RAW is processed, JPG is not

[RicardoUK]

Sorry. Im on Tapatalk and the numbering is different I think.

It was today. I posted a test of 3 shots. Straight from the card.
There was an osmo x3, x5 and a p4p shot of the same thing.

I will look fr them

 

[RicardoUK]

Sorry. Im on Tapatalk and the numbering is different I think.

It was today. I posted a test of 3 shots. Straight from the card.
There was an osmo x3, x5 and a p4p shot of the same thing.

I found them. What am I supposed to look in them?

 

[inkytog]

I found them. What am I supposed to look in them?

They are on we transfer. Open them and look at them and see if they have the same issues you've been having. Give me your opinion on them. Not the subject matter because it was out of my window but the idea is that they are all DJI cameras and all used in their drones. I was interested to see if those files exhibit the same issues you have.

 

[RicardoUK]

They are on we transfer. Open them and look at them and see if they have the same issues you've been having. Give me your opinion on them. Not the subject matter because it was out of my window but the idea is that they are all DJI cameras and all used in their drones. I was interested to see if those files exhibit the same issues you have.

Just saw them and they look great. I see the P4P flat and unsaturated. That´s why I am trying to achieve on mine without having to adjust in ACR or any other place.

 

[RicardoUK]

They are on we transfer. Open them and look at them and see if they have the same issues you've been having. Give me your opinion on them. Not the subject matter because it was out of my window but the idea is that they are all DJI cameras and all used in their drones. I was interested to see if those files exhibit the same issues you have.

And do you see how I see my RAW files under similar conditions, some deep shadows and some bright lights I think

we are getting somewhere here. .

 

[PhantomPhilip]

I decided to do an experiment this morning. I have the Osmo original (x3) and the Osmo Pro (X5) and also the P4P. The p4p is the only drone - the other cameras were on the handles but one assumes they would function in exactly the same way as if they were on the Inspire etc - so if we assume the software and the cameras are the same - this is what an Inspire would shoot.

I didn't shoot anything particularly exciting. I opened the window and shot. I focussed where possible on the furthest house.

I shot the same-ish shot with all devices. I exposed as to what I thought was right using the histogram and the EV guide. It wasn't 0 EV every time - but I think there's enough contrast in the shots to have a decent play.

ALL settings were RAW, 4:3, None in colour and 0,0,0 for the colour settings. WB was set at 5000k for all the shots.
I have uploaded them to WeTransfer straight from the card. Take a look.

https://we.tl/6MIiQlVBO0

Formulate your own opinions - with no comment from me.

I downloaded and opened the three DNG sample files in Photoshop CC 2017 ACR 9.8

The defaults when opened in ACR were: P4P file - temp 5300 tint +3; X3 file - temp 5100 tint + 1; X5 file - Temp 4500, tint +5. All other sliders at 0.

To improve the images to my eye, taste and monitor I did quick start adjustments in ACR as follows
P4P File- exposure -1, contrast -20, shadows, +30, saturation -20
X3 File- exposure -0.75, contrast 0, shadows, +70, saturation -25
X5 File- exposure -1, contrast -10, shadows, +50, saturation -25

I am no expert but the photos all look fine to me.

 

[inkytog]

And do you see how I see my RAW files under similar conditions, some deep shadows and some bright lights I think View attachment 74144 we are getting somewhere here. .

Ok. So tell me what you saw with my files?

 

[inkytog]

I downloaded and opened the three DNG sample files in Photoshop CC 2017 ACR 9.8

The defaults when opened in ACR were: P4P file - temp 5300 tint +3; X3 file - temp 5100 tint + 1; X5 file - Temp 4500, tint +5. All other sliders at 0.

To improve the images to my eye, taste and monitor I did quick start adjustments in ACR as follows
P4P File- exposure -1, contrast -20, shadows, +30, saturation -20
X3 File- exposure -0.75, contrast 0, shadows, +70, saturation -25
X5 File- exposure -1, contrast -10, shadows, +50, saturation -25

I am no expert but the photos all look fine to me.

The strange thing about that is that the temp in all was custom set at 5000. Interesting they are all reporting different.

 

[inkytog]

And do you see how I see my RAW files under similar conditions, some deep shadows and some bright lights I think View attachment 74144 we are getting somewhere here. .

To be honest. That file on screenshot looks about right. It's bright because the sun is on the building down the left. The shadow on the right is because there is shadow. I'd have exposed it perhaps 1/3 more and mask off the building the sun is on and knocked the highlights down on it. Mask off the red building on the right and up the exposure a touch and the shadows.

 

[RicardoUK]

To be honest. That file on screenshot looks about right. It's bright because the sun is on the building down the left. The shadow on the right is because there is shadow. I'd have exposed it perhaps 1/3 more and mask off the building the sun is on and knocked the highlights down on it. Mask off the red building on the right and up the exposure a touch and the shadows.

It doesn´t look right. We are back to square 1. The exposure was right and it came out dark, saturated and contrasted. The deep deep blue sky should not look like that and I didn´t see it like that when taken.

Sorry but I disagree. Thanks anyways.

 

[inkytog]

Just saw them and they look great. I see the P4P flat and unsaturated. That´s why I am trying to achieve on mine without having to adjust in ACR or any other place.

View attachment 74143

I don't think it looks flat and unsaturated at all - that's what I'm trying to figure. Perhaps you have just a different set of expectations? I think the raw file opened and not touched is passable with no editing.

 

[PhantomPhilip]

Just saw them and they look great. I see the P4P flat and unsaturated. That´s why I am trying to achieve on mine without having to adjust in ACR or any other place.

View attachment 74143

I see the P4P file overexposed as this example shows with the "red highlight" overexposure demonstrates. In particular to expose the brickwork correctly decrease highlights -70 and then saturation needs -20
obviously everyone to their own personal taste but everything is easily adjustable

 

[RicardoUK]

I don't think it looks flat and unsaturated at all - that's what I'm trying to figure. Perhaps you have just a different set of expectations? I think the raw file opened and not touched is passable with no editing.

This is a matter of taste and opinion. To me is unacceptable to have a RAW file that saturated etc. No matter what I can do with it in post. Is like buying a Ferrari and they say it can go as fast as 200mph and then you find out that you have to tune the motor to do so, otherwise will go at 150mph. Maybe is a bad analogy but you get my point.

 

[RicardoUK]

I see the P4P file overexposed as this example shows with the "red highlight" overexposure demonstrates. In particular to expose the brickwork correctly decrease highlights -70 and then saturation needs -20
obviously everyone to their own personal taste but everything is easily adjustable

If you mean to adjust it in post then I think you are misunderstanding the issue. It´s not a matter if I can correct that problem in post. Is that it shouldn´t have that problem to begin with.

 

[PhantomPhilip]

If you mean to adjust it in post then I think you are misunderstanding the issue. It´s not a matter if I can correct that problem in post. Is that it shouldn´t have that problem to begin with.

If you think this image is flat and unsaturated and does not need correcting in post then I have misunderstood you. Overexposed areas are highlighted in red from your screenshot from your PC!!

RicardoUK said "Just saw them and they look great. I see the P4P flat and unsaturated. That´s why I am trying to achieve on mine without having to adjust in ACR or any other place."

 

[RicardoUK]

If you think this image is flat and unsaturated and does not need correcting in post then I have misunderstood you. Overexposed areas are highlighted in red from your screenshot from your PC!!

RicardoUK said "Just saw them and they look great. I see the P4P flat and unsaturated. That´s why I am trying to achieve on mine without having to adjust in ACR or any other place."


View attachment 74159

You truly are misunderstanding me. I don´t pretend a RAW file does not need adjusting in post. ON THE CONTRARY, they do need more retouching than JPG. That´s my point. They HAVE to come out flatter in order to have more latitude to do post. When I say yours look great I mean they don´t look saturated or contrasted or underexposed.

 

[nickj]

Hi all (agent55 @ DJi forum), I've had this issue as well: the bizarre occurrence of my DNG files opening up in PS or LR and appearing really contrasty and underexposed from what I shot. Meanwhile the jpg maintains the flat settings I designated through the app. I am not a pro photographer, however I do make a living as a cinematographer and thought the P4P seemed a nice way to get into aerial as a hobby, perhaps more. Based on video tests I've done with my P4P, it's fairly intuitive to expose images nicely using a combination of the histogram, zebras and my eye with this drone camera. Which is why these crushed and somewhat darkened DNGs are so odd. Bottom line is this: Video has turned out how I've exposed it, jpeg's have turned out how I've exposed them, yet DNG files have not turned out how I shot them.

Question: has anyone that feels they're not experiencing this provided files to download and test? Cheers

 

[RicardoUK]

Hi all (agent55 @ DJi forum), I've had this issue as well: the bizarre occurrence of my DNG files opening up in PS or LR and appearing really contrasty and underexposed from what I shot. Meanwhile the jpg maintains the flat settings I designated through the app. I am not a pro photographer, however I do make a living as a cinematographer and thought the P4P seemed a nice way to get into aerial as a hobby, perhaps more. Based on video tests I've done with my P4P, it's fairly intuitive to expose images nicely using a combination of the histogram, zebras and my eye with this drone camera. Which is why these crushed and somewhat darkened DNGs are so odd. Bottom line is this: Video has turned out how I've exposed it, jpeg's have turned out how I've exposed them, yet DNG files have not turned out how I shot them.

Question: has anyone that feels they're not experiencing this provided files to download and test? Cheers

One more person with this issue! This means gr8pics and I are not really crazy!

Agreed with you Nickj. Video it´s as expected, DNG is not at all. At least not in your drone, gr8pics and mine.

But you will find so many people insisting that they can be fixed in post, or that, that contrasted and saturated DNG are normal.

 

[nickj]

One more person with this issue! This means gr8pics and I are not really crazy!

Agreed with you Nickj. Video it´s as expected, DNG is not at all. At least not in your drone, gr8pics and mine.

But you will find so many people insisting that they can be fixed in post, or that, that contrasted and saturated DNG are normal.

Oh I spent about an hour reading this thread last night to catch up haha :/

One thing I've noticed messing with PS trying to remove whatever god awful "look" is being applied to these DNG's, is under the Camera Calibration>Camera Profile menu in ACR 9.8. The only choice is "Embedded" with these DNG files from my P4P. However, I opened up a few raw images from my Canon 6d and noticed you can chose between "Adobe Standard" as well as all the 6d Picture Styles as a starting point. I'm by no means a PS expert AT ALL, but could this fixed "Embedded" setting be the culprit?

 

[RicardoUK]

Oh I spent about an hour reading this thread last night to catch up haha :/

One thing I've noticed messing with PS trying to remove whatever god awful "look" is being applied to these DNG's, is under the Camera Calibration>Camera Profile menu in ACR 9.8. The only choice is "Embedded" with these DNG files from my P4P. However, I opened up a few raw images from my Canon 6d and noticed you can chose between "Adobe Standard" as well as all the 6d Picture Styles as a starting point. I'm by no means a PS expert AT ALL, but could this fixed "Embedded" setting be the culprit?

That´s a good observation. I didn´t because when I work with my RAW files from DSLR´s I use lightroom just to make my selection and that´s it. And from there straight to Photoshop. I never use ACR although I know how to use it. But I did check it as you did and makes a lot of sense I think. That could maybe be causing the problem. Now the thing would be how to be able to change that hehe