Cyber Duck killed my Canon DPP Lens Data Downloads?

I run a programme called DPP, Digital Photo Professional, which was working fine and I was able to download 'lens data' for this program.
I then tried out Cyber Duck for some FTP transfers which went OK on my MBP.
But now I find that although Mail and Safari work fine, the data download for DPP no longer works, all I get is 'unable to connect to server'.
My MacMini has a copy of DPP on it and that is still able to download lens data, but I have not run Cyber Duck on that machine as yet.
Even if I reinstall DPP it remains the same reporting 'unable to connect to server'.
I tried contacting Cyber Duck who just bumped me off as it was a 'third party problem', which was not particularly very helpful of them.
So I am now at a loss what to do.
It would seem to point to something that may have been altered by using Cyber Duck, but what I do not know. All the internet connections seem to be correct as far as I can tell.
Anyone have any idea what could have been changed to give me this problem?
Many thanks for any help.

I rolled my system back to a clone that I made before I downloaded and used Cyberduck.
DPP is now able to download its Lens Data. So it would appear that Cyberduck does alter something which breaks DPP and stops it from connecting to the Lens Data server.

Similar Messages

No lens data under dpp 3.13.0

hi, I recently updated to DPP 3.13.0 and all of the lens data that I had brought in under the previous version has disappeared. If I try to update the lens data the application retuns the error can't connect to server. Under the previous version of DPP I was able to connect and download the lens data. Is anyone else having this problem? I'm running on mac os 10.7.5

Kernel 3.13.7 contains the patch to fix this bug, from here on the mailing list: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/3/20/819
So now I don't have to hold back my kernel anymore, and this issue is resolved. Woopee!
Last edited by zanny (2014-03-27 02:03:59)

PSE7, PS CS4, Organizer, Bridge, Camera Raw, Canon DPP

I'm trying to develop a process for using the various tools available to easily browser through a shoot's photos, zoom as needed, choose favorites, make any changes, etc.
I have PSE7/Organizer, Bridge/PS CS4, Camera Raw for both PSE7 and PS CS4, and Canon DPP. I owned PSE7 first, and I like it's backup features as well as the keyword/album and browsing interface, but I'm finding it may not be good for fast processing of a shoot's photos when they are RAW.
I'm shooting in RAW and I'm finding that zooming RAW images in Organizer is not possible beyond whatever preview image is present. Instead, I must open the image, which causes Camera Raw to open. Once in Camera Raw, I can zoom with greater control.
But what I notice is that using Bridge may be better to use for browsing RAW images, especially if I desire to open them in Camera Raw for greater zoom control, touch ups or whatever. The reason is that it seems to take longer for PSE7's Organizer to open a photo in PSE7 and Camera Raw than it takes for Bridge to open the same in PS CS4 and Camera Raw.
Here are my findings:
First time open of RAW or DNG:
Organizer opening to PSE7/Camera Raw: 15 seconds.
Bridge opening to PS CS4/Camera Raw: 10 seconds.
Second time open of RAW or DNG:
Organizer opening to PSE7/Camera Raw: less than 10 seconds.
Bridge opening to PS CS4/Camera Raw: less than 5 seconds
"Second time open" means that I keep the relevant application open when I return to the organizer. For example, after PSE7 opens, I do not close it when returning to Organizer, and likewise, when returning to Bridge, I do not close PS CS4 when returning to Bridge. The above figures show Bridge can open a RAW or DNG photo into PS CS4 and Camera Raw faster in both the case of PS CS4 not already open, and when an instance of PS CS4 is already open.
In exploring all of this, I tried using DPP as my "Organizer" and it, of course, was the fastest at opening photos to its editor which has a few preset zoom positions. It does have a "Transfer to Photoshop" option but that takes 30 seconds and converts to a TIFF in a temp directory. So DPP seems like something to avoid unless there are RAW editing features which do not exist elsewhere.
Given the above, it seems the best process for me is to use PSE7's Organizer for the features I like (i.e., backup, keywords, albums), but use Bridge/PS CS4 when processing a shoot's photos for keepers. Then use Canon DPP only if it has something which I must use, or just like better.
Do my choices here make sense, where I'm not missing something? If there's a good link that discusses high-level process for dealing with a shoot's photos to find keepers, that would be great to know about.
I realize what's best for anyone really depends on each person's preferences/needs, so the questions I ask are seeking general answers given the limited information I've explained about what's important for me (i.e., going through photos quickly, having good zoom control for review, and being able to go to either PSE7 or PS relatively fast... my findings say that Bridge/PS CS4 seems best for this unless DPP has something I must utilize).
Thanks,
Tom

Barbara and George M, You both had answers, but only one can be selected as "Correct" ... I wish the forum allowed splitting that. I gave Barbara's answer the "correct" mark since it was first. George M, I clicked "Helpful Answer" on your response, but your info was much more than just "Helpful"... great tips on the import/download file/dir naming. I'll look into that.
I played around with Bridge/PS quite a bit more, and I'm sold on its way of doing things. I get it now. It stores all keywords with the files, so this removes the need for any organizer-proprietary/custom format databases for retaining such information. This is actually the way I prefer to work, with as much control and as close to the files as possible, or at least with enough info about the files so I can do the right backups, ensure I'm saving the information I add, and so forth. PSE7 has the benefit of allowing keywords without affecting the files, but that's not a big deal for me so long as the metadata-writing software in the products I use isn't buggy, destroying the file (I know, I know, have a backup!).
I really liked PSE7 because I was thinking in terms of an organizer maintaining non-photo data (i.e., keywords) as does PSE7, but since Bridge embeds the info as metadata in the photo file itself, it removes the need for that type of organizer. With that known, the issue of backups no longer needs to be organizer-centric. With Bridge, I know the files and folders themselves is effectively The database. That means I can use whatever I use for my normal backups, and things are actually much more manageable and understandable down that route. So the Bridge/PS route is not only more powerful and faster (in my experience on my laptop), but the Bridge-way of embedding the keywords in the file keeps me loosely coupled, actually completely decoupled from being reliant on an organizer-specific database and all that jazz.
Thanks for helping/clarifying with your feedback on this.
Tom

Lens Data

When Pentax updated its firmware for the K10D to version 1.1, the raw files (PEF or DNG) changed in some way where LR no longer is able to interpret the lens data to know what lens was used. As I understand it, Pentax's numbering system internal to the raw file that identifies the lens changed, and LR no longer interprets it.
I believe that this will probably be a temporary situation; eventually a newer version of LR will come out that supports lens metadata for Pentax K10D raw files.
My concern is this: when and if this problem is ever corrected, will I have to re-import my raw images so that their lens metadata will be acquired into the LR database?
A lot of "if's", I know. Hopefully my question actually makes sense! haha

Talk to Canon and Tokina - if that data is properly given to the camera and properly recorded in the EXIF data by the camera then iPhoto will display it - if it is not there then iPhoto can not do anything about it - only the manufactures can fix that
LN

Big differences between LR 2.2 and Canon DPP 3.5

LightRoom 2.2 with ACR 5.2 and Camera Profile Standard (that of Canon )
DPP 3.5.1 with same Picture Style (standard)
Opening of the same raw (shot with 5D II) without touching nothing
http://www.rizzetto.com/temp/lightroom1.jpg
why those huge differences ? it seems LR set 1000 kelvin less (both WB
setting "as shot")
btw. DPP is more close to the reality... temperature was very "orangish"
thanks
Sandro

<René[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected].. > LR will start off by displaying the camera generated built in jpg of the > Raw. This should closely resemble DPP. Then the LR defaults get applied to > the actual raw data. > > What are your LR default settings? what do you mean ? I guess I have the standard settings (all 0); how can I control ? >Are you sure you haven't set some other parameters (which will not be read >by LR, but will be used as starting point by DPP) different in camera? Say >a >color tone correction? no.. camera use Picture Style Standard (+3 Sharpness and 0 contrast/saturation/color tone) > Also, in order for DPP to display correctly, you have to set the right > display profile in preferences. (In OSX, in windows there's a setting "Use > OS default" or some such) > > AFAIK the default setting for DPP is "sRGB" for display profile, which is > obviously wrong. I did some test (OS default, or I browse to choose the Dell2407 icm file) but also restarting the program, the colors remain the same...

Lens data from Exif

This is a question that was raised in the Lightroom Forum, but I think it might fit better in here. In Lightroom there is an option to sort images with respect to lens used, a very neat function, but when using raw files from Minolta (.mrw) or DNG's converted from these, no lens data is provided. The only information in there is "Unknown lens". Can this be fixed?

Dana Gartenlaub wrote:
> In File Info, Camera Data 1 lists any lens that is recent enough
> to communicate its identity to the camera. This works on Pentax
> PEFs or DNGs even when run through the DNG converter.
It may work this way with Pentax PEF files but unfortunately doesn't with Minolta MRW or Sony ARW files. Of course, Minolta AF (and now Sony Alpha) lenses do report their identities to the camera, and the camera does write this info into the EXIF data but it ends up as an obscure lens ID in the Minolta (or Sony) Maker Notes where most 3rd-party software (including Adobe's) cannot (or would not) access it.
Eric DeSilva wrote:
> Adobe apps will store it in XMP format, but all the makernote
> EXIF data is gone.
This is not true! Adobe XMP won't read the Maker Notes sections but it does preserve them. When I convert an MRW file to DNG (with Adobe DNG Converter) and then create a TIFF or JPEG file from the DNG (with Camera Raw) then the Minolta Maker Notes will still be present in the final TIFF or JPEG file (and of course in the DNG file, too).
Thomas Knoll wrote:
> The problem of the lens data for Minolta/Sony cameras is the
> lens ID codes have lots and lots of overlaps. Mostly because
> Sigma released lenses that duplicate lots of the Minolta lenses
> ID codes.
Sigma lenses don't have Minolta/Sony lens IDs but just random numbers. Kindly ignore what Sigma lenses do. And please don't bother which lens 'was really used.' Just provide us with the lens ID found in the EXIF Minolta/Sony Maker Notes data. Please!
By the way, is there a way to access the Minolta Maker Note LensID tag (or any tag) in the EXIF data through the JavaScript API? If not then please add one!
Currently, I enter the names of the Minolta/Sony lenses manually into the metadata. I customized my File Info Panel 'Camera Data 1' so I can enter the data there in a fairly comfortable way. This is not too hard to do because usually I am using no more than two or three different lenses per assignment usually. This way, the lens names go into the exif/1.0/aux tag named 'Lens.' Unfortunatey, due to a bug in Bridge or in XMP, raw files and DNG files won't accept changes in this and a few more tags; only TIFF and JPEG files will. Instead, the change will get stored in Bridge's cache only. So I wrote a Bridge script to manipulate the XMP sidecar files' contents directly, to 'burn' the changes from the volatile cache permanently into the disk files' metadata.
All this would become *much* easier when 1) we had access to the lens ID in the Minolta (or Sony) Maker Notes and 2) someone would eventually care about fixing that $#!+ metadata bug in Bridge (or XMP) which was already there in Bridge 1.0 and still is around in Bridge 2.1.
-- Olaf

How do I get canon dpp to see files which are sitting in iPhoto?

I have imported files from Canon 5dmkii into iphoto and there are 150 of them in two folders, raw files, loaded Canon DPP raw editor and it does not see the files in iphoto. Is there something I am neglecting to do, I just bought this rMBP two days ago and it's my first mac so I am real noob, any help would be real appreciated.

_Jock wrote:
Thanks Bill.
I can call DPP from iPhoto, but I was hoping to access the iPhoto library from DPP so I can batch process some images.
I've only recently begun to use DPP and have been using iPhoto for years, so it's a process of familiarisation with DPP I guess.
It's easy to locate the actual folder where any iPhoto image is stored, select the image in iPhoto, then select File/Reveal in Finder. You can then point DPP to that folder.
However, using other programs to modify with files tracked by iPhoto can really screw up iPhoto, so it might be better to follow LowLuster's advice and dump iPhoto, move the Canon raw photos somewhere else, and use a professional raw editor instead. In your case you can let DPP work with everything, then when you are happy with edits export JPEG copies and let iPhoto manage those if you want to use iPhoto for prints, albums, online sharing, etc.
The other reason to use something other than iPhoto is iPhoto is not a powerful raw editor. If you want to take full advantage of the quality of the raw files from your Canon, use DPP, Aperture, Lightroom, Photoshop, Capture One...

Tone curve - please bring back sliders, Canon DPP software just as clumsy!

Please bring back sliders for the tone curve beta 4 in this respect is now just as awkward and clumsy to operate in this respect as Canon DPP!

You can change from parametric to point curve mode yourself with the lower-right icon in the tone curve.

Canon DPP Can't Read CR2 Files

I'm considering getting CS3 but before that, wanted to try out using Canon DPP for my raw files taken with G9. I downloaded the latest DPP but it just won't display the CR2 files. Jpeg & Tif show up fine though.
Is DPP only for EOS only? I thought it should be able to read any CR2 file.
Any advice most appreciated.
Thanks.
Avivion

What Jim said. The Canon PowerShot G9 is supported by ACR 4.4.1, but I have no idea about ACR 3.7, which is the last version that can run in CS2, and no clue about Canon software.

Will my 70-300 Canon Zoom lens + a 2x multiplier function on a new EOS T3i

Will my 70-300 Canon Zoom lens + a Canon 2x multiplier function on a new EOS T3i?

Basically.... no.
As far as I know, Canon 2X Extenders (teleconverters) cannot even be fitted to any of the 70-300mm lenses. The Canon Extenders all have a protruding front element that prevents them from even being attached to quite a few lenses. They can be fitted to the 70-200mm zooms, as well as the prime lenses 135mm and longer.
A third party 2X would physically fit onto the lens. But.... Most 70-300mm are f3.5-5.6 aperture lenses. With a 2X on them two stops of light are lost to the teleconverter, so the lens/TC combo becomes and effective 140-600mm f7.1-11 lens. Your camera will stop autofocusing with smaller than f5.6 aperture lenses (only 1D-series and 5D Mk III can still focus at f8, even they would fail to focus at f11). Your could still manually focus, except the viewfinder will be quite dim to try to do so.
And, frankly, I wouldn't expect much in terms of image quality. A strong (2X) teleconverter on a zoom lens is often not a great combo.
My advice would be to save up for a longer focal length lens... Something I use a lot, which has good image quality and focuses very well, even in combination with a Canon 1.4X teleconverter, is Canon EF 300mm f4 IS lens. There is also the Canon 400mm f5.6 lens, but it lacks IS (so plan on using a tripod or at least a monopod). If you prefer a zoom there are the Canon 100-400mm IS and Sigma 120-400mm OS or 150-500mm OS. I hear that Tamron is developing a new 150-600mm VC lens that's supposed to be competitively priced, but I don't know when that will be available or have any advance info on it's performance or image quality.
Besides these options... get closer to your subjects. That's often going to give better results, anyway, since with longer focal lengths you'll be shooting from a greater distance, it's much harder to get a steady shot, plus there often can be various atmospheric effects that reduce image quality too.
Alan Myers
San Jose, Calif., USA
"Walk softly and carry a big lens."
GEAR: 5DII, 7D(x2), 50D(x3), some other cameras, various lenses & accessories
FLICKR & PRINTROOM

Panasonic G1 lens data in LR 2.2

It appears that LR 2.2 does not recognize lens data as encoded by the Panasonic G1, including that for the Lumix kit lenses. Looking at the RW2 files, I can't find any lens model data at all. The JPEGs do carry lens model information, but perhaps it is in some non-standard format?
So, the questions:
Does anyone know for sure that lens data is not encoded in RW2 files by the G1, including in some proprietary way?
Does anyone know if the JPEG lens data from the G1 is in some way non-standard?
Does anyone know if LR will be able to handle such lens data as may be present in either type of file in the future?
Perhaps it would be possible to re-encode the data from the JPEGs in some way that LR can use it?
Thanks -
Tim

I don't like it either that Adobe chooses only to handle certain camera brands lens data. It doesn't properly recognize lenses on my Olympus E620 either. Sometimes it will include something about the lens, but that's not the real lens name, it has picked it up from other fields in the metadata. Yes, you can pre-process the jpg files (and probably RAW too) to put the lens information in a place that Lightroom picks up.
I also discovered that the Panasonic G1 and the Olympus E620 do not call the same lens by the same name, so at the same time I standardized the names for me so if the 70-300mm lens is on either camera, it shows up as the same lens.
And the process is not so bad because now I'm merging GPS data into the files, as well as filling out the location fields automatically from the GPS data, so I am now doing a whole lot of pre-processing.
Panasonic and Olympus put the lens name in the field LensType. If you put text in XMP:Lens field then Lightroom picks it up.
You can use exiftool in Windows at least to do this. You would need something like this one line to copy the information frothe LensType field to the XMP:LENS field. Mine is more complicated because I put the lens name in explicitly.
exiftool -overwrite_original "-xmp:lens<${LensType}" *.jpg
I thought there was a LR plugin that would allow you to execute a command on import, but I don't see it now.
Judy

Export Full EXIF (inluding lens data)

It would be nice if exporting would include all of the EXIF from the original image. In particular, I would like the lens data included. (Yes, I do not have "Minimize Embedded Metadata" checked.)
For example (among other things), the original image (taken with Nikon D200) includes (exported with exiftool):
]Focus Distance : 10.00 m
Focus Mode : AF-S
Focus Position : 0x05
Lens : 18-50mm f/2.8 G
Lens Data Version : 0201
Lens F Stops : 6.00
Lens ID : Unknown (7F 48 2D 50 24 24 1C 06)
Lens ID Number : 127
Lens Type : G
Max Aperture At Max Focal : 2.8
Max Aperture At Min Focal : 2.8
Max Focal Length : 50.4mm
Min Focal Length : 18.3mm
All of which I would love to see in the exported images. (I'm sure there are other ones too that I just didn't notice off-hand.)
jon

Yes, I found this morning that camera data is not exported. This is a major problem. I am entering contests which require the metadata to verify that the photo was taken within a certain period. I just realized that this data is lacking on every picture that I have exported from LR. Luckily I can process those photos in DxO to retain the data.

Canon DPP incompatiblity

Has anybody had any success with Canon DPP (3.6.2) in Snow Leopard?
It will open, but when you go into preferences to set it up it gives the following message "An error occurred. Digital Photo Professional will be closed." Any help appreciated...

"hot off the presses" from Canon this afternoon:
"Thank you for your reply. Canon is currently posting updates for Mac OS
X 10.6 Snow Leopard. They should be posted within a week or so. When
they are posted, you can download them from the Canon USA website at
this address:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&tabact=DownloadDet ailTabAct&fcategoryid=324&modelid=18301
Please be assured that this is a priority for Canon and we are confident
that the new drivers will be available as soon as possible. We
sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may cause.
Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance with your
Canon SX1 IS.
Sincerely,
David
Technical Support Representative"
His reference to my reply relates to my reply to their initial response to my inquiry:
"hanks for your polite response; however, it doesn't even contain a
reference to my question:
I need to know when/if DPP is/will be fully compatible with Mac OS 10.6.
As a further slap in the face, the link you provided boldly proclaims
that you are "ready for Windows 7". When will you be ready for Mac? As a
minimum, you should be providing a link to a "Snow Leopard
compatibility" web page to reassure Mac users you are actively testing
compatibility/working on an update."
Sounds as though we should be able to download an update within a week or so, thank goodness.

Lens Profile Downloader Feedback

I'm curious to know what people think about Adobe's Lens Profile Downloader. Are people using it? What do you think of it? Are people even aware of it?
I think it has great potential. Adobe's been trying to play catch-up after releasing the Profiler (profiles are time-consuming to make, and there was no clear or easy way to request profiles from Adobe or the larger community).
However, it definitely feels a little half-baked. The need for selecting a profile based on the camera model is was built with is slim (if I am a D300 owner, I am equally interested in profiles created with the D90 or D300s, as well as the D7000 and so on). More importantly, there's no field for LENS MAKE. Hello? This means that if Nikon/Canon/Sony, Sigma, Tokina, and Tamron all decide to make a 12-24mm f/4 lens, there's no easy way to figure out which one the listed profile is actually for. More oddities: Apple listed under Camera Make? And a random half of the brands' names in full uppercase?
Here's the info we need when selecting a lens profile for RAW conversion:
Camera Make
Lens Make
Lens Model
Crop Factor
RAW or JPEG (do people use lens profiles for JPEG correction?)
Camera Model (only necessary for JPEGs or if crop factor is unknown)
Profile Creator
Profile Creation Date
User Rating & Comments
Cheers,
Cory
coryschoolland.com

The reason there is no selection for Lens Make is that, until very recently, it was not a standard EXIF field. Even with EXIF 2.3, manufacturers are generally not filling in the field. So there's nothing to search for, unfortunately.
Apple is listed because of the iPhone models.

Tokina 11-16 lens profile-download question

Lens profile downloader_p3_102510.air then clicking on this did not produce any results ....although AdobeAir is on the hard drive ...so I downloaded on 7/12 the AdobeAirInstaller so it might be that my air version is old since its a version 1.## and this download indicates a higher version.
So the only way to download a lens profile is with this downloader ? OR
lensprofile_creator_p3_win_042711.zip Does this have the capacity to view shared lens profiles and download?
Does this downloader go automatically to the storage location and produce a list from which to choose?
The Tokina lens arrived yesterday along with a 7D and I didn't value the lens profile corrections until I had to adjust a wide view of a building, one of the first test shots.
I have to admit I'm a little nervous about the above installs and then searching for the lens profile download . Its likely the AIR feature since in the past I did get errors in the event log connected with AdobeAir.
I guess I'm double checking on routines that others have used.
Rose

I cannot figure out how the download is to begin. I have clicked on Download....the bar fills with a colour and no file arrives on my hard drive.
You need to click on the gold box near the top right of the screen that says 'Upload file.' You will be prompted to create a "free account."
OHho...factory built in tilt....is that so?....I have wondered about that because its just TOO consistent and I have lined up with an object on occassion. Good info to include the tilt into the preset.
Shoot a picture of a window frame that nearly fills the viewfinder and make sure it is perfectly lined up on all four sides. Using a tripod helps. If you see a tilt, then you have the factory assembly defect of a "tilted" viewfinder image. Don't be surprised if it is also a little off-center! My 300D viewfinder is tilted clockwise and to the right slightly. Canon repair may be able to adjust it, but since it was so slight I never bothered.
AND specifics according to the camera serial number... I haven't had to deal with that to date but I have read about it,so its good that the code refers to the camera serial number rather than having to make specific settings.
Please read my correction note – There is no need to do this unless you own two of the same camera model and need to set the defaults differently for each.
I've just used the Jao, Nikon profile on a few Lake Huron sunset shots and a slight correction was made but I still had a tilt ....the lake was running downhill to the north <grin>
You are confusing "rectilinear distortion" such as "barrel" and "pin cushion" distortion with "perspective distortion!" ALL super wide-angle lenses can exhibit significant perspective distortion in different shooting situations, which can be very useful for "creative effects." Vertical perspective distortion is created when the camera is tilted up or down, and Horizontal perspective distortion is created when the camera pointed left or right of a central object. Go into Lightroom Develop module>Lens Correction>'Manual' and move the 'Vertical' and 'Horizontal' adjustments. This applies digital image processing to "correct" your picture, similar to what an expensive tilt-shift lens does on-the-camera
Even when you correct your picture elements for "parallel" vertical and horizontal lines, a super wide-angle lens may still exhibit what appears to be a "distorted perspective." That's both the virtue and deficit of shooting with short focal length lenses – It's up to you to properly apply this creatively to your subjects….but that’s a whole other subject! There are some good tips here by Ken Rockwell:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/how-to-use-ultra-wide-lenses.htm

Cyber Duck killed my Canon DPP Lens Data Downloads?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for