LR 5.5 and Canon DPP JPG export problem

  • 5
  • Problem
  • Updated 4 years ago
Lightroom 5.5 exports jpg files which will not open (as single files) in Canon's Digital Photo Professional software. LR 5.4 still works fine, so I went back to that. LR 5.5 will export TIF files properly, but who wants thousands of tif files jamming up storage?
Photo of John Peeples

John Peeples

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 4 years ago

  • 5
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 813 Reply Likes
Do the JPEG files open in Photoshop?
If so, then the problem is most likely another bug in JPEG parsing in Canon's DPP code.
Photo of John Peeples

John Peeples

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Chris,
The one file I could find that I exported with LR 5.5 did open in PS. However, I went back to LR 5.4 and everything works again with DPP. That just seems curious to me. Thanks for your prompt reply.
Mike
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 813 Reply Likes
Most likely that means that a metadata change in what LR writes is hitting another bug in DPP (we've seen them have lots of problems in the past).
Photo of Jim Wilde

Jim Wilde, Champion

  • 279 Posts
  • 90 Reply Likes
This issue was reported a week or so ago, at which time I tested it for myself. Yes, I can agree that jpegs exported from LR5.5 cannot be opened in DPP (new or previous version). However, the same jpeg files CAN be successfully opened in every other viewer and browser on both my Win7 and OSX Mavericks systems.

Interestingly, as well as this jpeg issue, I can't even get the latest version of Canon's DPP (version 4) to recognise raw files from my Canon 7d camera!

Have you tried opening the jpegs in other viewers? If so, are there any that give you the same problem?
Photo of John Peeples

John Peeples

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Yes, I am able to open the files in other viewers in Windows. Regarding DPP 4.0, Canon Rumors indicates that it will not open files from "older" cameras; only the latest. I, too, cannot open any photos shot with my 7D in DPP 4.0. I can only open files from my 6D. Therefore, I had to reinstall DPP 3.X as well as LR 5.4!!!
Photo of Alexander Vollkopf

Alexander Vollkopf

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
ok,

to come to a data driven solution I have exported one photo with LR5.4 (sunset1) and one photo with LR5.5 (sunset2). I was using exactly the same settings from a preset for the export.

You can easily see that both images do show an x/y-offset. Just in case you do not trust my eyes, I was running an image compare with imagemagick. The picture can be seen in diffimage and there is clearly an offset.

Please answer why?

To show you guys what is happening in another app on my NAS based photostation I have added another picture (capture.png). You can clearly see that sunset1 can be used in this system but sunset2 exported with the bug improved (at least that's what the change log claims) Lightroom 5.5 results just in crap.

DPP is not the only application there are other bug reports that you have not even answered.
Just because you can open it in photoshop does not meas there is no bug. There are plenty of other applications in the world and photoshop is not necessarily the center of the world.

I really do like lightroom and Photoshop, but I do not like tha attitude of the customer service. If I would treat my customer in this way, we would have lost a customer.

I really would like to see a response like "Oh, we are sorry, can you please send us some examples and we will look into it"

Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 813 Reply Likes
Your difference example does not show an offset, but does show a difference in the JPEG quality setting, leading to different values near edges.

As for the problems with your NAS - which software are you running on it that is failing to read the JPEG files?
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 813 Reply Likes
Checking the images in Photoshop, we find that they have no offset, and differ by a maximum of 3 values -- about what you'd expect if the quality setting were changed slightly, or a JPEG file was resaved with a different encoder.
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 813 Reply Likes
Diffing the 2 JPEG files, we find different quantization tables - meaning they were saved with different qualities, or different encoders.
Photo of Alexander Vollkopf

Alexander Vollkopf

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Thanks for looking into this. But this is the weird part. I was using Lightroom 5.4 and 5.5 with the same settings to export the same picture and it seems to be that a different decoder has been used for the export. Visually I also cannot see a difference in the export dialog settings. Is there anything else to test. And as mentioned not only DPP is affected and to be honest I do not care so much about dpp. Unfortunately I do not know, what QNAP is using to transform the pictures but I will try different web apps that are using GD and imagemagick in the next couple of days to see if it is reproducible.

There was at least also one reported issue with jalbum as far as i know.
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 813 Reply Likes
Not sure if it was a different encoder or decoder, it could be a small tweak in the quality tables. None of which should upset a compliant JPEG reader.
Photo of Todd Shaner

Todd Shaner, Champion

  • 1073 Posts
  • 346 Reply Likes
There is a post at Canon Rumors forum that indicates the JPEG marker order has been changed in LR5.5:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/inde...

Was this done intentionally to correct an issue or improve some operation in LR? If so does it comply with all JPEG standards? If not in either case it would seem the best solution is for Adobe to remedy this in an update. At the very least someone at Adobe could assist Canon with making DPP compatible. It shouldn't be necessary for either party to reveal "proprietary" information. Just a suggestion based on 45-years of work experience in system design.
Photo of Alexander Vollkopf

Alexander Vollkopf

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
JPEGs exported with LR5.5 causes issues in QNAP NAS media manager.


With update to LR5.5 an issue with JPEG export has been introduced. Exported JPEG images cannot be used in some applications. In my example, the mediamanager on my QNAP NAS does only generate corrupted resized JPEG images where most of the image is grey with some colored stripes. Reverting back to LR5.4 solves the issue. Others report similar issues with other applications. Please solve this issue as soon as possible.
Photo of Vivian Russell

Vivian Russell

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
This has just happened to me, too since I updated LR yesterday. Jpegs exported from LR are just a big X in DPP although tiffs are perfect. Updated new DPP but made no difference. Am now going to delete LR 5.5. and revert to 5.4. Thanks for posting this. What is Adobe playing at? Basic stuff!
Vivian R
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 813 Reply Likes
The JPEG files are readable by most applications, but not readable by a few that have a history of failing to reading perfectly valid JPEG files.
The application that fails to read the valid files is the application that needs to be fixed.

BTW - even minor metadata changes (all still valid) have broken DPP in the past.

Canon has a problem reading valid files, so Canon needs to fix their code. That's all there is to it.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
Fair enough I guess, but all programmers know: you have to add code to work around other's bugs, if you want your thing to work, despite those bugs.. I'm not saying Adobe cares enough to fix in Lr even though it "should" be fixed on the other end - just sayin'...
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 813 Reply Likes
We already work around the big bugs (OS, major applications, etc.). But we can't work around everyone else's bugs.
Photo of Vivian Russell

Vivian Russell

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I was bumping along quite happily switching between LR & DPP which is how I organise my workflow. Whatever the technical ins and outs of it all, it worked perfectly for me for many years and now it doesn't. Makes no sense at all! But thanks for your reply.
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
|> "Makes no sense at all!"

It's kinda like a mine field - just because you can walk around in it for a while without getting blown up, does not mean the next step won't blow you to bits.

I believe Chris is probably correct: bug not in Lightroom, despite the fact that an Lr change is what tipped the scale.. - but then I really don't know...

Cheers,
Rob
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
Here is a fix - Exportant (a free plugin I wrote):



Works out of the box on Windows platform, but Mac users need first to install JpegTran utility:

http://www.phpied.com/installing-jpeg...

Hint: Insert 'Miscellaneous' (and 'Main') post-process action in export/publish settings (and check the requisite boxes..).
Photo of Vivian Russell

Vivian Russell

  • 3 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thanks Rob - much appreciated
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
This problem is supposedly fixed in Lr5.6 (I haven't checked it, yet).

Can anybody confirm that it's fixed, or isn't, for them..
Photo of Jim Wilde

Jim Wilde, Champion

  • 279 Posts
  • 90 Reply Likes
Looks OK with LR5.6>DPP4, Rob. Only a couple of exports, but one should be enough, right?
Photo of Rob Cole

Rob Cole

  • 4831 Posts
  • 382 Reply Likes
Thanks Jim - and yeah: presumably if one or two are OK, all will be OK, for DPP4 anyway.

I still wonder whether it's solved the problem for the other apps too.