Raw editor for T7/1500 images

[davetelling]

I have a new Rebel T7, and I'm having a hard time finding a shareware/freeware raw file editor. I have tried Raw Therapee and UFRaw, but both just show my raw files as mainly bright pink backgrounds. I read that for UFRaw, the program doesn't recognize my camera - and looking at the camers list, the T7 is not listed. So, any ideas as to what might work? I see many recommend shooting in raw format because it has the most picture information, but it's a problem if the editor can't work with it. I had hoped ot use UFRaw to convert to tiff so GIMP could import it, but that's not working. I'm open to suggestions!

[davetelling]

Oh, wow... PhotoScapeX can read CR2 files from my camera, and save them as .tiff files. Cool!

[Peter]

RawTherapee 5.8 works and so does darktable. UFRaw hasn't been updated for years.

[davetelling]

---

@Peter wrote:
RawTherapee 5.8 works and so does darktable. UFRaw hasn't been updated for years.

---

I did try Raw Therapee, and it did the same as all the other "free" apps - pink everywhere. I am going to try the Canon DPP and see how that works.

[Peter]

---

@davetelling wrote:

---

@Peter wrote:
RawTherapee 5.8 works and so does darktable. UFRaw hasn't been updated for years.

---

I did try Raw Therapee, and it did the same as all the other "free" apps - pink everywhere. I am going to try the Canon DPP and see how that works.

---

Pink means that the black level isn't correct. For example older RawTherapee or older darktable versions that  haven't got the raw support for a camera model yet. T7 got raw support last year.

I have attached print screens from RawTherapee, darktable and one pink one from darktable with the black level put to zero. In the pink one you will also see the optical black area that raw converters normally don't show you.

Optical black areas can be used to remove the random banding issue from EOS R.

[davetelling]

Hello Peter,

I feel really dumb right now. I went back to my download folder to see which version of raw Therapee I had gotten, and it was 2.41 (!). Not sue how that happened, but I did download 5.8, and all is now much better. One thing I did notice, is that the same file opened in RT has a lot of what I assume to be noise specles (multi-colored pixels scattered all over the image) that I do not see in DPP4. I turned off de-noising, sharp mask, etc. and the difference is still there. I also saw the same "noise" (or whatever it is) opening the file in PhotoscapeX.

Raw Therapee image - note the multi-colored speckling.         DPP4 image - no specling, but looks like things are not as sharp, although I don't have sharpening turned on in RT. If I DO sharpen in DPP$, no speckes appear.

So, at this point, I'm leaning toward DPP4.

[ebiggs1]

"...at this point, I'm leaning toward DPP4."

And at this point you are making the right choice.  DPP4 is going to have the most accurate conversion of a Canon Raw file.  Canon is the only source that knows exactly how to accurately convert their Raw files.  Everybody else guesses how.  The freebies and open source software are at the low end of that guess work.

Adobe is on top for non-Canon software. Basically because it is the most widely accepted and used photo editing software available. Bar none. Period!  So, if you aren't going to use Photoshop/Lightroom, use Canon's own DPP4. Personally I prefer PS (ACR) conversion over DPP4 and the fact I almost always wind up in PS, I simply prefer to start there.

[Peter]

---

@davetelling wrote:

Hello Peter,

I feel really dumb right now. I went back to my download folder to see which version of raw Therapee I had gotten, and it was 2.41 (!). Not sue how that happened, but I did download 5.8, and all is now much better. One thing I did notice, is that the same file opened in RT has a lot of what I assume to be noise specles (multi-colored pixels scattered all over the image) that I do not see in DPP4. I turned off de-noising, sharp mask, etc. and the difference is still there. I also saw the same "noise" (or whatever it is) opening the file in PhotoscapeX.

Raw Therapee image - note the multi-colored speckling.         DPP4 image - no specling, but looks like things are not as sharp, although I don't have sharpening turned on in RT. If I DO sharpen in DPP$, no speckes appear.

So, at this point, I'm leaning toward DPP4.

---

As you can see, the image with noise is brighter and sharper. Those things increase the visible noise. Probably you use the default settings in RawTherapee that increases the contrast. I find darktable easier to handle.

I use all three raw converters. darktable, RawTherapee and DPP4. DPP4 doesn't have support for Linux so I need to use a VirtualBox. I really like the lens correction, but the lens correction in DPP4 is only for Canon lenses. RawTherapee and darktable use Lensfun as lens correction database. It means you can add any lens.

If I shoot raw and want to have the exported jpg to look like jpg straight out of the camera, but with higher image quality, DPP4 is easiest to use.

With both RawTherapee and darktable it is possible to remove the maze pattern from EOS R. It was not possible with DPP4 or Lightroom in December 2019. Perhaps Adobe and Canon have solved the problem in March 2020?

Different raw converters, different strengths and weaknesses.

[Ray-uk · Accepted solution]

Canon's very own DPP (Digital Photo Professional) it is made for the job and furthermore it is free, just download it from your Canon site. It may have been included on a CD with your camera but just lately Canon seems to have stopped doing that.

Arguably the best raw converter/editor for Canon camera files.

[ebiggs1]

It is strange that 90% of Canon camera owners are unaware of DPP4.  Yet they will go searching the web for a free editor.