RAW is processed, JPG is not

[RicardoUK]

The trouble is that you have been saying "P4P have problems in RAW" and don't have problems in RAW!! You are looking a problem when it's not there.

I understand all of you point of view. Maybe you can't listen and learn because it's hard to recognize for you.

1) RAW is not processed.
2) RAW is what the sensor sees. RAW it's like a negative in analog photography.
3) JPG is processed into P4P based on your profiles (color profile, picture profile, contrast, sharpening, saturation, WB, etc).
4) And most important: Histogram live feed is based on what you see in the screen, WITH the profiles applied live.
5) If you don't like what you see on the DNG straight to P4P, buy a Inspire 2 with X5. Don't waste your time waiting for a firmware that solves a problem, because WE DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM HERE!!!!!!!!!

If you shoot stills, attach to a NONE and 0-0-0 for a better histogram live feed, and when you have the RAW file, reveal as your taste. If you shoot video, it's another story because P4P don't have RAW data in video.

Terrible advise. If you don´t have a problem I am a very happy for you. The DNG is not coming out flat and without contrast as I take them. The JPG is. If you think we don´t understand. OK, we don´t understand. Enjoy your perfect flawless P4P hehehe

 

[Doctorcobani]

Terrible advise. If you don´t have a problem I am a very happy for you. The DNG is not coming out flat and without contrast as I take them. The JPG is. If you think we don´t understand. OK, we don´t understand. Enjoy your perfect flawless P4P hehehe

1) The DNG does not have to be flat.
2) Even my Canon 6D Full Frame doesn't give me flat RAW.
3) If you don't see "so flat" your RAW, that's because the program APPLY PICTURE PROFILES AND CORRECTIONS BEFORE SHOW YOU THE PICTURE.
3) In the RAW YOU HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT THE SENSOR COULD TAKE!!!!! Nothing more, nothing less.
4) If you have a flat JPG, that's because you choose the wrong picture profiles and color profiles and settings in contrast, saturation and sharpness.

Think... if the program doesn't apply baseline profiles to a RAW image, how can show to you the picture? Zeros and one's??? THE RAW IT'S THE WHOLE DATA RECOPILED BY THE SENSOR AND THE INTERPRETATION OF THESE IT'S BASED IN PICTURE AND BASELINE PROFILES FROM THE SOFTWARE VIEWER!!!!!

It's not so hard to learn. But I see that you can't understand. It's a shame because this forum it's made for learn and help us, not for fight one each other.

 

[RicardoUK]

1) The DNG does not have to be flat.
2) Even my Canon 6D Full Frame doesn't give me flat RAW.
3) If you don't see "so flat" your RAW, that's because the program APPLY PICTURE PROFILES AND CORRECTIONS BEFORE SHOW YOU THE PICTURE.
3) In the RAW YOU HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION THAT THE SENSOR COULD TAKE!!!!! Nothing more, nothing less.
4) If you have a flat JPG, that's because you choose the wrong picture profiles and color profiles and settings in contrast, saturation and sharpness.

It's not so hard to learn. But I see that you can't understand. It's a shame because this forum it's made for learn and help us, not for fight one each other.

1) The RAW file shouldn´t come out with process aplied to it. You say in this case it doesn´t a proces applied to it. but it does!!!
2) I use Canon 5D Mark III and it does give me a flat image. Also the G11 also some other cameras I have.
3) Its pointless discussing with the people that says the information is there. I know information is there!!!!!!!!! It´s the starting point what it is off. If for some reason I would like to underexpose the image let say 2 steps just because I like it darker, I could slide the exposure down but it will let me slide it down just a little bit since it´s already crushing the blacks. I know you think that it only looks that way and once you apply something on post you will be fine, and that hasn´t been the point hear. Read everything!
4) I don´t give a F*** about JPG´s I never shoot with JPG, I am just stating that the JPG looks like the DNG should look like and DNG looks like the JPG should look like. Regardless of what you can do to it in post!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then again, if you are so happy with your P4P results and your DNG´s etc, what the hell are you doing in this post. Don´t understand. Let us people who doesn´t know anything about photography try to fin a "magical" solution for a "perfect amazing flawless" DNG file okay?

Good luck

 

[skyeboysteve]

EVERY RAW file is processed in some manner by whatever software you're using to view it.
What you and the OP are claiming is that this is the fault of the P4P--(prepossessing the images in destructive ways), while others are saying not necessarily--that your editor is interpreting meta data. Either wait for Photoshop to get a profile from DJI for the P4P, or disable the metadata [so you really get a mess--unless you know how to reconfigure the matrix], or find another editor that interprets your RAW files in a "flatter" way.

Yes, we understand your sliders might not have the latitude (of adjustments) you want--but that doesn't mean the P4P is baking in a lossy process. As the saying goes, "It takes TWO to tango": in this case the camera that takes the picture and the editor to interpret it. Those on my side of the aisle are simply saying your issues are not necessarily the P4P's camera's fault, and wait for DJI and Adobe to get synced.

 

[Doctorcobani]

1) The RAW file shouldn´t come out with process aplied to it. You say in this case it doesn´t a proces applied to it. but it does!!!
2) I use Canon 5D Mark III and it does give me a flat image. Also the G11 also some other cameras I have.
3) Its pointless discussing with the people that says the information is there. I know information is there!!!!!!!!! It´s the starting point what it is off. If for some reason I would like to underexpose the image let say 2 steps just because I like it darker, I could slide the exposure down but it will let me slide it down just a little bit since it´s already crushing the blacks. I know you think that it only looks that way and once you apply something on post you will be fine, and that hasn´t been the point hear. Read everything!
4) I don´t give a F*** about JPG´s I never shoot with JPG, I am just stating that the JPG looks like the DNG should look like and DNG looks like the JPG should look like. Regardless of what you can do to it in post!!!!!!!!!!!!

Then again, if you are so happy with your P4P results and your DNG´s etc, what the hell are you doing in this post. Don´t understand. Let us people who doesn´t know anything about photography try to fin a "magical" solution for a "perfect amazing flawless" DNG file okay?

Good luck

1) It's not a process applied into P4P. IT'S WHAT THE RAW VIEWER INTEPRET BASED ON PICTURE PROFILES.
2) That's because Lightroom (or DPP or Phase One or whatever in your case) has picture profiles and color curves that the software apply for your RAWs when you see they. These profiles has been made FOR YOUR CAMERA. At the time, I don't know when Adobe go to provide users with a profile made for P4P camera.
Try to load a RAW from your Canon 5D Mark III in a software of the year 2008 for example, when these software don't have the picture profile from your camera, and see...
3) Lightroom? Change the Adobe profile or change the software interpreter.
4) It's not in POST. JPG looks flat because YOU HAVE CONFIGURED YOUR P4P FOR THIS.

I tried to help, nothing else. But I see... you are so expert that you can't learn from others.
I hope that any user have learned something from this. I'm done with you here because it's like talk with a wall. Good luck for you so.

 

[carr1976]

summary of this thread:

1. some of us think the RAW file is punchy and dark, some dont
2. we disagree on what the starting point (slider value 0)should be when using LR
3. a lens profile or firmware update may help those of us who think the RAW file is over done
4. some people here are pros and some are not
5. some people here want to start with a flatter image to adjust it in LR/ACR
6. I have a 6D and some of you lucky bastards have 1Ds and 5ds...you probably also have a 16-35L, 28-300L, and a 70-200L...now i really hate you.
7. I love my P4P
8. use AEB to capture some more exposure values and combine in post (best solution for me since I think the images in RAW are punchy)
9. some people are rude and disagree; sometimes that is good for a discussion
10. Wish I could afford a inspire 2 pro
11. I have learned a lot from this post and forum in general.

 

[RicardoUK]

EVERY RAW file is processed in some manner by whatever software you're using to view it.
What you and the OP are claiming is that this is the fault of the P4P--(prepossessing the images in destructive ways), while others are saying not necessarily--that your editor is interpreting meta data. Either wait for Photoshop to get a profile from DJI for the P4P, or disable the metadata [so you really get a mess--unless you know how to reconfigure the matrix], or find another editor that interprets your RAW files in a "flatter" way.

Yes, we understand your sliders might not have the latitude (of adjustments) you want--but that doesn't mean the P4P is baking in a lossy process. As the saying goes, "It takes TWO to tango": in this case the camera that takes the picture and the editor to interpret it. Those on my side of the aisle are simply saying your issues are not necessarily the P4P's camera's fault, and wait for DJI and Adobe to get synced.

I have try it with 3 different photo editors and they have the same result. Maybe any photo editor can interpret them correctly. And what is impressive is it to hard to think that a few P4P comes with this bug or this problem? I love DJI but they have had bugs in the past. Even the reach of my gimbal was off and the camera kept adjusting itself when powered on. Now it is solved. So it could be a problem of DJI. Again weather or not a lot of information is there, it should be pushed that way.

 

[RicardoUK]

1) It's not a process applied into P4P. IT'S WHAT THE RAW VIEWER INTEPRET BASED ON PICTURE PROFILES.
2) That's because Lightroom (or DPP or Phase One or whatever in your case) has picture profiles and color curves that the software apply for your RAWs when you see they. These profiles has been made FOR YOUR CAMERA. At the time, I don't know when Adobe go to provide users with a profile made for P4P camera.
Try to load a RAW from your Canon 5D Mark III in a software of the year 2008 for example, when these software don't have the picture profile from your camera, and see...
3) Lightroom? Change the Adobe profile or change the software interpreter.
4) It's not in POST. JPG looks flat because YOU HAVE CONFIGURED YOUR P4P FOR THIS.

I tried to help, nothing else. But I see... you are so expert that you can't learn from others.
I hope that any user have learned something from this. I'm done with you here because it's like talk with a wall. Good luck for you so.

Wrong again. I love learnig from others. But others who know what they are talking about. Again. JPG I know why they look like that, and again if I am applying such flat parameters to the shot, DNG should not look processed even though I can fix it after.

thanks anyways.

 

[Doctorcobani]

Wrong again. I love learnig from others. But others who know what they are talking about. Again. JPG I know why they look like that, and again if I am applying such flat parameters to the shot, DNG should not look processed even though I can fix it after.

thanks anyways.

You see a DNG "pre-tunned" because the software interpret as a "generic DNG". YOU DON'T HAVE the correct profile made for the specific P4P camera.

Adobe will release soon... I hope...

Enviado desde mi Nexus 6P mediante Tapatalk

 

[RicardoUK]

summary of this thread:

1. some of us think the RAW file is punchy and dark, some dont
2. we disagree on what the starting point (slider value 0)should be when using LR
3. a lens profile or firmware update may help those of us who think the RAW file is over done
4. some people here are pros and some are not
5. some people here want to start with a flatter image to adjust it in LR/ACR
6. I have a 6D and some of you lucky bastards have 1Ds and 5ds...you probably also have a 16-35L, 28-300L, and a 70-200L...now i really hate you.
7. I love my P4P
8. use AEB to capture some more exposure values and combine in post (best solution for me since I think the images in RAW are punchy)
9. some people are rude and disagree; sometimes that is good for a discussion
10. Wish I could afford a inspire 2 pro
11. I have learned a lot from this post and forum in general.

1.
2. Yes but make sense if in the shot is well exposed and flat, the 0 value should look like I shot it, and then have all that info to play around in post.
3 I´ve been talking to DJI and ask exactly about a file or a firmware update or something. I hope I can get a response.
5.- If I took it flat yes I´d like to strat with that flat image. Make sense, no?
6.- hehehe
7.- I don´t just yet.
8.- There are ways around this, but again. It shouldn´t. It´s not a matter if I can end up with a good image out of P4P, it is a great drone and a pretty good camera to be flying around. But it´s just not correct to see a DNG contrasted and saturated and dark when I didn´t take it that way.
9.- I have to disagree. hehehe you can disagree with someone and can be nice. If they don´t get it, they don´t get it, but there´s no reason to be rude or aggressive.
10. me too
11. regardless of what some one mentioned. I love learning and I´m very open to it, but when for me something is this obvious I can´t.

 

[RicardoUK]

You see a DNG "pre-tunned" because the software interpret as a "generic DNG". YOU DON'T HAVE the correct profile made for the specific P4P camera.

Adobe will release soon... I hope...

Enviado desde mi Nexus 6P mediante Tapatalk

I hope you are right. However I did try it with 3 different software and is the same result. I really hope the issue is on the software and not on the camera. Which there´s a 50 -50 chance. I don´t know why defend so much dji when they have got ir wring in the past.
But as you say, let´s hope this one day is history.

 

[carr1976]

1.
2. Yes but make sense if in the shot is well exposed and flat, the 0 value should look like I shot it, and then have all that info to play around in post.
3 I´ve been talking to DJI and ask exactly about a file or a firmware update or something. I hope I can get a response.
5.- If I took it flat yes I´d like to strat with that flat image. Make sense, no?
6.- hehehe
7.- I don´t just yet.
8.- There are ways around this, but again. It shouldn´t. It´s not a matter if I can end up with a good image out of P4P, it is a great drone and a pretty good camera to be flying around. But it´s just not correct to see a DNG contrasted and saturated and dark when I didn´t take it that way.
9.- I have to disagree. hehehe you can disagree with someone and can be nice. If they don´t get it, they don´t get it, but there´s no reason to be rude or aggressive.
10. me too
11. regardless of what some one mentioned. I love learning and I´m very open to it, but when for me something is this obvious I can´t.

RicardoUK...just to clarify...I agree with you and the OP on this topic; some contributors think we are crazy, and that's okay. regardless I have learned a lot. thank you all.

 

[RicardoUK]

RicardoUK...just to clarify...I agree with you and the OP on this topic; some contributors think we are crazy, and that's okay. regardless I have learned a lot. thank you all.

Thank you.
I mean, I hope it´s a problem of the software I am opening the DNG on, but if 3 images shows the same, and a photo taken exactelly the same on a Phantom 4 looks so different than on the P4P, then something may be off with the DNG from the camera. Hope a firmware updates that.

 

[Doctorcobani]

I hope you are right. However I did try it with 3 different software and is the same result. I really hope the issue is on the software and not on the camera. Which there´s a 50 -50 chance. I don´t know why defend so much dji when they have got ir wring in the past.
But as you say, let´s hope this one day is history.

I don't defend DJI, I will say THE TRUTH. If you are photographer, you know about the problem of the Canon 5D Mark IV when was released. Lightroom didn't have the correct profile, and at these time, when you open a RAW from Mark IV, you saw weird colors, bad toning, extreme contrast and bad interpreting. When Adobe made the correct profile, all these problems has fixed.

It's not a firmware problem, it's the lack of a profile made for P4P camera in the interpreter. This is what I trying to say, but english it's not my language and I do what I can with my basic english.

Anyway, if in a picture you need to go with sliders at -100 or 100 (in any setting), it's a photo with a bad exposure for sure.

 

[RicardoUK]

I don't defend DJI, I will say THE TRUTH. If you are photographer, you know about the problem of the Canon 5D Mark IV when was released. Lightroom didn't have the correct profile, and at these time, when you open a RAW from Mark IV, you saw weird colors, bad toning, extreme contrast and bad interpreting. When Adobe made the correct profile, all these problems has fixed.

It's not a firmware problem, it's the lack of a profile made for P4P camera in the interpreter. This is what I trying to say, but english it's not my language and I do what I can with my basic english.

I did understand you. I hope you are right. I think you may not be right when I open the file in 3 different software and is the same result. Maybe any of them has been updated. I will understand Adobe hasn't catch up, but other programs as well?

Also there's a small possibility. Maybe 5% if you want that it is in fact a problem in some cameras.

Anyways.
I really hope you are right.

 

[Doctorcobani]

I did understand you. I hope you are right. I think you may not be right when I open the file in 3 different software and is the same result. Maybe any of them has been updated. I will understand Adobe hasn't catch up, but other programs as well?

Also there's a small possibility. Maybe 5% if you want that it is in fact a problem in some cameras.

Anyways.
I really hope you are right.

Adobe is the number one in these things. Lightroom and Photoshop (based in ACR) are the most used picture interpreters by far, and to make a profile, Adobe will need to work with DJI together. If Adobe don't have the precise profile, for sure that the other software don't have too.

 

[ianwood]

summary of this thread:

1. some of us think the RAW file is punchy and dark, some dont
2. we disagree on what the starting point (slider value 0)should be when using LR
3. a lens profile or firmware update may help those of us who think the RAW file is over done
4. some people here are pros and some are not
5. some people here want to start with a flatter image to adjust it in LR/ACR
6. I have a 6D and some of you lucky bastards have 1Ds and 5ds...you probably also have a 16-35L, 28-300L, and a 70-200L...now i really hate you.
7. I love my P4P
8. use AEB to capture some more exposure values and combine in post (best solution for me since I think the images in RAW are punchy)
9. some people are rude and disagree; sometimes that is good for a discussion
10. Wish I could afford a inspire 2 pro
11. I have learned a lot from this post and forum in general.

12. The original data is all there even if the metadata is preset to a darker or over-saturated setting.

I hope you are right. However I did try it with 3 different software and is the same result. I really hope the issue is on the software and not on the camera. Which there´s a 50 -50 chance. I don´t know why defend so much dji when they have got ir wring in the past.
But as you say, let´s hope this one day is history.

Did you try to restore the exposure to your liking with the settings in your DNG editor? You should find all the exposure is there as you exposed it in camera. I agree the preferred path would be settings that come out flat but as long as all the original data is preserved, that shouldn't be a deal breaker.

 

[RicardoUK]

Adobe is the number one in these things. Lightroom and Photoshop (based in ACR) are the most used picture interpreters by far, and to make a profile, Adobe will need to work with DJI together. If Adobe don't have the precise profile, for sure that the other software don't have too.

I agree. And I doubt Adobe hasn't catch up. That's why my best is on the fact that there could be a few bad drones out there. Well... A defective camera I mean.

12. The original data is all there even if the metadata is preset to a darker or over-saturated setting.



Did you try to restore the exposure to your liking with the settings in your DNG editor? You should find all the exposure is there as you exposed it in camera. I agree the preferred path would be settings that come out flat but as long as all the original data is preserved, that shouldn't be a deal breaker.

This is where you and I disagree. There are some information preserved on the file? Yes. But not all. Not as it supposed to be. Otherwise I wouldn't be crushing the blacks when underexposing one or two steps. Even the photo was taken well and the histogram showed perfect exposure.

The starting point of the information on dng is off. Is not all there. I know you won't agree. You think it's only the eyes are seeing but is there hehehe. If the dng comes out contrasted it is contrasted. And I can lower the contrast I know. But the starting point should be how the photo was taken.

Please don't need to tell me further how the info is there. Again, some info is there. If I order a sandwich with ham and cheese. I do want to see the ham and cheese hehehe I don't want the cook telling me is there. You just don't see it.

 

[inkytog]

Can anyone inspect the xml data of the DNG file?

I think the preset is coded into that and it more than likely a basic - generic set of instructions that all raw software will read. So it opens up similar on various editors.

 

[Doctorcobani]

This is where you and I disagree. There are some information preserved on the file? Yes. But not all. Not as it supposed to be. Otherwise I wouldn't be crushing the blacks when underexposing one or two steps. Even the photo was taken well and the histogram showed perfect exposure.

Be careful, if you see the "live histogram" in DJI GO4, these histogram is based in the picture that show the software WITH the profiles applied like a JPG (color profile, contrast, saturation, sharpness, WB, etc)

If you take with D-LOG a picture "perfect exposed" in the live histogram, these histogram is based in the processed JPG, is not the real RAW histogram!