Digital Photo Professional 3.10.1 Updater

[Canon Rumors]

Share

A new Digital Photo Professional is available from Canon. Below are some of the changes.

1. Support added for images taken with the EOS Kiss X50 / EOS REBEL T3 / EOS 1100D, EOS Kiss X5 / EOS REBEL T3i / EOS 600D. If using an earlier version, images take with the EOS Kiss X50 / EOS REBEL T3 / EOS 1100D, EOS Kiss X5 / EOS REBEL T3i / EOS 600D will not be supported. Please update to version 3.10 or later.


2. Additional lenses now covered by correction of lens aberration. Including overseas models, images taken with the following six lenses are now covered by lens aberration correction. EF 8-15mm F4L USM Fisheye, EF 15mm F2.8 Fisheye, EF 300mm F2.8 II IS USM, EF 400mm F2.8 II IS USM, EF-S 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 III (an overseas model), EF-S 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS II. Distortion aberration correction for images taken with fisheye lenses (EF 8-15mm F4L USM Fisheye, EF 15mm F2.8 Fisheye) enables the user to select four types of effects that are not covered by ordinary distortion correction. Note that depending on the camera used, there are cases where images taken with applicable lenses may not be covered by aberration correction.


3. Added a function for circular masking. The new Circle option can be selected from the Ratio pull-down menu for the Trimming/angle adjustment tool. The behavior differs from when rectangles like 1:1 are selected in that selecting Circle will masking everything outside of the selected area.


4. When performing Noise Reduction processing, there were cases where the screen would momentarily turn magenta.


5. Fixed a malfunction involving PCs on which multiple versions of Photoshop are installed; there were cases where the Transfer to Photoshop command would be dimmed.


6. Fixed a malfunction in which attempting to display NR Preview while the highlight warning was displayed would cause the Preview screen to turn deep blue.


7. Fixed a malfunction that occurred if an image was overwritten by a newer version after a rating had been set; there were cases where the editing results were destroyed and the image reverted back to the settings when it was first taken.


8. Fixed a malfunction wherein white lines would appear in the displayed results if an image was displayed at 100% in the Edit Window or the Edit Image Window and the window was then scrolled.


9. Windows XP SP2 is no longer supported

If using this software in a Windows XP environment, please update Windows to Service Pack 3 before installing the software.

Available for Download from Canon Europe here (mac) & here (win)

cr

[CR Backup Admin]

Figures, I finally updated all my pc's last week to the current version, and now its obsolete.  I'm curious to see what the distortion correction will do for my 15mm FE images, so I'll update again.  I only use DPP occasionally, but sometimes it comes in handy, like allowing me to check the focus point.

[hutjeflut]

i dont get why they say XP sp2 isnt supported it works just fine.

[foobar]

i dont get why they say XP sp2 isnt supported it works just fine.

Not supported often just means "untested and the support hotline won't help you" and not necessarily that something is broken.

[CR Backup Admin]

i dont get why they say XP sp2 isnt supported it works just fine.

It may work fine, or some seldom used function might hang your computer or just not work right.  They spend hundreds of hours testing every function, and only do it with the latest version of windows XP, so they do not provide support for older versions.  If it works for you, then there is no worry.

[DJL329]

I'm hoping this means the lenses announced last year, specifically the EF 8-15mm f/4, are about ready to start shipping!   

[Redreflex]

Question - do most people put their RAW images through DPP?

I've just switched from shooting in jpg to RAW 1 week ago (!), and have stayed with my trusty Aperture. Thus far, seems OK, although I've never used DPP. Am only scratching the surface of what I can do with RAW.

[CR Backup Admin]

Question - do most people put their RAW images through DPP?

I've just switched from shooting in jpg to RAW 1 week ago (!), and have stayed with my trusty Aperture. Thus far, seems OK, although I've never used DPP. Am only scratching the surface of what I can do with RAW.

There are lots of very good RAW editors, Aperture is one of them.  DPP is free, and for free software, it is very good.  However, most photographers have their own preferred software.  I use lightroom, and occasionally export a image to Photoshop for extensive editing.  DPP is handy occasionallly as well.  I don't update it very often, because they are always issuing updates to add new camera models but not new functionality.

[te4o]

I was going to ask the same question (thanks RedReflex) but a bit more broadly: Are you guys aware of differences in IQ in particular between the different RAW Decoders (DPP, LR; Ap, whoever) set at similar presets?
 
RedReflex, Aperture which I have been using solely, is applying Camera Specific Presets to EACH RAW file you import, found under RAW FineTuning. These are called all very naturally: Boost, Hue, Sharpening, De-Noise etc etc... Your screen impression can be very different between different import settings! Be careful to what extend they are applied (like with my 40D the preset of max boost increases contrast unnaturally).

Of course, the MAC to PC variety among us makes answering this question difficult, but I was intrigued.

[Redreflex]

Question - do most people put their RAW images through DPP?

I've just switched from shooting in jpg to RAW 1 week ago (!), and have stayed with my trusty Aperture. Thus far, seems OK, although I've never used DPP. Am only scratching the surface of what I can do with RAW.

There are lots of very good RAW editors, Aperture is one of them.  DPP is free, and for free software, it is very good.  However, most photographers have their own preferred software.  I use lightroom, and occasionally export a image to Photoshop for extensive editing.  DPP is handy occasionallly as well.  I don't update it very often, because they are always issuing updates to add new camera models but not new functionality.

Thanks.

My understanding is that one of the benefits of using DPP, is that all the presets you have on the camera are available (WB, Pictures Styles - Canon website has additional ones that can be downloaded into DPP). This may make for easier adjustments (especially those new to RAW like me) that would be somewhat reproducible by manipulating camera settings.

Is that correct?

With Aperture, I'm not using most of the adjustments available. There are over 20 potential variables, many of which I'm still figuring out if it really has a practical role.

RedReflex, Aperture which I have been using solely, is applying Camera Specific Presets to EACH RAW file you import, found under RAW FineTuning. These are called all very naturally: Boost, Hue, Sharpening, De-Noise etc etc... Your screen impression can be very different between different import settings! Be careful to what extend they are applied (like with my 40D the preset of max boost increases contrast unnaturally).

Thanks. I'm not sure I can see a significant difference on screen with changes to some of these "Fine Tuning' variables! The untrained eye?

[neuroanatomist]

Question - do most people put their RAW images through DPP?

There are generally three main things you want/need to do with your RAW images:

• Convert from RAW
• Edit/retouch images
• Organize your library

Some programs perform the first three (e.g. Aperture), some perform some of them in combination with other software (e.g. Adobe Camera RAW plugin converts RAW images for Lightroom to organize or for Photoshop to edit), and some do only one (e.g. DxO is only a RAW converter).  That's one reason I think DxO is better - it doesn't try to do it all, it does one thing, and does it very well.  Personally, I use DxO to convert my RAW images to JPGs, then I use iPhoto to organize the JPGs.

There's also a fourth thing you should do with your RAW images that none of the above-mentioned programs directly handle - backup!  Backup!  Let me say that again.  Backup!  Whatever you do to the processed images, your RAW files should always be backed up - preferebly in more than one place (e.g. two different external HDDs stored in separate locations, or one external HDD and an online backup service, etc.).  Depending on your RAW conversion software, you may also want to backup the settings used for the conversion for each file.  The way you do that will depend on the software.  DPP (alone of the RAW converters) writes the changes directly into the RAW metadata, so all you need to backup is the RAW files themselves.  Most other programs store the settings in a 'sidecar' file linked to the RAW file; you may need to export those sidecar files, or backup the whole database, etc.

Are you guys aware of differences in IQ in particular between the different RAW Decoders (DPP, LR; Ap, whoever) set at similar presets?

Yes, there are differences.  I used to use DPP, then I switched to DxO Optics Pro.  I find that DxO does a much better job than DPP at reducing noise, and DxO also offers lens-specific corrections for distortion and vignetting (like DPP, but from my testing the DxO corrections are better than Canon's own).  Other RAW conversion software has lens corrections (e.g. Adobe Camera RAW) but DxO's are based on actual empirical tests of specific camera+lens combinations, whereas ACR's are based on 'what looks good' and in some cases are actually derived from user-submitted profiles.

[skitron]

I'm giving the PhaseONE Capture One Pro 6 product a whirl. Just bought a copy after seeing some very good reports on it, will post findings in a couple of weeks...

http://www.phaseone.com/en/Software/Capture-One-Pro-6/About/Pro-Overview.aspx

[skitron]

I'm giving the PhaseONE Capture One Pro 6 product a whirl. Just bought a copy after seeing some very good reports on it, will post findings in a couple of weeks...

http://www.phaseone.com/en/Software/Capture-One-Pro-6/About/Pro-Overview.aspx

I went ahead and d/l'd the demo while I'm waiting for my boxed copy since it can be activated without reinstallation.

WOW.

The difference between what I get out of Capture One Pro 6.1.1 and DPP is more than a new L over a kit lens.

No kidding.

Color, sharpening, NR is all in a completely different league. I had no idea 50d files could render like this.

[motorhead]

I see version 3.10.2 is available for download.

[ze]

Question - do most people put their RAW images through DPP?

I've just switched from shooting in jpg to RAW 1 week ago (!), and have stayed with my trusty Aperture. Thus far, seems OK, although I've never used DPP. Am only scratching the surface of what I can do with RAW.

There are lots of very good RAW editors, Aperture is one of them.  DPP is free, and for free software, it is very good.  However, most photographers have their own preferred software.  I use lightroom, and occasionally export a image to Photoshop for extensive editing.  DPP is handy occasionallly as well.  I don't update it very often, because they are always issuing updates to add new camera models but not new functionality.

Thanks.

My understanding is that one of the benefits of using DPP, is that all the presets you have on the camera are available (WB, Pictures Styles - Canon website has additional ones that can be downloaded into DPP). This may make for easier adjustments (especially those new to RAW like me) that would be somewhat reproducible by manipulating camera settings.

Is that correct?

With Aperture, I'm not using most of the adjustments available. There are over 20 potential variables, many of which I'm still figuring out if it really has a practical role.

RedReflex, Aperture which I have been using solely, is applying Camera Specific Presets to EACH RAW file you import, found under RAW FineTuning. These are called all very naturally: Boost, Hue, Sharpening, De-Noise etc etc... Your screen impression can be very different between different import settings! Be careful to what extend they are applied (like with my 40D the preset of max boost increases contrast unnaturally).

Thanks. I'm not sure I can see a significant difference on screen with changes to some of these "Fine Tuning' variables! The untrained eye?

There is no software that knows the Canon color profile as DPP does. Aperture, LR, Phase One etc. might have some nice features but the color tone would never be as good  and clean as DPP.