It must not be as simple as this, but for Photoshop CS, you need ACR 2.4, the older version, which was still available on the Adobe site the last time I checked.
ACR 3.1, the current version, works only with PS CS2. I have PS CS and when I finally realized I had to install ACR 2.4, it works fine in opening RAW files from my D70.
...just checked: ACR 2.4 is still available, but it only supports the 300D.:cry
Supposedly, the Digital Photo Pro software that ships with the XT is actually pretty decent. However, I can't get it to install and run correctly on MacOS Tiger. PF said it, my OS is too new for my new camera, but my version of PS is too old. Just silly!
That being said, the XT is a super neat little camera. I'm liking it.
I installed DPP on my G5 Mac without incident. Not sure why you are having difficulties with it.
But go ahead and upgrade to PS CS2, it is definitely a better image editor and the newer featurea are worth the upgrade and then the Raw Converter will work with your 350XT files.
So, I went to the Adobe.com site and looked at some of the DNG downloads available. Left me more confused about the DNG converter program. The latest version, 3.1 is listed for CS2. Then there versions 2.3 & 2.4 available. It seems to imply these are stand alone programs, so are the versions of DNG independent of the Photoshop program version?
If I am currently using either Photoshop CS or Elements 3, which DNG program should I download to convert Rebel XT RAW files to DNG?
Hoping I'm asking the questions correctly.
Available light is any damn light that's available -W. Eugene Smith
So, I went to the Adobe.com site and looked at some of the DNG downloads available. Left me more confused about the DNG converter program. The latest version, 3.1 is listed for CS2. Then there versions 2.3 & 2.4 available. It seems to imply these are stand alone programs, so are the versions of DNG independent of the Photoshop program version?
If I am currently using either Photoshop CS or Elements 3, which DNG program should I download to convert Rebel XT RAW files to DNG?
Hoping I'm asking the questions correctly.
It's independent, but they come bundled with the RAW Plugin. I don't know if you're on a PC, but on MacOS, you get a .dmg file (just a compressed archive, probably have a .zip for pc). Inside are 2 files (on PC, you'll probably have some stupid system files to make them work, thats your problem ), the DNG converter and the RAW plugin. The DNG converter is standalone, so you want the newest one, 3.1. Just toss the 3.1 plugin file unless you have CS2.
I installed DPP on my G5 Mac without incident. Not sure why you are having difficulties with it.
But go ahead and upgrade to PS CS2, it is definitely a better image editor and the newer featurea are worth the upgrade and then the Raw Converter will work with your 350XT files.
I don't either.
The CD, which looks like new from the box and Patch claims worked fine on his G5, just won't run to completion, always fails halfway through whether I do the custom or express install. I've gone to Canon and downloaded the installer files (and I said it before, I'm always weary of any MacOS software that requires an installer!), but they are all upgrades. I need at least some Canon utility installed, so I'm currently looking for an older version of the Image Browser that will hopefully work.
It's independent, but they come bundled with the RAW Plugin. I don't know if you're on a PC, but on MacOS, you get a .dmg file (just a compressed archive, probably have a .zip for pc). Inside are 2 files (on PC, you'll probably have some stupid system files to make them work, thats your problem ), the DNG converter and the RAW plugin. The DNG converter is standalone, so you want the newest one, 3.1. Just toss the 3.1 plugin file unless you have CS2.
Get it?
Got it. Thanks
.....and, yes, I'm on a PC
Available light is any damn light that's available -W. Eugene Smith
The CD, which looks like new from the box and Patch claims worked fine on his G5, just won't run to completion, always fails halfway through whether I do the custom or express install. I've gone to Canon and downloaded the installer files (and I said it before, I'm always weary of any MacOS software that requires an installer!), but they are all upgrades. I need at least some Canon utility installed, so I'm currently looking for an older version of the Image Browser that will hopefully work.
I doubt you need an *older* version of Canon software... I suspect the problem is that their software (or the installer at least) doesn't play well with Tiger. I have the Canon software on my Mac but I haven't used much of it since I upgraded to Tiger. I know the pano maker works. I'll have a look at it in the next couple of days and see if I can figure anything out.
In the mean time, you could sent the XT to me and I'll change the EXIF data
I doubt you need an *older* version of Canon software... I suspect the problem is that their software (or the installer at least) doesn't play well with Tiger. I have the Canon software on my Mac but I haven't used much of it since I upgraded to Tiger. I know the pano maker works. I'll have a look at it in the next couple of days and see if I can figure anything out.
In the mean time, you could sent the XT to me and I'll change the EXIF data
You are too good to me!!! I'll get it right out express mail to you!
I installed those disks on my PB and it obviously synced with the camera since I am in the EXIF. The new G5 and PB now have the latest Canon software which connects to my 1DmkII and could even remote fire the XT, but I could not get it to sync so I could change the settings, perhaps with the new round of cameras a new version of the software will come out that will work.
I installed those disks on my PB and it obviously synced with the camera since I am in the EXIF. The new G5 and PB now have the latest Canon software which connects to my 1DmkII and could even remote fire the XT, but I could not get it to sync so I could change the settings, perhaps with the new round of cameras a new version of the software will come out that will work.
So you're saying I'm stuck with your name on my RAW files for the indefinite future.
Update: spent most of last night and this morning messing with this, and I finally got it. The camera now belongs to me!
I had to manually install only the image browser. On the CD, there is a general installer, but there are folders for all the components and an installer for each individual one. Using the individual one corrected it. Then I could run the IB updater I downloaded from Canon. Strangely enough, I left the CD in when I ran this updater, and it went ahead an installed other components it needed off the CD (like the CameraWindow). Regardless, it works now. I'll probably never use it again, but I got into the settings and put my own name in.
Now, I have more woes... I'm hoping its just the lens or lack of practice with the new camera, but I'm unhappy with the images. Huge amounts of purple fringing. Never had it this bad with the 10D and my previous lenses. Patch mentioned something about this, but I don't recall exactly. Is this a common observation of the XT or this 17-85 IS lens?
Going through a bunch of photos now, will post later so you can see.
Update: spent most of last night and this morning messing with this, and I finally got it. The camera now belongs to me!
I had to manually install only the image browser. On the CD, there is a general installer, but there are folders for all the components and an installer for each individual one. Using the individual one corrected it. Then I could run the IB updater I downloaded from Canon. Strangely enough, I left the CD in when I ran this updater, and it went ahead an installed other components it needed off the CD (like the CameraWindow). Regardless, it works now. I'll probably never use it again, but I got into the settings and put my own name in.
Now, I have more woes... I'm hoping its just the lens or lack of practice with the new camera, but I'm unhappy with the images. Huge amounts of purple fringing. Never had it this bad with the 10D and my previous lenses. Patch mentioned something about this, but I don't recall exactly. Is this a common observation of the XT or this 17-85 IS lens?
Going through a bunch of photos now, will post later so you can see.
I have the Rebel XT and I have not notice any of the purple fringing on the shots. I using the stock lens that came with the camera as well. Can you post a pic of what you are seeing?
If I get some time tonight, I'll do a test between the 17-85 set at 50mm and my thrifty-50 f/1.8
I'm going with Marlof, seems this lens has had some bad reviews concerning PF in the highlights during certain shooting situations. With my luck, I think I just got the worst possible lighting situation to really set it off.
If I get some time tonight, I'll do a test between the 17-85 set at 50mm and my thrifty-50 f/1.8
I'm going with Marlof, seems this lens has had some bad reviews concerning PF in the highlights during certain shooting situations. With my luck, I think I just got the worst possible lighting situation to really set it off.
Yabbut, thats not the point. I didn't have PF like this from other lenses, I'm making the observation that I don't think this is a great lens, not that the images are unacceptable.
Yabbut, thats not the point. I didn't have PF like this from other lenses, I'm making the observation that I don't think this is a great lens, not that the images are unacceptable.
Just wanted to check and see if you were trying that. I know it's a pain, and not something you want to worry about on EVERY shot. Too bad the lens ends up having that problem.
Here's another way to solve the problem (and spend more money!). They have written profiles for many cameras and lenses (yours included) that will automatically adjust for the camera, lens and focal length, correcting all distortion and chromatic abberation. Pretty cool. Check out the demo.
I'm going with Marlof, seems this lens has had some bad reviews concerning PF in the highlights during certain shooting situations. With my luck, I think I just got the worst possible lighting situation to really set it off.
I use the 17-85 on my XT and am very pleased with the image quality of the package. However, from 17-24mm, the lens definitely exhibits PF in high-contrast conditions. This is a well-documented shortcoming of the 17-85. To avoid it, I try shooting at lengths higher than 24mm when shooting bright skies with foreground trees. If I can't avoid it, I've been reasonably successful correcting out CA in Camera Raw, getting blue boundaries down to 1-2 pixels or less. A polarizer in these conditions also helps quite a bit--just 'cause it cuts the contrast I suppose.
It's a bummer, but I've learned to live with it as I think the lens is a great performer in all other conditions.
I use the 17-85 on my XT and am very pleased with the image quality of the package. However, from 17-24mm, the lens definitely exhibits PF in high-contrast conditions. This is a well-documented shortcoming of the 17-85. To avoid it, I try shooting at lengths higher than 24mm when shooting bright skies with foreground trees. If I can't avoid it, I've been reasonably successful correcting out CA in Camera Raw, getting blue boundaries down to 1-2 pixels or less. A polarizer in these conditions also helps quite a bit--just 'cause it cuts the contrast I suppose.
It's a bummer, but I've learned to live with it as I think the lens is a great performer in all other conditions.
Ben
You hit the nail on the head here. Thats the response I was hoping someone more experience with this lens would give me. Thanks!
My lighting this past weekend was exactly as you describe - a recipe for bad fringing when shooting wide.
Just wanted to check and see if you were trying that. I know it's a pain, and not something you want to worry about on EVERY shot. Too bad the lens ends up having that problem.
Here's another way to solve the problem (and spend more money!). They have written profiles for many cameras and lenses (yours included) that will automatically adjust for the camera, lens and focal length, correcting all distortion and chromatic abberation. Pretty cool. Check out the demo.
I was just re-reading the FM reviews of this lens, and had just found a link to DXO software before you posted this.
Comments
ACR 3.1, the current version, works only with PS CS2. I have PS CS and when I finally realized I had to install ACR 2.4, it works fine in opening RAW files from my D70.
...just checked: ACR 2.4 is still available, but it only supports the 300D.:cry
I installed DPP on my G5 Mac without incident. Not sure why you are having difficulties with it.
But go ahead and upgrade to PS CS2, it is definitely a better image editor and the newer featurea are worth the upgrade and then the Raw Converter will work with your 350XT files.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
If I am currently using either Photoshop CS or Elements 3, which DNG program should I download to convert Rebel XT RAW files to DNG?
Hoping I'm asking the questions correctly.
Get it?
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
The CD, which looks like new from the box and Patch claims worked fine on his G5, just won't run to completion, always fails halfway through whether I do the custom or express install. I've gone to Canon and downloaded the installer files (and I said it before, I'm always weary of any MacOS software that requires an installer!), but they are all upgrades. I need at least some Canon utility installed, so I'm currently looking for an older version of the Image Browser that will hopefully work.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
Got it. Thanks
.....and, yes, I'm on a PC
In the mean time, you could sent the XT to me and I'll change the EXIF data
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
I installed those disks on my PB and it obviously synced with the camera since I am in the EXIF. The new G5 and PB now have the latest Canon software which connects to my 1DmkII and could even remote fire the XT, but I could not get it to sync so I could change the settings, perhaps with the new round of cameras a new version of the software will come out that will work.
Great.
I want a refund
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
I had to manually install only the image browser. On the CD, there is a general installer, but there are folders for all the components and an installer for each individual one. Using the individual one corrected it. Then I could run the IB updater I downloaded from Canon. Strangely enough, I left the CD in when I ran this updater, and it went ahead an installed other components it needed off the CD (like the CameraWindow). Regardless, it works now. I'll probably never use it again, but I got into the settings and put my own name in.
Now, I have more woes... I'm hoping its just the lens or lack of practice with the new camera, but I'm unhappy with the images. Huge amounts of purple fringing. Never had it this bad with the 10D and my previous lenses. Patch mentioned something about this, but I don't recall exactly. Is this a common observation of the XT or this 17-85 IS lens?
Going through a bunch of photos now, will post later so you can see.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
I have the Rebel XT and I have not notice any of the purple fringing on the shots. I using the stock lens that came with the camera as well. Can you post a pic of what you are seeing?
www.capture-the-pixel.com
Smugmug site
Blog Portfolio
Facebook
I'm going with Marlof, seems this lens has had some bad reviews concerning PF in the highlights during certain shooting situations. With my luck, I think I just got the worst possible lighting situation to really set it off.
We'll see.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
Have you tried correcting it in PS?
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Look here for some samples that I worked on and corrected for the most part: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=17064
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
Just wanted to check and see if you were trying that. I know it's a pain, and not something you want to worry about on EVERY shot. Too bad the lens ends up having that problem.
Here's another way to solve the problem (and spend more money!). They have written profiles for many cameras and lenses (yours included) that will automatically adjust for the camera, lens and focal length, correcting all distortion and chromatic abberation. Pretty cool. Check out the demo.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
I use the 17-85 on my XT and am very pleased with the image quality of the package. However, from 17-24mm, the lens definitely exhibits PF in high-contrast conditions. This is a well-documented shortcoming of the 17-85. To avoid it, I try shooting at lengths higher than 24mm when shooting bright skies with foreground trees. If I can't avoid it, I've been reasonably successful correcting out CA in Camera Raw, getting blue boundaries down to 1-2 pixels or less. A polarizer in these conditions also helps quite a bit--just 'cause it cuts the contrast I suppose.
It's a bummer, but I've learned to live with it as I think the lens is a great performer in all other conditions.
Ben
www.ackersphotography.com
My lighting this past weekend was exactly as you describe - a recipe for bad fringing when shooting wide.
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]
moderator of: The Flea Market [ guidelines ]