Really the answer to the question involves 3 parts. 1) First I edited my original post above to include. That this is only about processing "One Image" in the HDR Processing screen. I've never tried to process more than one at once, and didn't know it's purpose, that of processing more than one, and doing some-sort-of combination of images. Combining images was not apart of the question at all. 2) As Shadowsports points out. A feature request seems logical. (Although his example was a Star Trek motion picture transporter accident). I will post a simple example, of one photo, not an "oh no they're forming" example. (umm that's a quote from the movie if you didn't get it...) Could the processing be done in another tool? Maybe, but the work is done for me already, why not use it, before I have to. And the results sometimes are where I need it. 3) Using the Exiftool is the ticket to fix the problem in the mean-time, if its that important to me. I can add the data back in from the original .CR3 file. It was not exactly what others had posted on this thread, but rather reminding me of the tool. So that's what prompted me to look up how to copy one files data to another. So all I'll need to do is: exiftool -TagsFromFile {file...}.CR3 {File... HDR-Processed}.jpg
That's funny I don't appear to be missing anything. I was just following the internet instructions. The image below is from my command.
@robertkjr3d wrote:I see in the HDR-Processing menu it gives you the option to process more than one file at once. But I've never used that option, or even knew what it was for. I only process one file, and see the wonders at what it does.
So that means you are not making HDR, or more precisely "Exposure Bracketed" files. The process must start in camera using the HDR or Auto Exposure Bracketing (AEB) feature in your R6 mark II. I'm not sure what shenanigans DPP is up to by allowing only one file to be processed, but that's just not the way it's traditionally done (see Attached). I suspect that it is just applying the effects that it would normally do for an exposure bracketed file.
You start by taking three images: Normal exposure; Under exposure; Over exposure by setting + and - exposure in addition to your initial correct exposure either in the R6II's HDR or AEB feature (please look in the manual for these procedures). The difference being that the HDR feature will create an in camera HDR with an option to save your original files and the AEB feature will just make your three files to be processed in DPP (or whatever program you wish to use). Tip: Set your R6II drive to continuous and it will quickly shoot your three exposures, if not, you will have to press the shutter three times. Also, you can do this "hand held" because the R6II does this very quickly (Elec. Shutter) and you can enable "Moving subject". You then process these files to create a file with a higher dynamic range. Not necessarily a better color gamut, but more detail in the dark, light, and mid-tones, the sum being better than the parts.
These are three down n dirty shots I just took with the R6 mark II and processed in DPP 4. The second attachment is the bracketed HDR of the three CR3 files.
Traditionally (the correct way it's done), exposure can be changed in several different ways and I've noticed that sometimes a combination, like one file may have a different ISO and the next shot in the series will have a different shutter speed and ISO. Also traditionally, and I've been exposure bracketing quite a while, long before DPP included it as an option, EXIF data has never been included. The final composite can not be represented properly by any of the original EXIF data. You can paste data all you want, but it won't even be close to what the final image represents and I seriously doubt Canon is going to do anything about this because, as mentioned, the EXIF data in the composite will not properly represent any of the three images used for the bracket.
Newton
@FloridaDrafter What you say about an HDR composite is correct. Thanks for providing that explanation.
HDR PQ mode in the camera or in DPP follows the standard. I usually think standards are a good thing, but in this case it may limit flexibility.
https://cam.start.canon/en/S002/manual/html/UG-12_HDRPQ_0010.html has the DPP manual section on HDR PQ.
There is also a list in the manual of all the normal things that are not available in HDR PQ mode in DPP.
The HIF files produced look stunning in the Photos.app on my iMac with HDR monitor. This is a big improvement over HDR squeezed to display on a SDR monitor, so I hope eventually it becomes as well supported as JPEG, but for now I will continue using JPEG and sRGB and adust the tone curve (gamma) in DPP to squeeze as much of the dynamic range of a single CR3 file as possible into a JPEG because JPEG is more likely to be viewable in web browsers and most often my photos are viewed on a screen.
More about HDR PQ HEIF is at: snapshot dot canon-asia dot com, but I am apparently not permitted to post the URL here. It seems to me a very good explanation.
The PG standard part of HDR PQ is explained at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perceptual_quantizer
The HEIF part of the standard is explained at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Efficiency_Image_File_Format
It seems unclear to me what sort of meta-data is expected in a HIF file. It is not the same as a JPEG. To get an HDR JPEG from DPP I suggest not using the HDR PQ mode, but in the gamma adjustment tab move the white point to the right until none of the important colors are clipped. I think of doing this as creating a non standard gamma curve that seems to me to work well with a particular photo. As an alternative, one might convert the HIF to a JPEG and transfer meta-data from the CR3 file to the JPEG.
@robertkjr3d wrote:"I'm just using it on one file. Try it yourself. It does great things. Regardless the question was to do with shot settings not being saved into the file. Perhaps understandable if more than one file? (one person suggested, that it should see the shots have the similar or the same settings and just record them....) But I was really talking about just 'One File' so of course it should forward those off to the resulting file."
I understand what you are doing and have done it with one file in DPP and in other raster editors before.
In your case (one properly exposed file), DPP is simply adding it's presets with some adjustability (that are intended for a bracketed composite) to your properly exposed image. Although I knew what the results would be, I ran one of my underexposed bracketed files and used all of the "Art" presets and played with the sliders as you requested (see attached). I'm not impressed. Note that the key word in all but the Natural preset is "Art" (I used Natural in my previous composite). These, as the name implies, are for artistic renderings of what would be a normally exposed image. If art is what you are after instead of a natural looking scene, by all means have at it. But you can not expect accurate EXIF data from an artistic rendering of an image. If anything, maybe the preset used and its slider values, but certainly not the exposure triangle as that is long gone when you add the Art presets to manipulate your image.
With Art Standard +Brightness applied.
Newton
