Using the DxO camera profile in ACR

[dennismullen]

I use the DxO Raw converter and export as a DNG file which I open in CS5 ACR.
When doing this there is an additional choice in camera calibration called embedded.
I assume this is the DxO color profile for the camera and it looks better than the default ACR profile.

Cheers,

[agorabasta]

Got DxO 6.2 and 6.5. Neither does it the way you described. If a true raw DNG is exported off DxO, there's no 'embedded' profile offered with further ACR developing.
The DNG exported from DxO still are fully demosaiced, as it's always been the case, but they are treated as raw files by the ACR. Just to get the 'embedded' profile listed with ACR, you need to have the DNG container with a TIFF/JPG bitmap inside - like what you get if DxO had the file subjected for external editing and then exported later upon.

[dennismullen]

When I open the camera profile drop down list in ACR after opening a DNG file exported from DxO a new profile is added at the top of the list called embedded.

[David Kilpatrick]

How on earth are you managing to get LENS profiles into the CAMERA profile dropdown menu?

You must have installed lens profiles in the wrong directory. I can not imagine what these will do!

David

[dennismullen]

How on earth are you managing to get LENS profiles into the CAMERA profile dropdown menu?

You must have installed lens profiles in the wrong directory. I can not imagine what these will do!

David

Hi David,

What you are seeing are camera + lens color profiles made by el_floz on the Dyxum.com forum.
You can find them here...

http://www.florian-knorn.com/2010/10/so ... files.html

The DNG files exported by DxO are demozaiced to a linear file but the color is not set therefore White Balance can still be controlled.
DxO has camera + lens specific profiles and they are apparently embedded in the file. ACR does not automatically default to it however.

Cheers,

[agorabasta]

Here's what's happening - I have checked that DxO raw DNG exports offer those 'embedded' profiles for the a300/a500 (and most likely for most other cams), but never for the a700.

The root for that strange exception must be with ACR rather than with the DxO. It's exactly the ACR that has got a severely broken raw support for the a700. It's most likely that the ACR simply cannot read any embedded matrix from the a700 raw files, be that DNG or ARW container - no matter.

P.S. The 'embedded' profile for the a500 has a severe WB shift, while the a300 one is OK.

[dennismullen]

You are right about the A700 not working. I have an A700 and A900 and the embedded camera profile is only offered with the A900. As the A900 is my main camera I am very happy with this work flow. The adobe standard camera profile has a magenta cast. DxO's camera profile looks very similar to the profiles el_floz posted on Dyxum.com.

Cheers,

[agorabasta]

Frankly, I hate the DxO output. And it's not so hard to build a good profile that's both formally correct and quite pretty looking.

Here's an example -

[bakubo]

I use the DxO Raw converter and export as a DNG file which I open in CS5 ACR.

Are you saying that you use DxO to make a DNG file and then use ACR to process that raw file? I think I am not following you. Wouldn't it be easier to use the Adobe DNG converter to make it a DNG file? Is DxO doing something other than just converting to DNG? If you are using DxO to do the raw conversion then what are you using ACR for? I am sorry for so many questions, but I am curious what you are doing and why. Thanks!

[agorabasta]

Henry, the DNG is a mere container, the contents may differ. The DxO exported raw DNG is a demosaiced TIFF without WB scaling but with all the tone/colour/geometry adjustments coded as metadata. So the adjustments by DxO are there, but still may be mostly bypassed; it's only the demosaicing that can't be undone.

[bakubo]

Henry, the DNG is a mere container, the contents may differ. The DxO exported raw DNG is a demosaiced TIFF without WB scaling but with all the tone/colour/geometry adjustments coded as metadata. So the adjustments by DxO are there, but still may be mostly bypassed; it's only the demosaicing that can't be undone.

Okay, but that makes me even more curious as to why Dennis is going to all this trouble. Are you saying that the DxO demosaicing is much better than ACR so he wants that, but then wants ACR to do all the other raw processing which it does better than DxO?

[agorabasta]

Well, as Dennis himself pointed out, he likes the DxO colours/tone. And that is carried over with the embedded colour profile.

[dennismullen]

Okay, but that makes me even more curious as to why Dennis is going to all this trouble. Are you saying that the DxO demosaicing is much better than ACR so he wants that, but then wants ACR to do all the other raw processing which it does better than DxO?

Each tool in the two programs is different. One will work better than the other depending on the picture. When I have a real keeper photo I might process it in DxO and export as a TIF and a DNG.
Then I will select the DNG, TIF, and original ARW versions in Bridge and open in ACR. This makes it very easy to compare the different versions as I adjust them in ACR.
The better version soon becomes apparent.

The new version of DxO has fixed most of the usability problems of the past and I usually find its version is best but could not live without the tools that ACR and Photoshop have.
Sometimes I just use ACR as admittedly it is quicker that way. I never just use DxO.

Note: DxO recommends not adjusting the color when exporting to DNG. I'm still experimenting with this which is why I like to also export a TIF for comparison.

Cheers,

[bakubo]

Dennis, thanks for the explanation. Can you do the same where you start with ACR and then go to DxO for the rest of the conversion? I have never heard of anyone else doing a partial raw conversion in one program and then the rest in another. Is this something you discovered on your own or did you hear about it somewhere?

[Mike-Photos]

Don't forget as well, that if you have DxO-supported lenses the software performs automatic lens corrections. In addition, the sharpening option sharpens at different strengths to reduce the fall-off at the extremes.