Canon EOS Rebel T3. Need editing program that came with this camera.

[Pommom]

I have Canon Rebel T3. Recently I had computer problems and my programs were wiped out.

It is not the driver for the camera, but the editing program that came with the camera, where files were placed, cropped, sorted, etc.

I have searched everywhere for this and cannot find it.

Help

[ebiggs1]

B from B

"I haven't used Photoshop Elements, ..."

Obviously! This is not even arguable.  DPP 3 or 4 or 5 or whatever number, does not have one tenth the capability of PSE.  If you put all the free Canon software into one package you start to get close to what PSE does by itself.

[ebiggs1]

"In fact, DPP is more similar to Lightroom than PS."

I can see that as long as you say "more similar" but, yes, a good analogy.

[jrhoffman75]

"Photoshop is not a substitute for Canon's Digital Photo Professional.  In fact, DPP is more similar to Lightroom than PS."

I agree with the concept, but I would word it differently: "Canon's Digital Photo Professional is not a substitute for Photoshop".

It doesn't try to be; DPP even has a hard wired option to transfer an image to Photoshop.

The raw converter part of Photoshop and PS Elements is the Adobe Camera Raw filter - one of many filters. All the pixel mashing that is performed by Photoshop comes after the image is processed in ACR (or converted in DPP and exported to PS).

Many folks don't need or want to do the pixel manipulations that PS is excellent at. For folks who are into graphic editing PS is the best, but its not the only option for folks who just want to process RAW images with minimal manipulation.

[ebiggs1]

"...  but its not the only option for folks who just want to process RAW images with minimal manipulation."

True, so now comes the question, which is better for the average person?  IMHO, it is PSE.  Not PS but PSE.

The next question is what do I do with my RAW conversion?  If one is using DPP, very little.  If on the other hand you have PSE a whole world of development is at your fingertips.

"DPP even has a hard wired option to transfer an image to Photoshop."

Absolutely. Even Canon realizes DPP is not the end of post editing. So it does bring us to the obvious next question, why not just start in the software you are going to end up in?  Most people want to do more than simply convert a RAW file.  They want Facebook and scrap-booking and data based filing, removing that ugly wire in the foreground, on and on, etc.

It boils down to, do you want to learn a single program or do you want to tackle several to end up in the same place?

[RobertTheFat]

---

Waddizzle wrote:

[Quoting me] "I agree completely. I haven't used Photoshop Elements, but I've used DPP 4 (and DPP 3) extensively. It's a bit quirky and slow, but it does a very good job in almost all respects. To me the only sensible reason for buying any form of Photoshop without first trying DPP is to prove that one is above such plebeian considerations as how much the product costs." 

Photoshop is not a substitute for Canon's Digital Photo Professional.  In fact, DPP is more similar to Lightroom than PS.  BTW, I think you would do cartwheels over the noise reduction results in Lightroom.

---

Me? Cartwheels? I doubt it. The last time I had noticeable noise in pictures I took was when I was still using a Rebel XTi.

[Waddizzle]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@Waddizzle wrote:

[Quoting me] "I agree completely. I haven't used Photoshop Elements, but I've used DPP 4 (and DPP 3) extensively. It's a bit quirky and slow, but it does a very good job in almost all respects. To me the only sensible reason for buying any form of Photoshop without first trying DPP is to prove that one is above such plebeian considerations as how much the product costs." 

Photoshop is not a substitute for Canon's Digital Photo Professional.  In fact, DPP is more similar to Lightroom than PS.  BTW, I think you would do cartwheels over the noise reduction results in Lightroom.

---

Me? Cartwheels? I doubt it. The last time I had noticeable noise in pictures I took was when I was still using a Rebel XTi.

---

Yes, you would.  I can use my T5 at ISO 6400, and clean up nearly all of the noise.  Gone, like pheasant through the corn.

[jrhoffman75]

Full disclosure - I subscribe to the Adobe Photography Bundle so I have Lightroom and Photoshop. If they offered LR. only I would subscribe to that since PS isn't critical to me. 

Beginners come to this forum for help/guidance. We have to try and be as factual as possible when presenting answers/options.

Your (ebiggs1) and my workflows are different; I use Lightroom for my editing and have gone into PS for only about a dozen images where I needed to remove a hanging plant. That works for my style; clearly it won't work for yours since you use PS extensively. 

I've run a number of tests where I convert in DPP and then send TIFF to Lightroom and compare it against the results of the same image processed fully in Lightroom. For the images I was working with I saw no difference. Since I don't use the power editing of PS, and since LR and ACR in PS are the same, this means, that for me I can get what PS/PSE would do for free.

DPP will produce a JPEG that can be posted to Facebook; I've done it. DPP will allow printing a photo that can be put in a physical scrapbook or a JPEG that can be put in an electronic scrapbook; I've done it for my wife. DPP has a Stamp tool that for some items (telephone wires for example) I found superior to Lightroom. 

PSE isn't a wrong choice, I just don't think it's a necessary choice. 

[jrhoffman75]

Here is original image. I would never normally get in a situation this bad, but folks wanted image on the portico and every single one had these hanging flowers:

Here's the image after Context Aware Fill in Photoshop CC: (the remnent could be easily cleaned in LR Clone tool)

Here's the image processed in DPP using the Stamp tool:

[ebiggs1]

John the response and recommendation of PSE vs DPP is not to compare the quality of the output.  It is the ease of use.  How complete it does the required desires.  You or I 'can' make any photo editor do what we want.  That was not the question at hand.

"DPP will produce a JPEG that can be posted to Facebook; I've done it. DPP will allow printing a photo that can be put in a physical scrapbook or a JPEG that can be put in an electronic scrapbook; ..."

Of course it can but is it one mouse click?  Does it integrate with your email editor?  Does it know Facebook?  Does it make scrapbook pages?  Actual pages?  Photo college?  Data base?  On and on .........! No, it does not.  That is what I mean by ease of use.  All in one package.

" If they offered LR. only I would subscribe to that since PS isn't critical to me. "

Unless Adobe has changed its business practice in the last few days, Lightroom is still a stand alone.  It does not need the subscription.  It is what I currently use and do.  I use CS6 form my last available upgrade.  ACR 9.x.   I do not rent the software from Adobe.  LR is approx. $150 bucks.

[Waddizzle]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

[deletel]

" If they offered LR. only I would subscribe to that since PS isn't critical to me. "

Unless Adobe has changed its business practice in the last few days, Lightroom is still a stand alone.  It does not need the subscription.  It is what I currently use and do.  I use CS6 form my last available upgrade.  ACR 9.x.   I do not rent the software from Adobe.  LR is approx. $150 bucks.

---

I agree!

Highly recommended.  Lightroom 6 is almost like DPP on steroids.  BTW, you are not limited to only Canon lens profiles, which is why I purchased it.  I have since found it to be more powerful and flexible than I had realized.