with camera) but I'm not sure how to use this or even if it is relevant as I can't work out the instructions.

Does this make sense???
 
Hi Viv,
Almost certainly you will find Elements or Paintshop Pro useful - if only for the fact that there are an awful lot of other users out there and books to help.
I cannot comment on DPP as I only use Canon for my scanners but from the variety of other software supplied with other manufacturers cameras that I do have (some of which is very strange) - something like Elements will at least let you talk in the same 'language' as a lot of other photographers.
The only time that I use the workflow approach is when I am working in bulk, which is a lot of the time for me as I work with a lot of digitised film, or for weddings etc. where its pretty well essential to have a production line approach including software that can cope with images from many sources.
For my fun photography, which includes wildlife I go with the flow often using the relevant manufacturers 'free' software to download and view (not really necessary for still work with a decent card reader) and using the appropriate 'industry standard' software (still or video) to tweak the results for competition or other use.

For a demo try your local photo or wildlife club and talk to the members or even buy Photoshop elements for dummies which will give you a good overview.

Or simply avoid a stream of useless words from people like me and try it for free for a month

https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/tdrc/index.cfm?product=photoshop_elements&loc=en_gb

If the link doesn't work google photosop elements free trial.
 
What is it that you seem to "lose" in the edit?

I find DPP is fine for tweaking the image (such as tweaking contrast, brightness and the like, trimming and sharpening). That probably isn't helpful. But if you say what you think is not going well, we might be able to help further.
 
Viv, your "workflow" is the series of steps you take from the RAW file reaching your PC to it being a finished article.

I asked, because - and Dogbreath has beaten me to this point - a great many people rate DPP very highly indeed (dont like it too much myself, but that's more because I don't care for the interface, and because the converters I use deliver a look and quality I'm comfortable with), so it strikes me as likely that the "problem" is down to how you're using DPP rather than DPP itself.
 
Thanks for your replies.

I download from the camera to the computer using USB cable vis Canon EOS Utility. Then I edit using DPP and save them all on an external hard drive.

However I often find that what looks a really good shot when looked at on the camera's LCD screen becomes average once downloaded and I can't seem to make it look any better using DPP to edit.

I am perfectly sure it is me - I am certainly no expert - so any pointers to get me in the right direction would be great.

Our computer is quite old and very slow, I am hoping to invest in a laptop shortly where I can load all my photography software and use that as a dedicated "photo" machine with the hard drive to save them on.
 
You can't trust the camera's LCD, Viv - as you've noticed!

;)

I wonder if perhaps you're "overworking" your files in DPP?

Can you post an example of an image that you're not to happy with (leaving the Exif in, please) as this will give us something to work from.
 
Just to answer one point in your questions, I tried DPP when i was using a 450D and 40D and hated the User Interface.

Adobe CS4 extended is what i use now, ( which i love ) but its a minefield to use.

If you would like to try some simple RAW processing + a very handy .JPG processor after conversion, download FastStone ( its free )

It will auto download RAW files and put them in a dated folder all in one go. You can then view RAW files , it can do basic .JPG conversion / editing but you can get much better editor for free. Try Photofiltre or Photoscape. Both these free .JPG editors cost nothing, and are brilliantly written.

Get FastStone for downloading / viewing / converting. Then use one of the others for editing. I actually keep both Photofiltre and Photoscape on my PC ( and still use them ) even though i use Adobe CS ext. as my main editor. Photoscape is a reall oddball, and quite unique. I can do stuff in Photoscape with one click that i cannot do in CS4 ext., and other things too

I have FastStone to download straight from my SDHC camera card via USB reader, then i can view all RAWS and decide what to keep before i even have to open another piece of software. After viewing/dumping, i then use Adobe Camera Raw to convert/basic edit and CS4 ext. for futher editing
 
Viv Connett said:
However I often find that what looks a really good shot when looked at on the camera's LCD screen becomes average once downloaded and I can't seem to make it look any better using DPP to edit.
Click to expand...

Just as an aside, and from someone who wants to learn about processing but simply hasn't had the time as yet, I usually find that my photos often look poor on the LCD screen (I have a Canon EOS40D) but much better on the laptop. I shoot in RAW (as I believe this is the closest to a conventional "negative", and by keeping the original unedited RAW files I can come back to them in years to come, when I know more about processing), open in DPP, sharpen (usually to 10), adjust brightness, then usually drop contrast to -1, increase colour tone and saturation to +1, save as, then crop and resize if posting to web etc.; all done by eye. That's just about all I do at the moment!
 
Keith Reeder said:
Viv, your "workflow" is the series of steps you take from the RAW file reaching your PC to it being a finished article.

I asked, because - and Dogbreath has beaten me to this point - a great many people rate DPP very highly indeed (dont like it too much myself, but that's more because I don't care for the interface, and because the converters I use deliver a look and quality I'm comfortable with), so it strikes me as likely that the "problem" is down to how you're using DPP rather than DPP itself.
Click to expand...


It`s for this reason I use Adobe cs5 RAW convertor,I like the interface & find I get better results from it.Raw processing software is really a personal thing.

Steve.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 13 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

C
I've got a Canon R7 and need to update my lenses
Replies
15
Views
1K
Barred Wobbler
Barred Wobbler
K
Digiscoping with android phone vs with mirrorless DLSR- advice please?
Replies
6
Views
469
Mike Crawley
Mike Crawley
Oregon John
What I think would be the perfect birding (rather than bird photography) camera
Replies
10
Views
2K
robinlanark
R
yarrellii
Canon vs Kite stabilized binoculars
2
Replies
24
Views
5K
DRodrigues
D
BenjiS
Budget Canon lens
Replies
8
Views
1K
nikitasius
N

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top