1D Mark IV RAW conversion

I recently got the 1D Mark IV. I have been disappointed by the RAW converter. RAW for the 1Ds Mark III is awesome. But the 1D Mark IV files have significant noise and squiggly artifacts in the shadows and bokeh. I think it is actually worse at low iso than at high iso. These artifacts are even worse with the color red. There is even some banding in the reds at iso 100 in an unprocessed image (master). I check the files in DDP, the artifacts are not there. So it seems that the problem is with OS X/Aperture RAW conversion. Has anyone else experienced experienced disappointing results with the 1D Mark IV?

It doesn't look like the Edge Sharpening panel is part of the RAW conversion, it can easily be turned on or off.  However, the RAW Fine Tuning panel, at the very TOP of the the Adjustments pane, is available only for RAW files. 
I noticed those Apple default settings are exactly the same for my 1DM4, 1DM3, and 40D.  For my 1DM4 files, I need to pull the Sharpening to 0, and push the De-Noise to maximum.
I've also been playing with the in camera sharpening and noise reduction in the Custom Functions within the camera.  If you shoot in JPG mode, the files look great in Aperture, because the Canon profiles are processed right in the camera.  RAW files look great in DPP (Canon's RAW converter, Digital Photo Professional), also because of the native Canon profiles in that program.
A friend of mine said Canon upped the native sharpening in camera on the 1DM4, so she dropped it to 0 in the Standard shooting mode.  I'm going to try that and see what happens.
Anyway, I need to shoot in RAW, much of my work is indoors in poor lighting, and Aperture is a huge part of my workflow for large numbers of images.
I'm still playing with it, and I've sent feedback to Apple about it.

Similar Messages

  • 10.4.10 and Canon 1D Mark III RAW Conversion in Aperture

    I'm noticing bright reds are not being converted properly at all. Overall, most images look excellent; however, images with a large amount of red look terrible. I've tried converted the .CR2 files via DNG and then in LightRoom, and the red looks good.
    Has anyone else noticed this? I'll try and get some crops and place on Flickr tonight.
    PowerMac G5 Dual 2GHz   Mac OS X (10.4.9)   4 Gigs RAM, CalDigit S2VR Duo 1TB

    I haven't seen those problems. Did you post the samples on Flickr? How can I find them?

  • Canon 5D mark II raw file conversion size blowout

    I am suffering from an issue where my CR2 files from a 5D decrease in size when converted to DNG  from for example 14.4MB to 11.8MB while the 5D mark II files increase from 8.7MB to a much larger 23.6MB after conversion. Both conversions are being done with DNG Converter 5.4 using the same preferences. Any light you could shine on this for me would be greatly appreciated.

    It is because your 5D Mark II files are sRAW images, not raw. (The full 5D Mark II raw files are usually over 20 MB, not ~8 MB.) When you process sRAW files into DNG files, the DNG files are stored in the "linear DNG" format, which is much bigger than the sRAW format.
    p.s., these questions should be directed to the Camera Raw, Lightroom, or DNG forums in the future to get a faster reply.

  • RAW conversion for Canon 5D Mark II

    I can't open my raw files from my Mark II I have PSE 6 and have upgraded my raw conversion to 5.2 it still won't recongnize my .cr2 raw files from my Mark II it recongnizes my .cr2 from my 40D whats up?

    Some of the Adobe download links are wrong and take you to an earlier version of Adobe Camera Raw. The latest version is ACR 5.6 which brings support for the newest camera models such as:
    Canon EOS 7D, PowerShot S90 & G11, Nikon D3S and others. It’s also backward compatible and will support all earlier models including the EOS5DmkII.
    First you will need to exit Photoshop Elements.
    To get the plug-in for PSE6 go to the link below - instructions are for Windows users. They will differ for Mac users.
    http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=4626&fileID=4303
    Download the plug-in for Elements 8
    Open the zip folder you just downloaded and click Extract Files.
    You should see a 64 bit folder and a plug-in file below it. The plug in has a file name: Camera Raw.8bi
    Now drag the plug-in file (or copy it) into the File Formats folder in the following location:
    C:\Program Files\Adobe\Photoshop Elements 6.0\Plug-Ins\File Formats.  See Gotcha
    If running windows Vista you will probably get a pop-up requesting Administrator permission. Assuming you are the Administrator for your computer, simply agree.
    I can confirm it does work as I have recently updated my plug-in for PSE6 using the above method. To test it, go to one of your photo folders, right click on a raw file (NEF, CR2, DNG etc) and select open with Photoshop Elements. The image should automatically open in ACR 5.6 giving you access to the latest slider adjustments, including white balance and exposure.
    Note: If you have an earlier Camera Raw plug-in, I suggest you move it from the File Formats folder to My Documents before you begin. This will prevent it being overwritten by the new Camera Raw file (it will have the same name) and you can always move it back again if the download installation fails.
    If you are using a 64-bit edition of Windows, then move the plug-in file from the unzipped download folder by navigating to:C:\Program Files (x86)\Adobe\Photoshop Elements 6.0\Plug-Ins\File Formats.

  • Aperture RAW conversion colour noise with Canon 1D Mark II

    I'm using Aperture 2.1 and am wondering if anyone here is having this problem - basically highlights end up with false colour with this camera/RAW conversion combination. The problems appears to have been introduced with the 1.1 RAW converter as 1.0 conversions don't seem to have the problem. I'm not sure if this is camera specific, or whether there is some tuning which can be done to the RAW converter to minimise the effect - attempts have so far failed with this approach.
    The best subject to produce the effect is strong reflections from water - i've attached a crop of an image which shows this problem, and I can supply a RAW with this problem.
    Conversion using RAW 1.0 (less or no colour pixelation):
    http://www.loftsoft.co.uk/pictures/KC7U5116%20-%20RAW%201.0.jpg
    Conversion using RAW 2.0 (colour pixelation):
    http://www.loftsoft.co.uk/pictures/KC7U5116%20-%20RAW%202.0.jpg
    Any suggestions as to what to do? Is this simply a RAW conversion problem which can be addressed or am I using the tool wrong?
    Many thanks,
    Cesare

    Hmm. I can see some color effects in the 1.0 conversion as well.
    Those are some touch photos... you have lots of specular highlights with the sun reflecting off the water and the railing.
    Aperture 2.x and 1.x handle the RAW conversion differently. I would suggest you try playing with the RAW Fine Tuning brick, specifically with the Moire and Radius sliders, and try fiddling with the Auto Noise Compensation checkbox.
    I don't know whether you'll be able to make the problem go away completely or not.
    With my ~30,000 1D Mark II files I've seen something similar to this (though much less extreme) on a couple of them. Always with specular highlights though -- off water or metal objects.
    Still, you may wish to submit Aperture feedback and include the RAW file.

  • Have a 7D Mark II and can't find a updater for the Raw conversion for Photoshop 6?

    Have a 7D Mark II and can't find a updater for the Raw conversion for Photoshop 6?

    I assume you mean Photoshop CS6?
    I don't think your camera is supported.
    Anyway here you'll find the info
    Camera Raw plug-in | Supported cameras
    Camera Raw-compatible Adobe applications

  • I have an A77 and see that DxO RAW conversions look different

    Several RAW conversion comparisons on the web amongst A77 users are pointing to markedly better conversions and noise handling currently within new DxO 7 eg. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1037&thread=39970661
    I know that Sony's RAW have historically taken a while to arrive at optimal conversions from previous experinece with my A350. When Lightroom 3 came along it was like getting new cameras for most Sony Alpha users with from RAW performance at last matching Nikon from effectively the same sensors.
    Can you let me know the likely time lag till ACR and Lightroom will have an update to this initial default to really match the DxO performance. Otherwise, to be honest, despite being a Lightroom user since the original Beta stages and a passionate supporter and advocate, I may have to consider jumping ship. Working exclusively in RAW I do need to be using the very best conversions possible to make the best out of my investment in my camera equipment.
    I don't know if this lag with ARW conversions is because Sony don't co-operate with Adobe early enough or whether because Sony is only number three in DSLR share it gets less priority within Adobe than Canon and Nikon, but some timeline on a revised version of Lightroom to address this for the new Sony Alphas would be great.
    Many thanks from a long time advocate who really hopes I can stick with Lightroom,
    Cheers,
    Paul

    Hi Hal,
    Many thanks...I’ll give it a try. Not trying to cause trouble as I genuinely am a fan of LR, but if they always lag on getting to grips with Sony RAWs it’s a major drawback for Sony users.
    Cheers,
    Paul

  • Will Lightroom 4 get updated with support for Canon 7D Mark II Raw Files?

    I received an update for Photoshop to support Canon 7D Mark II raw files (ACR 8.7), will Lightroom 4.4 get an update to support these files?

    I don't know why you feel it makes things more complex. All you need to do is use the DNG converter as your download software. The conversion takes place during the download, and then you can import directly into Lightroom. I'm not trying to sell you on using DNG. But it isn't as cumbersome as it seems.
    Since Lightroom doesn't utilize the Camera Raw plug-in, it makes it more difficult to provide updates. In Lightroom update means distributing a whole new Lightroom program.

  • Brushes not working with new RAW conversion for Nikon D7000

    I have always worked with RAW files w/A2 & A3.1.1 with my Nikon (D80) And now, just got Nikon's D7000 and of course, waited for the RAW conversion that just came out.
    Apple addressed the Nikon D7000 RAW situation (which was fixed this month), but now when I use "brushes" on RAW pics, very little if any changes occur.
    Very little affect occurs (if any) with A3.1.1 and the "new" RAW conversion for Nikon. I shot (at the same time) both RAW and JPEG (as cameras can) and put them side by side in A3. Pulled down Dodge / Burn / Skin Smoothing & Blur from brushes and they all did a great job. But on the RAW pic that was taken at the same time..... nada, nothing (maybe a minute change, but nothing to call home about).
    Bottom line, the newest RAW capability that came out a couple of weeks ago, somehow messed up brushes? I don't think I am that smart or lucky to see this issue. Am I missing something here? If so, please set me straight.
    I have tried the places one pulls down brushes but no affect on RAW. Using curves from bricks and luminance, etc, works just fine. Guess I am stuck with JPEG's until this is resolved by our A3 guys, or someone realigns me.

    I am able to import them, but I cannot edit them as RAW files. They behave like .jpegs. So correcting exposure for example is a horrible experience. My 5D Mark II files behave as they did in Aperture, so it is the FZ1000 RAWs in particular that are problematic.

  • RAW conversion with Aperture

    Has anyone compared the quality of RAW conversion of Aperture vs. Nikon Capture as well as other converters?
    I really like the quality of nikon capture and would not want to purchase aperture unless the conversion was at least equivalent.
    Thanks for any input.
    mark
    G4 17" Laptop   Mac OS X (10.4.3)  

    I've compared Aperture's conversion side by side with Adobe Camera Raw's. My method was to do some conversions with Camera Raw and save the result along with the RAW file. Then, in the Apple Store, I performed the conversions using Aperture.
    The results from Aperture are not good. They look okay at reduced size, but if you look more closely, the de-mosaicing Aperture performs is quite bad. On some images it is only "somewhat" worse than Camera Raw; on others it is so bad as to be unusable. Shadow detail suffers the most, but highlights are not immune. Some images showed color fringing that was not present in the Camera Raw conversion, even with all chromatic aberration adjustments set to zero in Camera Raw.
    I ignored differences in color and tonal rendering because I did not have enough time with Aperture to learn to get the best results out of it in terms of color. It takes a while to figure out how to get good color out of a RAW converter.
    In no case was Aperture as good as Adobe Camera Raw in terms of image quality. The difference was immediately obvious at 100% magnification.
    I would not use Aperture for RAW conversion.
    EDIT: I forgot to mention, in case it matters, my camera is a Nikon D2X.

  • Need a link for PS6 raw conversion for 5dIII & 7dII cameras?

    Can any one give me a link to the raw conversion software for bridge and PS6 for 5dIII & 7dII cameras?  New computer and need to install to get my raws.  Using Windows 8.1 version.
    many thanks,
    Noella

    many thanks.
    In a message dated 11/18/2014 4:01:26 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, 
    [email protected] writes:
    need  a link for PS6 raw conversion for 5dIII & 7dII cameras?
    Arpit  Kapoor
    (https://forums.adobe.com/people/Arpit+Kapoor?et=watches.email.outcome)  marked ssprengel
    (https://forums.adobe.com/people/ssprengel?et=watches.email.outcome) 's  reply on _need  a link for PS6 raw conversion
    for 5dIII & 7dII cameras?_
    (https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1636778?et=watches.email.outcome)  as  helpful. View  the full reply
    (https://forums.adobe.com/message/6939148?et=watches.email.outcome#6939148)

  • Lightroom vs. Photoshop Raw conversion

    I have noticed that the Lightroom RAW conversion looks about 1/3 to 1/2 stop brighter compared to Photoshop on the same image with the same settings (I'm using LR 2.4 and Photoshop CS4).  Anybody else notice this or have any thoughts?  I'm assuming they use the same RAW conversion engine.

    Thanks for the response.  Well, when I export from LR to a JPEG and do the same from Photoshop (viewing them in photoshop), I get two slightly different toned images (I mistakenly said the LR images are brighter...they're actually darker).  Viewing them this way should remove any monitor discrepencies (I'm working on a calibrated Lacie 724 monitor with 120% Adobe 1998 gamut so that should not be an issue).

  • 5D Mark II raw image quality

    There's been a post by A Museman (earlier this year) on "5D Mark II raw image quality" that attempts to discuss the differences and problems with Aperture with flat / poor quality raw photo's as compared to sharper, clearer, more saturated pictures processed in Digital Photo Professional.
    That thread "seems" to have faded in discussion. I am still having problems with Aperture and raw photo quality from my Canon 5D Mark II camera.
    Can someone shed some light on this subject, in that has the problem been been identified, validate, resolved or does the problem still exist (as it does for me).
    This problem is causing me a lot of frustration since I want to use Aperture because of its organization and potential processing capability. Although I get superior results with DPP, it does cause a lot of file storage requirements by having large raw and jpeg files for the same picture (in essence it doubles the file storage requirements).

    On my end there are no issues. I get absolutely beautiful portrait renderings out of aperture and my 5d2 - the dynamic range is amazing with this combo. I can often adjust exposure 3+ stops if needed before getting into too much noise.
    The best output I've ever had - completely smokes the ACR rendering of skin tones.
    Aperture 2 doesn't apply the "Picture Style" preset to the raw decode like DPP does. This makes raw images look flat in comparison to the camera rendered jpeg - shoot in "faithful" mode and you will have a pretty much exact match.
    So My quick recipe to match the default setting is adding a little vibrancy, definition, and contrast. FWIW I would turn off the auto lighting optimizer, and the highlight tone priority if using aperture.

  • Is there a plug-in to support the new Canon 7D mark 2 raw files?

    Is there a plug-in to support the new Canon 7D mark 2 raw files?

    Native Lightroom support for the D750 was added in the Lightroom 5.7 update released this evening.
    Release details:
    Lightroom 5.7: http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2014/11/lightroom-5-7-now-available.html
    Camera Raw 5.7: http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2014/11/camera-raw-8-7-and-dng-converter-8-7-now-a vailable.html

  • Panasonic Lumex DMC-LX1 raw conversion for Aperture doesn't work.

    I've seen many people having raw conversion problems. Direct import of Lumex raw files to Aperture does not work.
    Adobe DNG conversion of raw to dng does not work.
    I'm running on Photoshop CS.
    Perhaps my DNG conversion settings aren't right? Tell me what they should be.
    Do I have to go as far as changing the raw.plist or whatever it's called.
    Would CS2 with the Raw conversion Plug-in work instead?
    Remember that..."If all the woman lived across the sea, what a great swimmer Yellowman would be"!
    2.0 Duelly G5 4gigs ram. 23" Flat Cinema   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

    Joe,
    good to see that you are reading these posts. I am sure that many users whose cameras' raw files are currently not supported by Aperture would love to help out in any way they can.
    However, as we are living in a converging world, why doesn't Apple talk with Adobe and share some of the information used for RAW conversion? I'm thinking dcraw which (according to a note in its source code*) is using data provided by Adobe... and that same data is also contained in the Raw.plist.
    Thus, if Adobe knows something and shares it with dcraw, and Apple uses some of the dcraw code (at least the m2 matrices found in Raw.plist are equal to the dcraw ones), why can't you guys all share the same information, and thus speed up RAW support for all cameras?
    Just a thought.
    Kindest regards,
    Karl
    * This is the bit:
    Thanks to Adobe for providing these excellent CAM -> XYZ matrices!
    void CLASS adobe_coeff (char *make, char *model)
    powerbook G4 17 1.33 GHz   Mac OS X (10.4.6)  

Maybe you are looking for