Skip navigation
HEAD Productions
Currently Being Moderated

Canon 5D Mark III support in CS6 PLEASE!

Apr 10, 2012 10:21 AM

I own Lightroom but prefer Bridge/Camera Raw for small projects. Would love to see an update to support Canon 5D Mark III in Camera Raw! Thank You.

 
Replies
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 10, 2012 10:27 AM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    Via SG on another post:

     

    "The Photoshop CS6 beta software has the same camera support as found in Ps CS5/5.5 compatible CR 6.6.

    There will be future updates to CR 7 for Ps CS6 to pick up more camera support.


    If you like to work with your 5D mkIII raw files in the public beta build now, you'll have to get the DNG Converter 6.7 from here: http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/cameraraw6-7/

    and convert your files to DNG."

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 10, 2012 11:09 AM   in reply to Howard Pinsky

    Thanks Howard!

     

    steve

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 14, 2012 1:30 PM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    So I take it Adobe is going to wait until CS6 comes out before officially supporting the 5D3?

    Looks like this camera upgrade is going to cost more than I thought.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 14, 2012 1:40 PM   in reply to william_900

    We might not see an update until CS6 ships. Until then, there are workarounds, listed above. Also, if you're a Lightroom user, Lightroom 4.1 RC supports the Mark III: http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/lightroom4-1.html

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 14, 2012 1:43 PM   in reply to william_900

    Hi,

     

    The link above is for the Camera Raw version that is compatible with Ps CS5. You won't need to upgrade from CS5 to CS6 in order to get camera support for the Canon 5D Mark III.

     

    Again, please check: http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/cameraraw6-7/

     

    You will however not get the new features of Camera Raw 7, unless you upgrade to Ps CS6.

     

    regards,

    steve

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,528 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 14, 2012 8:02 PM   in reply to william_900

    William, just to reiterate in different words...

     

    1.  You can download the Camera Raw 6.7 beta now, that will open 5DIII images directly in Ps CS5.

     

    2.  You can get the DNG converter 6.7 now that will convert 5DIII images to DNG, which you can then open in any version of Photoshop with Camera Raw, including the Ps CS6 beta.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 16, 2012 4:44 PM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    See this link for full details on camera support in Camera Raw versions:

    http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2012/03/raw-support-in-lightro om-and-camera-raw.html

     

     

    Snip taken from link above:

     

    You’ll also note that ACR7, available with Photoshop CS6 beta, is lagging the most in updated camera support.  This is based on when we lock down or “bake” the code for each release.   Even though ACR7 was only released last week it was “baked” before Lightroom 4.0 and Camera Raw 6.7.  Similarly, Lightroom 4.0 was finalized before Camera Raw 6.7.  We’ll get Lightroom and Camera Raw in sync soon but in the interim, here’s the latest incremental support list for each product, relative to Camera Raw 6.6 and Lightroom 3.6:

    Photoshop CS6 beta with ACR7

    • Canon PowerShot S100V
    • Fuji FinePix X-S1
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,052 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 17, 2012 1:02 AM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    And all these updates would be unecessary if your camera manufacturer embraced the DNG format that Thomas Knoll/Adobe offered to the community. Please lobby your camera manufacturer: it is his fault if your camera is not supported in many converters at day of release. Even the programs made by Canon/Nikon needs to be updated to support their new models. This would not be necessary, and engineers could work on features, rather than camera support.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor Dennis
    5,972 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 17, 2012 3:25 AM   in reply to Pierre Courtejoie

    PECourtejoie wrote:

     

    And all these updates would be unecessary if your camera manufacturer embraced the DNG format that Thomas Knoll/Adobe offered to the community. Please lobby your camera manufacturer: it is his fault if your camera is not supported in many converters at day of release. Even the programs made by Canon/Nikon needs to be updated to support their new models. This would not be necessary, and engineers could work on features, rather than camera support.

    How would dng work for people who don't want to own an Adobe product?  There must be one or two people out there who shoot RAW but prefer DPP, Capture NX, DxO, Captue One...     Would all those Adobe competitors need to incorperate the Adobe file format?  Seems like a big ask to me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 17, 2012 4:23 AM   in reply to Trevor Dennis

    well if the camera manufacturer supports DNG then their own software would support DNG as well i guess.

     

    and DNG is not proprietary to adobe software. everyone can support it.

    Trevor.Dennis wrote:


    How would dng work for people who don't want to own an Adobe product?  There must be one or two people out there who shoot RAW but prefer DPP, Capture NX, DxO, Captue One...     Would all those Adobe competitors need to incorperate the Adobe file format?  Seems like a big ask to me.

     

    i have 4 different camera brands.. it seems not too much to ask that i have to make sense of this format mess.

    i think it would make sense for software companys who make RAW converter to have less formats to support.

     

    the problem is that camera manufacturer don´t like to give away some of their influence and possibilities to make changes to the raw format they use.
    they sure would want to have influence on the DNG development and that would slow down the DNG progress... because of too many cooks.

     

    anyway i think we (the user) would benefit from an ISO standard for digital negativs.

    the closest to that is DNG right now (OpenRAW seems to be dead. mostly because of the ignorance of one person).

     

    DNG is based upon TIFF 6.0 and ISO standard TIFF/EP so ist not completely new stuff.

     

    i mean.. leica can do it!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,528 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 17, 2012 8:32 AM   in reply to Pierre Courtejoie

    LOL, they clearly don't WANT to support an open format.  The camera makers feel that the more things they can do to "lock you in" to their brand, the better.  The only software packages outside of their own that they would even acknowledge exist already have development programs that immediately embrace all their proprietary formats, and they don't even have to fund them.  Give the policy makers one good, tangible reason to change these current policies...  I can't see one. 

     

    Even Adobe leverages new camera support into selling new products.  You want to just open images from your new camera with minimum fuss?  Upgrade to new software (latest release of Photoshop/Lightroom).  I'm surprised they've even gone so far as to provide a free DNG converter - I'll bet there are leaders who have lobbied for discontinuing that program.

     

    Ladies and gentlemen, we are entering a new era of high tech corporate greed that you have not seen the likes of yet.  Be happy things are as good as they are right now.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 17, 2012 5:54 PM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    HEAD Productions wrote:

     

    Not having Ps and Lr in sync is a real workflow killer! I hope Adobe coordinates from now on and syncs Ps and Lr support of raw files.

     

    Yes it is a pain...but LR and Photoshop release cycles are never together. Close but since LR's first version there has been a few months of non-overlap. LR and ACR with the exception of initial releases are in sync and long as you are running the mosr recnt version of LR & PS with ACR. LR4 is in sync with PS CS6 except that the ACR 6.7 RC is slightly ahead of ACR 7 because of the beta release schedual of CS6 needing more time than ACR 6.7 or the LR4.1 RC.

     

    The root of the problem still comes back to the camera companies who release cameras without really working with 3rd parties nor ahearing to any sort of raw file format standards. People who get brand new cameras are always faced with a disconnect for 3rd party support. When that disconnect interecects with new software releases, the problem gets even worse...but it'll be cleared with in a month or so. In the meantime, the DNG Converter 6.7 will support all the new cameras except the new Fuji X Pro-1–which because of new sensor design might take a while.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 17, 2012 6:34 PM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    The root of the problem still comes back to the camera companies who release cameras without really working with 3rd parties nor ahearing to any sort of raw file format standards.

    YES!!!!!

    And this HAS to change. Whether it is Adobe DNG format or some other standard developed...

    It is totally irresponsible of the major players NOT to create, promote, endorse or support ANY standardized format for RAW images.

     

    A real disservice to photographers today and future generations.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Trevor Dennis
    5,972 posts
    May 24, 2010
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 17, 2012 9:15 PM   in reply to -Agfaclack-

    -Agfaclack- wrote:

     

     

    i have 4 different camera brands.. it seems not too much to ask that i have to make sense of this format mess.

    i think it would make sense for software companys who make RAW converter to have less formats to support.

     

    What the heck has end user convenience got to do with it?     The camera companies will still have to develop their proprietary software for folk who don't want to pay for LR or PS, so they are not going to trip over themselves to make life easier for Adobe, or even for the people using their cameras. I have had direct dealings with Canon because their sponsorship for Photographic Society events, and they are incredibly protective of their brand. That seems fair enough to me. Much as I'd like to avoid a different RAW format for every camera, I know it is not going to happen.

     

    Just think us all lucky that Adobe didn't develop the JPG standard!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,052 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 17, 2012 9:39 PM   in reply to Trevor Dennis

    Yet, many of them suppport the TIFF format, or based their raw format on TIFF-EP... both being Adobe-developed formats!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 17, 2012 11:52 PM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    I would like to see the support for 5D Mark III in CS6 too. Why couldn't beta camera raw updater update cs6 plugin? How are we expected to test raw file from mark iii in cs6 before the final version is out?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2012 12:53 AM   in reply to Trevor Dennis

    Trevor.Dennis wrote:

     

    -Agfaclack- wrote:

     

     

    i have 4 different camera brands.. it seems not too much to ask that i have to make sense of this format mess.

    i think it would make sense for software companys who make RAW converter to have less formats to support.

     

    What the heck has end user convenience got to do with it?     The camera companies will still have to develop their proprietary software for folk who don't want to pay for LR or PS, so they are not going to trip over themselves to make life easier for Adobe, or even for the people using their cameras. I have had direct dealings with Canon because their sponsorship for Photographic Society events, and they are incredibly protective of their brand. That seems fair enough to me. Much as I'd like to avoid a different RAW format for every camera, I know it is not going to happen.

     

    well if we all would think that way no standard would see the light of day and we still had betamax and VHS.. ähhh HD-DVD and BLU-RAY.

     

    if peope don´t say that they are unhappy with the format mess and just accept it.... sure nothing will change.

     

    leica and other camera manufacturers already offer DNG as format.
    it´s time for nikon and canon to join.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2012 12:55 AM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    What does this "format" discussion have to do with the original question of this thread?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2012 1:59 AM   in reply to Dmitry Dulepov

    Dmitry Dulepov wrote:

     

    What does this "format" discussion have to do with the original question of this thread?

     

     

    PECourtejoie wrote:

    And all these updates would be unecessary if your camera manufacturer embraced the DNG format that Thomas Knoll/Adobe offered to the community. Please lobby your camera manufacturer: it is his fault if your camera is not supported in many converters at day of release. Even the programs made by Canon/Nikon needs to be updated to support their new models. This would not be necessary, and engineers could work on features, rather than camera support.

     

    the original question was answerd a dozend times already (as a search would have revealed) so we moved on to greener fields.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2012 2:02 AM   in reply to -Agfaclack-

    I do not want to lobby anything. This is no my job. I buy the camera and Adobe software. I want Adobe software to support my camera when I click on the file produced by the camera. That's all. The rest is Adobe's job, not mine. I pay for it and the price is not small. So Adobe should care about it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2012 2:04 AM   in reply to Dmitry Dulepov

    My previous message may sound harsh but I really do not see why I should bother solving Adobe's issues with various formats. Not my job, really.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2012 2:12 AM   in reply to Dmitry Dulepov

    Dmitry Dulepov wrote:

     

    I do not want to lobby anything. This is no my job. I buy the camera and Adobe software. I want Adobe software to support my camera when I click on the file produced by the camera. That's all. The rest is Adobe's job, not mine. I pay for it and the price is not small. So Adobe should care about it.

     

    well .. let´s try a bit of logic here.

     

    to reverse engineer the cameras ... adobe must have them first.

    so expecting that a new camera is immediately supported by a third party product... well that is not gonna happen with a proprietary RAW format.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2012 2:13 AM   in reply to Dmitry Dulepov

    Dmitry Dulepov wrote:

     

    My previous message may sound harsh but I really do not see why I should bother solving Adobe's issues with various formats. Not my job, really.

     

    i don´t lobby DNG to make adobes job easyer.. i lobby DNG (or any standard RAW format if there would be one) because it would make MY job easyer.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2012 2:14 AM   in reply to -Agfaclack-

    Well, Adobe have raw support from this camera in LR4RC1 and DMG converter beta

     

    I could use LR4 to open raw files from mk3 in PS. However PS CS6 and LR4 do not work together. So I can't use LR4 to convert&open raw files in PS. The only way for me now:

    • Look at the images in LR4 and find the image I want to edit with PS
    • Launch DMG converter externally
    • Find the folder with files somewhere deep in the folder heirarchy
    • Convert all files from the folder to DMG
    • Go to Finder and find that deep directory
    • Find the necessary DMG file in about 300 files (150 cr2 +150 dmg)
    • Double click the file to open it in PS
    • Go to LR and clean up duplicates

     

    This takes too much time. This would not be necessary if PS either worked well with LR4 or CR update was available.

     

    Am I wrong?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 18, 2012 2:28 AM   in reply to Dmitry Dulepov

    CS6 is a BETA.... not a final product.

     

    with people expecting a BETA works like a final product i understand why many companys don´t do public betas.

     

    i could understand your complains if CS6 beta was meant to be used in a working environment.. but it´s just a BETA.
    and fact is that this beta don´t have all features of the final product.

     

    your wish falls in the same category as the wish that the final is released already and not only a beta... but that is the problem with a physical linear timeline for us humans. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 9:15 AM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    A problem for me is that the Camera Raw release that is given as a solution, when installed, actually removes some of the functions that were there in the earlier release of the software.  Chromatic distortion correction is gone, for example - since in Photoshop CS 6, they've moved that function to the "Len Correction" filter within Photoshop and taken it away from THAT version of Camera Raw as well.  I have now lost the ability to do automatic chromatic aberration correction within Photoshop CS 5.5 .  Thanks a lot, guys.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,528 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 9:38 AM   in reply to battlepriest

    Battlepriest, you'll be pleased to learn that the CA correction is NOT gone from Camera Raw 6.7, and in fact it has gotten better than ever...

     

    Go over to the Profile tab in the Lens Corrections section, and check the box at the bottom.

     

    CACorrection.png

     

    Yes, it seems like it's kind of in the wrong place, doesn't it.  But it really works.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 12:36 PM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    I suggest that the newly-posted Lr 4.1 (Upgrade/Beta/RC2) might solve the problem and I believe that you will then be able to open the processed RAW files into Photoshop CS6:

     

    http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom4-1/

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 12:44 PM   in reply to CameraAnn

    Installing or using LR4.1 RC2 does not add the new defringing to ACR, it only adds the ability to create a TIF or PSD in LR that has had the CA and defringing applied, and that can then be opened in any version of PS.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 12:54 PM   in reply to ssprengel

    That is what I was trying to explain.

     

    I think that using Lr 4.1 would make it possible for the OP to get access to support profiles for his 5D mkIII raw files  and he would then be able to open those processed RAW files in CS6?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,052 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 1:44 PM   in reply to CameraAnn

    No, Ann, an updated version of Camera Raw will still be needed.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 29, 2012 9:10 PM   in reply to CameraAnn

    LR 4.x is marching in tandem with ACR 6.6 and the DNG Converter 6.6.  ACR 6.7 is ahead of ACR 6,6 and ahead of ACR 7, because ACR 7 and LR 4.1 were finalized before ACR 6.7.  Confusing?  You bet!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,528 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2012 7:18 AM   in reply to station_one

    station_one wrote:

     

    Confusing?  You bet!

     

    Just a bit worrisome, too...  One would expect a suite of products should be managed and coordinated as a cohesive unit - no matter how big the company, no matter what the history.  But what motivates an organization to release one part early, before related software is ready?  Then we see updates of that early release come out as beta versions (RCs) several times, so maybe it wasn't really ready...  A Marketing experiment?

     

    Whatever happened to just continuing to work on software until it is ready, with commercial quality?  Set the engineers to optimizing the parts of it that are already feature-complete.  They love doing that!  Too much pressure from management to get early sales?  Why?  Is Adobe afraid of losing market share (to ???) so that they now push to release beta quality software early and in a disjointed way?

     

    I have to say, some parts of Adobe's recent strategy - the public beta of Photoshop CS6, for example - seem very good indeed.  Folks are happy to test software clearly marked as "beta" and which doesn't cost them, and you get the added benefit of them really wanting the release when it comes out.  We can only hope the released Photoshop product is solid and bug-free as a result of sending the beta out to everyone.

     

    Contrast that to releasing LR apparently too early, taking peoples' money, and having them essentially be paying beta testers.  The best Adobe can hope for is that people feel they got their money's worth.  The worst?  The appearance of lack of quality and lack of coordination.

     

    I don't mean to step on any toes here (and I apologize if I have)...  I'm just providing one person's honest assessment of what things look like.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Apr 30, 2012 1:25 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    LR4 was obviously rushed out the door so that it would beat the release of the Nikon D800 and Canon 5D3. Anticipating large sales of these cameras, Adobe did this so that all LR3 users would have to pay to be able to edit the new raw files. The worst part is that LR4 doesn't even officially support the 5D3 yet.

    LR4 is also incredibly slow. It is not a finished product and should not have been released.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Pierre Courtejoie
    7,052 posts
    Jan 11, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    May 1, 2012 12:26 PM   in reply to HEAD Productions

    Lr is not part of the creative suite, andI would rather guess that its release schedule is simply set apart of thé créative suite. Previous releases of lightroom did not match the ones of prosumer cameras.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    May 4, 2012 10:31 AM   in reply to Pierre Courtejoie

    Migrated from PS CS6 beta forums

     
    |
    Mark as:

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points