Guidance Needed on Color Management to Send CR3 file From Lightroom to PL6 and Back

I have been reading the several threads on PL6 color management and getting more and more confused how best to do this. I want to use the new wide gamut format. I have a calibrated Adobe RGB monitor on screen 2 of my Win 10 PC.

Please consider two PL6 Export choices. In both I have a CR3 file in LR and will be doing nothing with it there until I send it to PL6 and it returns.
A. Export an image from PL6 to LR Classic in linear DNG format with all DxO corrections
(Except color rendering)…
B. Export an image from PL6 to LR Classic in linear DNG format with only optical corrections and denoising.

  1. Does DXO treat the DNG’s differently in A & B other than what corrections are applied?
  2. If I do any correction in PL6 besides Optical and denoising, must I use A?
  3. Am I correct to assume that there is no rendering done in either case and will be done in LR?
  4. If no rendering is done in PL, does the gamut choice in PL6 (Legacy or Wide) make any difference once the file is back in LR?
  5. Do I need to have Soft Proofing ‘On’ before Exporting?

Thanks very much for any clarifications offered.

For ease-of-use, I propose you do “B” first and then do everything else in Lightroom.
Ignore all colour settings and test the workflow before committing for good.

I had tested the variants and found that it is easier to not bother and use the same procedure every time than to figure out when to do A or B. After all, what exactly are the colours in the RAW file’s image? We’ll never know and comparing things adds to the confusion, also because all editors have their own ideas about what the correct rendering and white balance values are.

The only goals imo should be an easy to use, repeatable workflow by

  1. keeping things simple by not doing similar things in several apps
  2. producing colours you like rather that colours that pretend to be correct

As always: Your mileage may vary.


To answer this single question only, Rod;

  • It does not matter whether Soft Proofing is ON or OFF when exporting … Either way, during the Export process, an algorithm (specific to the target ICC Profile) will be automatically applied to protect any saturated colours … See here for more info on this.

  • If you are using the new wide gamut color space then I recommend that you have Soft Proofing set ON at all times - as then you will see the result (on screen, within PL) of the Protect Saturated Colors Algorithm being applied … That’s what having Soft Proofing set ON does.

– Tho, things may be a little complicated if you’re using two differently capable monitors …
– Which one will you be Soft Proofing for (?? !!)


1 Like

That doesn’t apply to linear DNG exports, John.

Linear-DNG - DxO

Color rendering is a non-linear process. This is why PL6 clarifies the DNG export options by adding “except color rendering” to one of them. Functionally, this option is the same as it was in PL5. So neither option includes color rendering. The linear DNG image is only partially demosaiced and remains in the camera’s native color space. So, as I understand it:

  1. No.
  2. Yes, if you want those additional corrections sent to Lr.
  3. Essentially, yes. Nevertheless, what you get in Lr from a DxO linear DNG might not match what you get in Lr directly from the RAW file.
  4. I thought no, but this post says otherwise: PL6 DNG export options - #28 by jorismak
  5. No, soft proofing doesn’t matter since your export will not have color rendering applied.

For greater clarification, including explanations from DxO staff and the as-yet-unsettled concern about #4, see this post and those that follow: PL6 DNG export options - #33 by Barbara-S

Maybe someone who has actually used this workflow can help more than I.


Ahh - OK.


1 Like

This is actually incorrect. The image is fully demosaiced and includes DeepPrime noise reduction and lens correction if specified.

See this:

1 Like

Hmmm. What I meant by partially demosaiced is described in the following discussion. I thought I read somewhere (maybe even in that discussion) that this is incomplete demosaicing, since the Bayer RGGB mosaic pattern is preserved (or whatever sensel pattern is used) - but you’ve indicated that this isn’t proper semantics. I’m still learning about this.

1 Like

DNG files can contain mosaiced or de-mosaiced images. DxO writes demosaiced images, therefore we get the increased file size.

RAW image at 1000% as seen in RawDigger

DNG exported by DPL:

Nevermind the colours and look at the screenshots in original size. Then, the RAW file will show its Bayer structure, while the DNG exhibits a “normal” RGB structure.

Anyway, we’re off topic again :wink:

1 Like

Thanks for a good reminder of the KISS principle and to be consistent. I will be following that! :slight_smile:

1 Like

Thanks for the point by point reply. Helpful. I had read some, but not all of your links. After these links and some of the confusion you referenced in my point 4 is when I decided to make this thread, Very glad that I did.

Thanks for pointing that out. If I do soft proofing, it will be on the Eizo. That is my #2 monitor so I guess I need to determine what Windows may do to it for color management.

Thanks to all of you for your helpful posts here. :slight_smile: After mostly digesting all of this my thoughts are to use PL basically as a PureRaw with the ability to adjust Deep Prime. This will have me use B. Export an image from PL6 to LR Classic in linear DNG format with only optical corrections and denoising.

My remaining concerns are:

  1. Can I do B. and also use Perspective adjustments? I don’t need that often and could call Viewpoint from LR if necessary. It would of course be more convenient to do it in PR.
  2. Is anything affected in B. by having my Eizo as the second monitor? It shouldn’t make a difference in PL because I’m not doing any color adjusting. But I need to find out if it might have an effect in LR when I do adjustments there. (nothing to do with PL of course.).

Perspective corrections made in DPL are lost when you export to “OC/NR only” DNG. Moreover, you don’t need ViewPoint to correct perspective distortions. Lightroom can do that!

PhotoLab does not care. You don’t have to either, as long as you do colour adjustments in LrC. I’d simply make sure to use the calibrated screen for colour and tonality work. Note that Lightroom can be switched to softproofing too!

1 Like

Thanks Platypus. I’ll have to check out LR Perspective adjustments. All of my photo editing is done on the Eizo.

I had seen soft proofing in LR. Fortunately it doesn’t need to be used to get correct monitor color display. :slight_smile:

There is an option C in which you stop using Lightroom…

Do you use Lightroom-specific features?

1 Like

I guess you are assuming that I have used LR for a long time and am a new PR user. It’s actually the opposite.

If I misunderstood, please let me know.

In which case, Sparky’s implied question is a good one: Why would you want to complicate your workflow by inserting LR into it ?

As well and as easily as can be achieved with PL ?

John M

1 Like

A curiosity question, Rod;

What is the intended target of your final export ?

If you’re working (within PL) on your Adobe RGB Eizo monitor - and Soft Proofing for that monitor too - and (presumably ?) exporting via ICC Profile = AdobeRGB … then does that mean;

  • you only ever “consume” the resulting image on an AdobeRGB-capable monitor (or better) ?

  • you don’t share the exported image with others (on-line, or to those with typical sRGB-limited monitors) ?

John M

1 Like

Oh Boy! :slight_smile:

Actually I am switching (for how long I don’t know) to LR to somewhat simplify my workflow.

  1. I’m no longer needing Photo Supreme or Imatch. LR has a very good DAM. It’s not as elaborate as those two, but sufficient for me and way ahead of PL’s.
  2. I’m finding LR easier to use and more intuitive. That is probably contrary to many here but is where I am.
  3. I am finding their masking to be excellent and again more intuitive for me.
  4. I use some external apps such as Topaz. I can easily send an image from LR to PS, open a layer for an external, send it there and it comes back with adjustments. I can then open another layer for a different external and so on. I can adjust the opacity of each layer to suit if needed, flatten the layers and send it back to LR. All of this is done with a minimum of TIFF’s or DNG’s, quickly and easily.
  5. I can develop and edit my cell phone images in LR.
  6. There is an abundance of good (& some not so good) tutorials available for LR/PS
  7. Because of the popularity of LR/PS many companies make Plugins for them.
  8. I haven’t worked on my old jpg’s there yet but might have more of LR/PS capability available.

I have only been using LR for a short time. Time will tell how it all works out for me, but so far I’m very happy.

I certainly don’t mean to bash DXO. It’s has excellent products and certainly has a very good reputation. This ‘Community’ is something to be verry proud of. I have learned a lot here and had some excellent assistance. I do fear that DXO is not supporting it and you Beta Testers the way they should. You all are a tremendous asset, and they should be treating you with a lot more appreciation and support.

1 Like

The resulting images that have been worked on with my AdobeRGB monitor in PL and now PL & LR. have two paths.

  1. The majority of images are exported as jpg’s in sRGB. These of course are suitable for most anyone’s monitor.
  2. I print some. For those I will export in the widest gamut possible.

Thanks for asking. :slight_smile: Rod