# ADOBE R5/R6 HAS UPDATED TODAY 9/18/20



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Aug 18, 2020)

CAMERA RAW,LIGHTROOM & PHOTOSHOP HAVE BEEN UPDATED FOR THE R5/R6 finally we call shoot RAW NOW lol


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Aug 18, 2020)

Great, right on schedule. They update once a month and the last update was about 28 days ago, so a update was expected anytime. Mine is updating now. I'm still waiting on my camera though. My card has not been charged yet and no estimate from B&H. I really do not expect it soon.


----------



## koenkooi (Aug 18, 2020)

BigAntTVProductions said:


> CAMERA RAW,LIGHTROOM & PHOTOSHOP HAVE BEEN UPDATED FOR THE R5/R6 finally we call shoot RAW NOW lol
> View attachment 192227



... and still no "Camera Matching" colour profiles for any Canon Camera newer than the R.....


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Aug 18, 2020)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Great, right on schedule. They update once a month and the last update was about 28 days ago, so a update was expected anytime. Mine is updating now. I'm still waiting on my camera though. My card has not been charged yet and no estimate from B&H. I really do not expect it soon.


 OCTOBER NOV FOR YOU lol


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 18, 2020)

Looks like the CR3 support is giving the same results as the DNG converter. One less step but still not happy with what appears to be 2/3 underexposed in LRC.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 19, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Looks like the CR3 support is giving the same results as the DNG converter. One less step but still not happy with what appears to be 2/3 underexposed in LRC.


Yeah, I've noticed the underexposure compared to DPP and also compared to the EOS R when both are viewed in ACR. Is it possible that the R5 is less sensitive at a given ISO value?


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 19, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Yeah, I've noticed the underexposure compared to DPP and also compared to the EOS R when both are viewed in ACR. Is it possible that the R5 is less sensitive at a given ISO value?



It's weird. The thumbnails in LightRoom are similar to camera exposure on import, but then when I click on it, it darkens it significantly, and that's where the editing starts.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 19, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> It's weird. The thumbnails in LightRoom are similar to camera exposure on import, but then when I click on it, it darkens it significantly, and that's where the editing starts.


That’s not weird that is how LR works. It starts with the camera produced jpeg within the RAW that is used for in camera playback. Once you click on it in the computer LR renders its own version and that is rendering it darker.


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> That’s not weird that is how LR works. It starts with the camera produced jpeg within the RAW that is used for in camera playback. Once you click on it in the computer LR renders its own version and that is rendering it darker.



It just makes it harder to get the correct exposure. It looks good on the back of the camera (neutral style), but then I have to make bigger adjustments in LR. Do you think Adobe is going to change the settings so that the import is closer to the embedded jpg?


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 20, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> It just makes it harder to get the correct exposure. It looks good on the back of the camera (neutral style), but then I have to make bigger adjustments in LR. Do you think Adobe is going to change the settings so that the import is closer to the embedded jpg?


Probably, but it is also very easy to apply an exposure correction on import so the files closer match the jpeg. Or make your own profile, or if you have a Macbeth chart send me a few files and I'll make you some profiles specific for your camera, then just apply that to all your images on import.

I understand people like 'Canon colors' and to my taste OOC jpegs are often very very good, but it is simplicity itself to take control of your color workflow. I have shot weddings where five different camera makes and models have been used but the dress needs to be the same color and everybody have the same complexion in all the images. Work like that demands a unified and consistent approach to color.


----------



## Random Orbits (Aug 21, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Probably, but it is also very easy to apply an exposure correction on import so the files closer match the jpeg. Or make your own profile, or if you have a Macbeth chart send me a few files and I'll make you some profiles specific for your camera, then just apply that to all your images on import.
> 
> I understand people like 'Canon colors' and to my taste OOC jpegs are often very very good, but it is simplicity itself to take control of your color workflow. I have shot weddings where five different camera makes and models have been used but the dress needs to be the same color and everybody have the same complexion in all the images. Work like that demands a unified and consistent approach to color.



Applying an exposure correction on import doesn't bother me if it doesn't affect IQ. If it does reduce editing latitude, then it could be a problem.


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 21, 2020)

Random Orbits said:


> Applying an exposure correction on import doesn't bother me if it doesn't affect IQ. If it does reduce editing latitude, then it could be a problem.


No it won’t impact anything if applied to a RAW file. If I was you and was worried about it I’d calibrate your camera. Just take a series of controlled exposures of what you think are correct exposures, and under and over exposures, and see how your camera histogram compares with the histogram in the develop module of Lightroom. I’d use a greycard to fill the viewfinder then you can check your metering at the same time.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 21, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> That’s not weird that is how LR works. It starts with the camera produced jpeg within the RAW that is used for in camera playback. Once you click on it in the computer LR renders its own version and that is rendering it darker.


I find it helps to turn down the LCD and EVF brightness by one notch. Exposure wise, I take it to the point of clipping highlights and then dial it back a bit. Exposures look pretty good in Adobe Camera Raw with that technique..


----------



## nikkito (Aug 23, 2020)

The colours of the R5 In lightroom look really off. Nothing like the colours in Dpp. I hope we will get colour profiles, because like this is very frustrating.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 23, 2020)

nikkito said:


> The colours of the R5 In lightroom look really off. Nothing like the colours in Dpp. I hope we will get colour profiles, because like this is very frustrating.


Yeah I agree I am shooting Raw and HEIF/Jpeg for now because I do not really trust LRC atm.


----------



## nikkito (Aug 23, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Yeah I agree I am shooting Raw and HEIF/Jpeg for now because I do not really trust LRC atm.


It's very annoying, right? The camera is great though


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 23, 2020)

nikkito said:


> It's very annoying, right? The camera is great though


Yeah loving the camera, just need "my" workflow.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 24, 2020)

nikkito said:


> The colours of the R5 In lightroom look really off. Nothing like the colours in Dpp. I hope we will get colour profiles, because like this is very frustrating.


I haven't found the colours in Adobe Camera Raw to be too bad, just looking at skin tones under studio lighting in my case. Actually quite similar to DPP with a few minor adjustments to exposure.

Could you post some photo examples of how it is screwing with the colours? Very curious to know in what situations it is failing to give good results. Thanks!


----------



## nikkito (Aug 24, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> I haven't found the colours in Adobe Camera Raw to be too bad, just looking at skin tones under studio lighting in my case. Actually quite similar to DPP with a few minor adjustments to exposure.
> 
> Could you post some photo examples of how it is screwing with the colours? Very curious to know in what situations it is failing to give good results. Thanks!


Sure, look. It's worst with people's skin also. The first one is with dpp and the second with LR.


----------



## nikkito (Aug 24, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Yeah loving the camera, just need "my" workflow.


that's exactly the feeling i have.


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Aug 25, 2020)

nikkito said:


> Sure, look. It's worst with people's skin also. The first one is with dpp and the second with LR.
> 
> View attachment 192401
> View attachment 192402



Thanks for the examples, I can certainly see a difference there. I have to say though, that for skin tones Adobe hasn't been too bad for me so far. I still need to test in natural light conditions, but DPP hasn't been brilliant for skin tones in comparison.


----------



## nikkito (Aug 25, 2020)

You guys should check this profiles by http://www.colorfidelity.com/
I bought them yesterday and it certainly looks way better now. I hope this helps


----------



## nikkito (Aug 25, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> Thanks for the examples, I can certainly see a difference there. I have to say though, that for skin tones Adobe hasn't been too bad for me so far. I still need to test in natural light conditions, but DPP hasn't been brilliant for skin tones in comparison.


Hi Chris, maybe you can try this profiles i posted on my previous message if you are not happy with the ones from adobe.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 25, 2020)

nikkito said:


> You guys should check this profiles by http://www.colorfidelity.com/
> I bought them yesterday and it certainly looks way better now. I hope this helps


Oh I need a full report on these I have been waiting to see how they look


----------

