Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canon CR3 support?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Canon CR3 support?

    1. So is ACDSee ever going to support Canon's CR3 RAW format?

    2. We're advised to use Adobe's DNG Converter as a workaround. OK. I installed that and used it to convert my latest CR3 images, with the following preferences:

    Compatibility: Camera RAW 11.2 and later
    JPEG Preview: Full Size
    Don't embed fast load data
    Don't use lossy compression
    Preserve Pixel Count
    Embed original

    The converted DNG files looked grainy, so I compared them with the original JPEGs generated by my camera alongside the CR3 files: yes, DNG was grainy. I thought maybe that's only in the JPEG preview despite the above setting, so I saved a DNG file as a new JPEG using my regular ACDSee conversion settings (for maximum possible sharpness). It's still grainy.

    Is DNG inherently lower resolution than the original RAW file, which I consider fatally unacceptable, or am I missing something?

  • #2
    I'd say you're comparing apples and pears. The JPEG embedded in the CR3 was processed by your camera, which knows every technical detail and idealized the image. The raw data of your CR3 is noisy and Adobe DNG Converter embedded a new JPEG in your DNG file which is not preprocessed.

    Comment


    • #3
      Emil, I suppose I shouldn't have compared the DNG with the JPEG; I was just astonished to see such a radical, unfamiliar difference. Here are 100% crops of a jpeg made by ACDSee from a CR3 (Canon SX70 HS) DNG and of one made directly from a CR2 image (Canon SX50 HS), with maximum jpeg quality and without other adjustments in ACDSee; both originals were shot at ISO 100. Compare the out of focus green areas. The CR3 image is much grainier than the CR2. Are you saying that's Canon's fault, that their sensor is so much noisier? Thank you.
      Last edited by Dennis Cheasebro; 06-08-2019, 01:54 PM.

      Comment

      Working...
      X