NO, JoAnna - the result of your export will no be “with just the tone curve added in” - you will bake in white balance ( so that “R” - “G” - “B” channels in demosaicked linear DNG will be disbalanced accordingly to account for WB application that was set in DxO PL …you can’t exclude that - and the last time I checked there is no option to select UniWB in DxO unless your shot as such and then “as shot” might be of help - but even then your UniWB might not be exactly 1:1:1 but just close to that) and many other things IN ADDITION to results of tone curve application
How many times this VERY SIMPLE fact shall be repeated ?
How many times do I have to report your posts for abusive, arrogant and downright rude attitude, not just to me, but also to other kind, well-meaning folks who are trying to have a reasonable conversation?
And then you have the nerve to hide your real identity. Obviously your attitude has caused you to want to hide from those you have offended.
Now that is interesting. So, the original colour temperature transfers from the RAW to the DNG. That’s what i would have expected since the only tool I had touched was the curve.
Does Lr then treat the DNG as if it were a RAW file?
@noname, your input is neither solicited nor desired
The idea is for example that when someone wants to process an image with an other software than photolab but with optic correction and noise reduction (with pureraw for example), the exported DNG should keep the same “characteristics” than the original (plus optic correction and noise reduction only).
And this is not the case since you have to add a curve to try to correct it.
There are ways to do it, but photolab does not do it right for some cameras.
@noname ,
Beside the reading of the max R,G and B in RawDigger you haven’t much added to the problem. It’s a lot of shouting and repeating. And some nice cartoons. That must be your hobby.
DxO must give us the explanation of the problem and the solution. But I doubt if they do, the explanation.
So for me it is an adventure if I can “nail” the reason, a try anyway. The fact that exporting with all edits though no edits are done gives a good dng makes me believe that the problem may be there somewhere. I have a curiosity that I miss with you.
linear DNG output is already demosaicked … so other “demosaicer” for already demosaicked data is a bit complicated concept, isn’t it ? we shall assume you mean something like “raw converter” and NOT “demosaicer”
yes, a good point - people using DxO PureRaw can’t use any silly attempts @ tone curve - we all of course know that tone curve is not even a workaround for the bug for those who want only optics corrections and NR - but never hurts to drive that point again
as noted MULTIPLE TIMES it is not ONLY tone curve effects - a whole bunch of other things will be piled in the output ( baked in demosaicked data) as soon as we decide to select “Export as DNG (all corrections applied)”
I am not adding to the problem - I am reporting the problem and incorrect scaling ( max values are simply the way to show for hoi polloi ) of demosaicked data in linear DNG output when a user selects “Export as DNG (Denoise and Optical Corrections only)” this is the problem vs a relevant white level tag written in that DNG is the problem …
indeed, we can live w/o explanation for as long as it will be fixed… DxO already acknowdedged the bug as described with X-T5, now we are simply pointing to them that this is not the only model… it might be on a smaller scale - as the smaller the gap the less pronounced magenta skies effect is - but it is still there … the only proper solution is for all camera models to scale demosaicked data to the relevant white point tag that DxO itself writes
I turned on the shadow and highlight clipping warnings to see how far I can go with the whites and blacks, but then didn’t set them as “strong” to remain more believable (the subject looks too flat/dim for a bright day and the sky is overcast). In that context I didn’t check, if the “original” color temperature from the PL rendering was overtaken by LR. It looked similar to me, but I wanted to change it anyway …
And yes, there’s absolutely no point in overexposing at will and then trying to “heal” in software.
I suppose that this is the consequence of DPL’s spreading burnt highlights as can be seen in the screens from RawDigger in my previous post and the screens from LrC above.
From a metadata point of view, I see no difference in “white” as shown below:
you can even see in ACR histogram why … small spikes for the first picture shows that ACR not seeing a clipping ( rightfully, because DxO PL did not produce a proper linear DNG ) does not employ anti-“magenta” technique, WB application when you pull brightness happens as usual and “blue” + “red” are more bright then “green” = magenta tint in the skies… for the second picture ACR now correctly ( of course , as it has a properly formed linear DNG to deal with ) detects clipping and no matter how you pull brightness ACR keeps fixing the channels scale by not allowing WB application (only the areas when it shall be done so ! ) to result in “magenta skies” effect
, nobody else is at fault that you do not understand your suggestion is not even a workaround for the bug in question
