7D files and ACR rendering

Ric Grupe

I've been going to mention this for some time now.

Quite often (not always) after viewing a file on the camera LCD and on the PC via Breezebrowser the images are as they should be.

Then opening them in ACR renders them about a full stop underexposed. No big deal usually...just raise the exposure slider.

Anyone else experience this? Explanation?:dunno

Richard

What are your ACR default settings for exposure and brightness?

Ric Grupe

Richard wrote: »

What are your ACR default settings for exposure and brightness?

Not positive what you mean. AFAIK the defaults are not changeable.

On the basic panel, exposure is 0, brightness 50, contrast 25, and black point 5.

I see nowhere in preferences to change default settings. Just to select Auto or default in the basic panel.

Richard

Those are the basic Adobe defaults, and for my 50D, they seem to be a pretty reasonable starting point. But you can change them if you like at any time by clicking on the little icon at the right of the title bar on the palette, then clicking Save New Camera Raw Defaults. If you are always boosting exposure by one stop, this will save you a tiny bit of time, but it doesn't answer the question of why that should be necessary. The only reason I brought it up was to rule out the possibility that your default had somehow gotten screwed up.

Ric Grupe

Richard wrote: »

Those are the basic Adobe defaults, and for my 50D, they seem to be a pretty reasonable starting point. But you can change them if you like at any time by clicking on the little icon at the right of the title bar on the palette, then clicking Save New Camera Raw Defaults. If you are always boosting exposure by one stop, this will save you a tiny bit of time, but it doesn't answer the question of why that should be necessary. The only reason I brought it up was to rule out the possibility that your default had somehow gotten screwed up.

I see...something I had not noticed.

But as you said, it does not explain why some of my images are rendered incorrectly.

pathfinder

Ric, are you certain our exposures are indeed accurate? I think the settings you mention for ACR are the standard defaults, I use the same ones too.

How did you determine exposure? I would suggest you shoot some frames out of doors, using Sunny 16 to set your exposure, and see if they are needing the extra exposure slider move you mention.

I do not believe you can accurately judge accuracy of your exposure by looking at the jpg displayed by the LCD on your camera. Even the histogram on your camera can lead you to underexposure, as it is based on the jpg displayed on the LCD, not on the overhead in the RAW file.

I notice that I can expose further to the right than I anticipate, even when chimping my histogram as an RGB display on my camera. I have noticed this more with LR3 and ACR 6+ also. Maybe it is a way to encourage us to expose further to the right to capture all the details that the sensor can capture?

Ric Grupe

pathfinder wrote: »

Ric, are you certain our exposures are indeed accurate? I think the settings you mention for ACR are the standard defaults, I use the same ones too.

How did you determine exposure? I would suggest you shoot some frames out of doors, using Sunny 16 to set your exposure, and see if they are needing the extra exposure slider move you mention.

I do not believe you can accurately judge accuracy of your exposure by looking at the jpg displayed by the LCD on your camera. Even the histogram on your camera can lead you to underexposure, as it is based on the jpg displayed on the LCD, not on the overhead in the RAW file.

I notice that I can expose further to the right than I anticipate, even when chimping my histogram as an RGB display on my camera. I have noticed this more with LR3 and ACR 6+ also. Maybe it is a way to encourage us to expose further to the right to capture all the details that the sensor can capture?

I determine exposure by the histogram. I need to check that the histogram in ACR and the one on the camera are agreeing. Something I have not done as a test. I was just wondering if this was something others had noticed so I don't have to do any detective work.

Much easier to shrug my shoulders and move the slider!

It's not really a problem unless I underexpose and then get set back another stop by the software.

The thing is...Breezebrowser is rendering the images as I would expect from what I saw on the camera.

Also, I always go plus with exposure compensation...never minus. It does perplex me sometime to see how exposure makes bigger than expected jumps from one frame to the next even at high speed. I would think that metering would be more consistant when the light of the subject and BG are not changing and I am staying on the subject.

Richard

Ric Grupe wrote: »

The thing is...Breezebrowser is rendering the images as I would expect from what I saw on the camera.

Maybe Breezebrowser is doing some sort of auto-correction that ACR doesn't do.

I must say, I admire your memory...I often don't even remember having taken a shot that I see in post, much less what the histogram looked like.

arodney

Ric Grupe wrote: »

I've been going to mention this for some time now.

Quite often (not always) after viewing a file on the camera LCD and on the PC via Breezebrowser the images are as they should be.

Then opening them in ACR renders them about a full stop underexposed. No big deal usually...just raise the exposure slider.

These are raw files? First off, the raw and the LCD (which is the JPEG representation of the raw based on the camera processing) are totally unrelated. Next, each raw processor will render the same raw differently. Depending on the default rendering settings, settings you can update as a new default, the initial previews can be radically different.

Its much like having a color neg and walking into a color darkroom where there are a dozen different color enlargers all with different filter packs setup. You pop the neg in each, make a test print and develop them and they all look different, despite the fact the neg is the same.

Ric Grupe

Richard wrote: »

Maybe Breezebrowser is doing some sort of auto-correction that ACR doesn't do.

Never thought of that.

I must say, I admire your memory...I often don't even remember having taken a shot that I see in post, much less what the histogram looked like.

Just enough memory to go from the bedroom, where I'm set up to shoot the birds on the feeders outside, to the computer room to view and edit. Sometimes I only have 50 frames or so to look at.

Ric Grupe

arodney wrote: »

These are raw files? First off, the raw and the LCD (which is the JPEG representation of the raw based on the camera processing) are totally unrelated. Next, each raw processor will render the same raw differently. Depending on the default rendering settings, settings you can update as a new default, the initial previews can be radically different.

Its much like having a color neg and walking into a color darkroom where there are a dozen different color enlargers all with different filter packs setup. You pop the neg in each, make a test print and develop them and they all look different, despite the fact the neg is the same.

Yes, they are raw files.

I am using files from the same camera, using the same viewing software, and editing in ACR.....I don't see where the variable is. Whatever...it seems to me they should all be relative.

ThatCanonGuy

You probably have the Auto boxes checked in ACR right above each slider... uncheck those, then it goes to the ACR defaults. I've always found ACR defaults to be pretty accurate, just needing a little tweaking here and there. The Auto options, however, are NOT accurate, well hey, it's a computer trying to process a photo for you... I usually disagree with Auto and just keep it turned off.