Which EOS 6D MarkII settings apply to RAW files vs JPEG?

[mbs5380]

I'm curios and, frustratingly, Canon's documentation doesn't make things clear.  I always take my photos in RAW mode and use Adobe Lightroom to edit.  It seems clear that "auto-lighting optimizar" only applies to the CANON generated jpeg image and is thus irrelevent in Lightroom.  It seems like the Lens aberration correction settings also only apply to CANON generated jpeg and are also irrelevent in Lightroom. 

I'm confused about many of the other settings though.  Long exposure noise reduction?  High IS speed noise reduction?  Highlight tone priority?  Are any of these settings of any use when taking RAW photos only?  Do the do anything to alter the RAW file, or are they only applied in the "develop" phase when creating a jpeg?

[Peter · Accepted solution]

• Long exposure noise reduction is raw file minus dark frame raw file. In my opinion more noise in shadows (but hot pixels removed). Lightroom removes hot pixels automatically (more or less) so you shouldn't need Long exposure noise reduction if you just want to remove bad pixels. DPP4 doesn't. If your target is to remove what looks like "amp glow" you will need a dark frame.
• HTP, raw file but seems pointless. Seems to underexpose 1 stop. With the same settings in manual mode I could get the same DR. 1/100s f/8 and ISO 100 seems to be the same as 1/100s f8 and HTP ISO 200. I got the same DR when I last measured.

• High ISO noise reduction, only jpeg but DPP will read the settings from the raw file metadata and apply a noise reduction.
• ALO, only jpeg but DPP will read the settings from  the raw file metadata and apply ALO.
• Lens correction, only jpeg but DPP will read the settings from the raw file metadata and apply lens correction.
• Picture style, only jpeg but DPP will read the settings from the raw file metadata and apply the Picture style.

All thumbnails in the raw file are affected by High ISO noise reduction, ALO, Lens correction and Picture style.

Other things good to know about:

• ISO 100 and ISO L from your 6D II are the same when shooting raw (except thumbnails and some metadata)
• M-RAW and S-RAW are already demosaiced.
• The multi exposure feature (average) will give you, if you don't move the camera, a CR2 file with less noise but with the white balance already baked in. Not demosaiced and that is good.

[jrhoffman75]

Good info Peter. 

The latest version of Lightroom can be configured to use camera Picture Styles. It does require that there be Adobe camera profiles available. Not sure if they are available for 6D Mk II.  I know they aren't available for 1D X Mk III. 

[mbs5380]

Thanks!  I used the HTP occasionally to try and get a blue sky with good gradations in a high contrast scene, but it seems like the exact same effect can be achieved by simply underexplosing a little then editing in lightroom.

I'm interested in star photos.  Is there any way to turn off the algorithm for removing hot pixels in lightroom?  I wouldn't want it to accidentally eat stars.  Also, is there a way to manually layer a dark frame on the raw file?  What if I create my own dark frame instead of using LENR?  The problem with photoshop is I can't really save back to a raw format and it seems like information is lost.  Even if you save as 16 bit depth file you no longer have all the raw editing options in lightroom.

[ebiggs1]

"I can't really save back to a raw format and it seems like information is lost."

When you save in PS you never do anything to the original Raw file. It stays as it always was. Nothing is lost.   PS makes a tag that keeps all the info on your edits. If you wanted to start from scratch in an unaltered Raw file you can. If you save as a psd that is a totally separate file. It has nothing to do with the original Raw file.

The same is true for LR.  The original Raw file is unaltered. No data is lost.

"Is there any way to turn off the algorithm for removing hot pixels in lightroom?"

Not that I know of. The only solution is to use dedicated star photography editor or use Photoshop to clone them out.

"Even if you save as 16 bit depth file you no longer have all the raw editing options in lightroom."

I don't know exactly what you mean.  There are some tools that only work with certain color bit.

[mbs5380]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

"I can't really save back to a raw format and it seems like information is lost."

When you save in PS you never do anything to the original Raw file. It stays as it always was. Nothing is lost.   PS makes a tag that keeps all the info on your edits. If you wanted to start from scratch in an unaltered Raw file you can. If you save as a psd that is a totally separate file. It has nothing to do with the original Raw file.

The same is true for LR.  The original Raw file is unaltered. No data is lost.

"Is there any way to turn off the algorithm for removing hot pixels in lightroom?"

Not that I know of. The only solution is to use dedicated star photography editor or use Photoshop to clone them out.

"Even if you save as 16 bit depth file you no longer have all the raw editing options in lightroom."

I don't know exactly what you mean.  There are some tools that only work with certain color bit.

---

You didn't really understand anything I was saying.  By "data lost" I mean that there is no way to work with the original raw image in PS.  You have to save in a totally different format which ruins the ability to, for instance, easily adjust white balance or other edits you would do in lightroom.  So it seems the answer is a need to use some kind of third party software hack to manually subtract a "dark frame" while keeping the raw format.  

Anyways, I'm just trying to figure out what the work flow is for star photography.  I obviously want to get rid of hot pixel noise, but don't want to use inbuilt cannon LENR setting if it isn't as good of a result as a manual dark frame.  I suppose I could do all the other edits first and then remove the noise by subtracting the dark frame as the very last step in photoshop.  In this case you are not working with RAW image but subtracting already processed sRGB data.  Is this what star photographers usually do?  I see a lot of web sites but nobody ever explains the details of how they actually do the editing.

[ebiggs1]

"By "data lost" I mean that there is no way to work with the original raw image in PS.  You have to save in a totally different format which ruins the ability to, for instance, easily adjust white balance or other edits ..."

Boy now you really did lose me!  Let's see, you open a Raw CR2 file in ACR and do whatever edits you like.  Tomorrow or the day after or next year you can open that same CR2 file in ACR with totally everything in tact it ever had and still do any and all edits you like. ACR and LR do exactly the same functions and save exactly the same way.

If there is something some photo editor can do PS can do it also. A dedicated astro editor may be more simple to use since it is prioritized for astro work but that doesn't mean PS can not do the same edits. It can, it is just a matter of figuring out how.

No editor I know of saves back to a CR2 Raw file.  The closest is Canon's own DPP4 which does embed a meta data tag.

[ebiggs1]

Open in ACR. Do your edits. PS makes this tag file that is totally seperate from the CR2 so the Raw data is not touched and nothing is ever lost. 

Photoshop for whatever further edits.

  Later, when you save it as a PSD all the original Raw data you had if you do nondestructive edits is still there. Perhaps you are doing your edits destructively. I urge you to avoid that if you are.  The data is lost but only in the PSD not the original CR2 file.  If you decide everything you did was totally wrong all you have to do is open up the CR2 in ACR once again and start over.

What am I not getting? 

[Peter]

---

@mbs5380 wrote:
Is this what star photographers usually do?  I see a lot of web sites but nobody ever explains the details of how they actually do the editing.

---

Search for Astrophotography Image Processing Using Modern Raw Converters. Happy reading ^^

---

@mbs5380 wrote:

I suppose I could do all the other edits first and then remove the noise by subtracting the dark frame as the very last step in photoshop.

---

Dark frame substraction should be done before demosaicing. Why? Check the animated GIF file i posted before. It is better to remove 1 hot pixel before demosaicing than 5 after demosaicing. You can read more about dark frames at RawPedia. RawPedia is kind of a manual for RawTherapee, but even if you don't use RawTherapee you will find helpful information there.

[ebiggs1]

"Are any of these settings of any use when taking RAW photos only?"

Yes and no. 

"Do the do anything to alter the RAW file, or are they only applied in the "develop" phase when creating a jpeg?"

Almost no camera setting affects the Raw file itself. Of course exposure does, for one, luminosity for another.  All the settings in your camera, set by you, are used by the editor or viewer to create a viewable image since you can not see a Raw file. It is essentially just ones and zeros. The editor has to know something. Make sense? The big advantage to Raw format is more latitude to edit your files. However, some editors or viewers do not understand all the features or options that a Canon camera has. Adobe is usually pretty on top with these and if they don't they will soon.

I used ti ignore any and all of my cameras settings and just do everything in PS/LR as I saw fit. It works!  Now, I do make most of the settings I want in camera even though I still use Raw format. One good choice when shooting Raw is Average WB and then do set it in post to whatever.