difference between digital photo professional and photoshop?

[bnnrcn]

I started shooting photographs 4 months ago and I have shot in jpg format till now..but I have realised that shooting in raw format is a necessity and it helps you a lot.So from now on I decided to shoot in both jpg and raw format for a while and then to shoot only in raw format,because I have to improve some PP skills besides improving shooting skills.My camera is a Canon 1100D and a computer programme came in the same box as my camera when I bought it.It is called Digital Photo Professional.I wonder if I can use this one for PP.Is there a big difference between photoshop and this one?Do you suggest me to start with this one or do you think I shouldn't deal with it at all and start with the most efficient one that I don't know which brand.At the moment I only use picasa for cleaning dots and leveling horison (I didn't even use picasa before I came to CIC,one of the members suggested me..)

[Colin Southern]

The difference in capability between DPP and Photoshop is probably similar to the difference between a child's pedal car and a Formula 1 car. No comparison what-so-ever.

The real question is "do you need the power of Photoshop"? That's not one I can answer, but I should probably say that most people don't need that much capability -- and even fewer seem prepared to put the effort into learning it.

I use it - and will always use it; others will probably suggest alternatives.

[bnnrcn]

Thank you Colin,I know you are very good at photoshop...What I know is that I need to learn PP,but what I don't know is the right tool for PP.Let's see what the other members say about it.

The difference in capability between DPP and Photoshop is probably similar to the difference between a child's pedal car and a Formula 1 car. No comparison what-so-ever.

The real question is "do you need the power of Photoshop"? That's not one I can answer, but I should probably say that most people don't need that much capability -- and even fewer seem prepared to put the effort into learning it.

I use it - and will always use it; others will probably suggest alternatives.

[Colin Southern]

Thank you Colin,I know you are very good at photoshop...What I know is that I need to learn PP,but what I don't know is the right tool for PP.Let's see what the other members say about it.

Personally, I feel it involves crystal ball gazing; if one is going to really embrace it then starting with Photoshop might be the best choice. If one is only wanting modest corrections then Photoshop Lightroom may well suffice or indeed other packages with DPP or GIMP.

The trick is knowing in advance so one doesn't have to turn-around and learn something new wen they hit the end of the road. Convenience and time also come into it.

[kintatsu]

I use the Canon DPP application. It works great converting RAW files into JPGs. It allows you to make your converted JPGs match your vision a lot closer to your desired outcome prior to dealing with another app. It's also designed for use with Canon gear, so it aligns better with your initial files.

You'll still need another app to further process your images.

[Manfred M]

The problem with Photoshop is that it is both costly and requires a lot of experience and skill to drive it reasonably well (building on Colin's pedal car to Formula 1 analogy).

I too would recommend going the Photoshop route, as it is really the "gold standard" when it comes to post-processing out there, but with the understanding that this might not be the right solution for everyone. Adobe makes two other popular productsl Photoshop Elements and Lightroom. There are also a number of free applications out there; with GIMP being the most powerful one (although you will need an third party RAW converter (DPP will work just fine for you).

[Donald]

DPP is a very good introductory tool for processing your RAW files into, for example, TIFF format, so that you can then finish them in a package such as the GIMP or some other package. DPP is essentially a RAW processing tool, although there are many people who use it as their only post-processing software. I would say that is too limiting, for while DPP is a good tool, it does not allow you to do many of things other packages do, particularly adding layers.

I learned about processing RAW images using DPP. I do not describe DPP a poor tool. Instead, I describe it as limited when put alongside some other tools. So, I would say it is a good thing to use at your stage of development and knowledge. Once you feel you have stretched DPP to the limits and wish to be abke to do more, you can look at alternative options.

[bnnrcn]

Many thanks all of you...you have helped me again to make my mind clear about the subject.What I have understood from above posts,I do the right thing by starting with DPP and I can always move to a more complicated one while still using DPP as a raw converter.An otherwise product would be more difficult for me for the time being because I haven't managed to shoot properly yet and I'm hoping to improve in spring by using the knowledge I have learnt from CIC .I hope my new tripod and set of lenses and filters help me in this rocky road,let me do it step by step:-)

[Donald]

I think that is an appropriate developmental pathway to follow.