dtbain
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2011
- Messages
- 127
- Location
- Glasgow, UK
- Lightroom Experience
- Intermediate
- Lightroom Version
I've just upgraded from a Canon 450d to 77d and from Lr5 to Lr-CC. I shoot raw and import raw (.cr2) images which Lr converts to DNG. I'm used to my raw previews in Lr seeming duller than the corresponding jpegs (on the rare occasions I shoot in jpeg) *until* I edit the image (though I still prefer working with raw). BUT, with my new camera and new version of Lr, I've noticed something new ...
The previews both on the back of the camera AND in Lr are more vibrant (more like jpegs, if you like) than in the old set-up, even though I am still shooting raw, BUT the first time I click on them in Lr (whether they've been converted to DNG or are still in the .cr2 format) they lose their vibrance and end up duller again -- and stay that way. So the DNGs look duller than the previews on the back of the camera AND duller than the previews in Lr just after import.
Question is just: can anyone explain what is going on, and why this is new (I never noticed this under my old set-up).
It is, I should emphasise, not a problem. But I am interested in understanding what is going on.
One issue in the background, which might be worth mentioning, is that I've always wanted to shoot and keep raws *and yet* to be able to take a peak at what the Canon jpeg would have looked like, had I shot one, since for some routine pictures the following is true: if the canon-jpeg-look is ok, I'd be happy to settle for that and not further edit it, and spend my editing time on other, more interesting pictures instead. I could shoot in raw+jpeg and keep the jpegs in the cases where they're good enough and edit and keep the raw when they're not, but I find having two of each image overwhelming (even with stacking) and what I want to keep in the routine cases is not a jpeg but a jpeg-*looking* dng (since I like to know the picture remains maximally editable, even in the routine cases, in case I revisit it).
I raised this latter issue a while back on this forum (seeing from RAW what a JPEG would look like) and the message was that the best I could do would be to write my own preset (perhaps including the Canon standard setting -- though I've just noticed I can't include that in a preset) to produce the look I want, something I've not done yet but (finally!) intend to.
Anyway, any thoughts on any of this would be most welcome!
Thanks all
David
The previews both on the back of the camera AND in Lr are more vibrant (more like jpegs, if you like) than in the old set-up, even though I am still shooting raw, BUT the first time I click on them in Lr (whether they've been converted to DNG or are still in the .cr2 format) they lose their vibrance and end up duller again -- and stay that way. So the DNGs look duller than the previews on the back of the camera AND duller than the previews in Lr just after import.
Question is just: can anyone explain what is going on, and why this is new (I never noticed this under my old set-up).
It is, I should emphasise, not a problem. But I am interested in understanding what is going on.
One issue in the background, which might be worth mentioning, is that I've always wanted to shoot and keep raws *and yet* to be able to take a peak at what the Canon jpeg would have looked like, had I shot one, since for some routine pictures the following is true: if the canon-jpeg-look is ok, I'd be happy to settle for that and not further edit it, and spend my editing time on other, more interesting pictures instead. I could shoot in raw+jpeg and keep the jpegs in the cases where they're good enough and edit and keep the raw when they're not, but I find having two of each image overwhelming (even with stacking) and what I want to keep in the routine cases is not a jpeg but a jpeg-*looking* dng (since I like to know the picture remains maximally editable, even in the routine cases, in case I revisit it).
I raised this latter issue a while back on this forum (seeing from RAW what a JPEG would look like) and the message was that the best I could do would be to write my own preset (perhaps including the Canon standard setting -- though I've just noticed I can't include that in a preset) to produce the look I want, something I've not done yet but (finally!) intend to.
Anyway, any thoughts on any of this would be most welcome!
Thanks all
David
Last edited by a moderator: