Skip to main content
K
k3nb0t
Participant
January 22, 2025
解決済み

Panorama DNGs created from Google Pixel DNGs no longer have "google embedded camera profile"

  • January 22, 2025
  • 返信数 2.
  • 483 ビュー
  1. Version of the app: 14.1 (issue present from 13.3 onwards)
  2. Platform and OS version: Windows 10

Phone: Pixel 6 Pro

 

Panorama DNGs created using photo merge (ctrl+m) used to get a profile called "google embedded camera profile", however since version 13.3 they do not and only the defualt Adobe profiles are available, which give an extremely overexposed image and require a lot of processing to get a nice result.

 

Issue does not appear to be caused by a change on google's side, as creating a panorama using the same set of input files in the different versions of lightroom show the issue only occurs in Lightroom Classic versions since 13.3 (versions 13.2 and below were OK).

 

Sample files (tried to attach but got this error "does not match its file extension and has been removed": https://1drv.ms/f/c/adb60cab3509b123/Eg6TroFyRL5OvYETnFG406UBRd-fLsvvxLhWSSHL6XsXsQ?e=kul38U
Google profile available.dng - Pano created with old version of lightroom (e.g. 13.2) which has the google embedded camera profile
Google profile not available.dng - Pano created from the same set of .dng files as the previous image, but created using a recent version of Lightroom (e.g. 14.1) - google embeeded camera profile is not present
remaining files are the 8 input .dngs used to create the pano

 

I did try to extract the profile from an old pano with dcpTool and then import that profile to lightroom to apply to new panos, but i couldn't get the imported profile as an option on the new panos in the profile browser

 

if anyone can help with a workaround or advise if this could be raised as a bug, that would be great, thank you.

解決に役立った回答 johnrellis

[This post contains formatting and embedded images that don't appear in email. View the post in your Web browser.]

 

I'd consider this a bug, though I'm skeptical Adobe will pay enough attention to make a careful consideration as to whether they think it is or not.

 

Normally, Photo Merge sets the camera profile of the merged DNG to the camera profile of the input photos. But it's not doing it in this case.

 

In LR 13.2 and earlier, Photo Merge did exactly that, copying the camera profile embedded in the input DNGs (Google Embedded Camera Profile) to the merged DNG.  But in LR 13.3 and later, it set the embedded camera profile of the merged DNG to Adobe Standard, discarding the original embedded profile.

 

I'd consider this as a bug -- Photo Merge isn't preserving the camera profiles assigned to the input DNGs as it normally does.

 

I think this bug was introduced as a side effect of fixing another bug: LR 13.2 and earlier didn't recognize the Adobe profiles (Adobe Standard, Adobe Color, etc.) for many of the Google Pixel phones, including the 6 Pro:

https://community.adobe.com/t5/camera-raw-bugs/p-google-pixel-6-6a-6-pro-7a-and-7-pro-dngs-don-t-show-adobe-camera-profiles/idi-p/14446768

 

The root of that bug was that the DNG spec requires the field EXIF:UniqueCameraModel to uniquely identify the camera model.  The Google camera app sets it to "Google Pixel 6 Pro".  But the Adobe camera profiles treat the phone as having four separate cameras: Pixel 6 Pro Front Camera, Pixel 6 Pro Rear Main Camera, Pixel 6 Pro Rear Telephoto Camera, Pixel 6 Pro Rear Ultrawide Camera. There are separate Adobe Standard profiles for each of those. So there must be a special case in the camera profile code to handle the disconnect between what the Google camera app is recording (one camera) and the profiles expect (four cameras).

 

One effect of the bug fix for the Adobe profiles was to change EXIF:UniqueCameraModel of the merged DNGs to be "Google Pixel 6 Pro Rear Main Camera" instead of "Google Pixel 6 Pro". This might have confused LR 13.3 Photo Merge into setting the embedded profile of the merged DNG to Adobe Standard rather than the embedded Google profile in the input DNGs.

 

While waiting for Adobe to fix this (which I'm guessing isn't likely), two workarounds:

 

- Make a preset that closely approximates the embedded Google profile, using the Tone Curve and the Highlights, Shadows sliders.  The merged DNGs haven't lost any information (e.g. blown-out pixels), and just a minute or two of tinkering with the sliders may be sufficient.

 

- Use "dcpTool" to extract the Google embedded profile into a .dcp profile that works with DNGs merged by LR 13.3 and later:

 

1. Do:

 

dcpTool -d PXL_20240224_154254205.RAW-02.ORIGINAL.dng google-pixel.xml

 

 

2. Edit "google-pixel.xml" in a text editor and change this line:

 

    <UniqueCameraModelRestriction>Google Pixel 6 Pro</UniqueCameraModelRestriction>

 

to be:

 

    <UniqueCameraModelRestriction>Google Pixel 6 Pro Rear Main Camera</UniqueCameraModelRestriction>

 

 

3. Do

 

dcpTool -c google-pixel.xml google-pixel.dcp

 

 

4. In LR, do File > Import Develop Profiles And Presets and select "google-pixel.dcp".

 

5. Restart LR (important).

 

6. Now the profile Google Embedded Camera Profile will appear in the Legacy group:

 

 

返信数 2

K
k3nb0t作成者
Participant
January 26, 2025

Lightroom Classic Version Number: 14.1.1
OS Version Number: Windows 10
Phone: Pixel 6 Pro Android 15 - all OS and app updates installed

 

Steps to reproduce:
perform photo merge on 2 or more .dng from pixel 6 pro (or like any recent pixel phone) to create a panorama

Expected result:
Panorama is created with "google embedded camera profile"

Actual result: Panorama is created with only adobe colour profiles available

 

Panorama DNGs created using photo merge (ctrl+m) used to get a profile called "google embedded camera profile", however since version 13.3 they do not and only the defualt Adobe profiles are available

 

johnrellis has kindly written a detailed explanation of what is likely the cause, relating to EXIF:UniqueCameraModel here: https://community.adobe.com/t5/lightroom-classic-discussions/panorama-dngs-created-from-google-pixel-dngs-no-longer-have-quot-google-embedded-camera-profile-quot/m-p/15105808#M393919

 

Sample files (tried to attach but got this error "does not match its file extension and has been removed": https://1drv.ms/f/c/adb60cab3509b123/Eg6TroFyRL5OvYETnFG406UBRd-fLsvvxLhWSSHL6XsXsQ?e=kul38U
Google profile available.dng - Pano created with old version of lightroom (e.g. 13.2) which has the google embedded camera profile
Google profile not available.dng - Pano created from the same set of .dng files as the previous image, but created using a recent version of Lightroom (e.g. 14.1) - google embeeded camera profile is not present
remaining files are the 8 input .dngs used to create the pano

johnrellis
johnrellis解決！
Legend
January 25, 2025

[This post contains formatting and embedded images that don't appear in email. View the post in your Web browser.]

 

I'd consider this a bug, though I'm skeptical Adobe will pay enough attention to make a careful consideration as to whether they think it is or not.

 

Normally, Photo Merge sets the camera profile of the merged DNG to the camera profile of the input photos. But it's not doing it in this case.

 

In LR 13.2 and earlier, Photo Merge did exactly that, copying the camera profile embedded in the input DNGs (Google Embedded Camera Profile) to the merged DNG.  But in LR 13.3 and later, it set the embedded camera profile of the merged DNG to Adobe Standard, discarding the original embedded profile.

 

I'd consider this as a bug -- Photo Merge isn't preserving the camera profiles assigned to the input DNGs as it normally does.

 

I think this bug was introduced as a side effect of fixing another bug: LR 13.2 and earlier didn't recognize the Adobe profiles (Adobe Standard, Adobe Color, etc.) for many of the Google Pixel phones, including the 6 Pro:

https://community.adobe.com/t5/camera-raw-bugs/p-google-pixel-6-6a-6-pro-7a-and-7-pro-dngs-don-t-show-adobe-camera-profiles/idi-p/14446768

 

The root of that bug was that the DNG spec requires the field EXIF:UniqueCameraModel to uniquely identify the camera model.  The Google camera app sets it to "Google Pixel 6 Pro".  But the Adobe camera profiles treat the phone as having four separate cameras: Pixel 6 Pro Front Camera, Pixel 6 Pro Rear Main Camera, Pixel 6 Pro Rear Telephoto Camera, Pixel 6 Pro Rear Ultrawide Camera. There are separate Adobe Standard profiles for each of those. So there must be a special case in the camera profile code to handle the disconnect between what the Google camera app is recording (one camera) and the profiles expect (four cameras).

 

One effect of the bug fix for the Adobe profiles was to change EXIF:UniqueCameraModel of the merged DNGs to be "Google Pixel 6 Pro Rear Main Camera" instead of "Google Pixel 6 Pro". This might have confused LR 13.3 Photo Merge into setting the embedded profile of the merged DNG to Adobe Standard rather than the embedded Google profile in the input DNGs.

 

While waiting for Adobe to fix this (which I'm guessing isn't likely), two workarounds:

 

- Make a preset that closely approximates the embedded Google profile, using the Tone Curve and the Highlights, Shadows sliders.  The merged DNGs haven't lost any information (e.g. blown-out pixels), and just a minute or two of tinkering with the sliders may be sufficient.

 

- Use "dcpTool" to extract the Google embedded profile into a .dcp profile that works with DNGs merged by LR 13.3 and later:

 

1. Do:

 

dcpTool -d PXL_20240224_154254205.RAW-02.ORIGINAL.dng google-pixel.xml

 

 

2. Edit "google-pixel.xml" in a text editor and change this line:

 

    <UniqueCameraModelRestriction>Google Pixel 6 Pro</UniqueCameraModelRestriction>

 

to be:

 

    <UniqueCameraModelRestriction>Google Pixel 6 Pro Rear Main Camera</UniqueCameraModelRestriction>

 

 

3. Do

 

dcpTool -c google-pixel.xml google-pixel.dcp

 

 

4. In LR, do File > Import Develop Profiles And Presets and select "google-pixel.dcp".

 

5. Restart LR (important).

 

6. Now the profile Google Embedded Camera Profile will appear in the Legacy group:

 

 

    K
    k3nb0t作成者
    Participant
    January 25, 2025

    Thank you so much for taking the time to look into this, provide a detailed explanation of what is going on and provide a good workaround. I really appreciate it!

     

    Is it worth making a post in the bugs section just in case?

    johnrellis
    johnrellis
    Legend
    January 26, 2025

    "Is it worth making a post in the bugs section just in case?"

     

    It never hurts and it sometimes helps.

    契約条件Accessibility statement
    Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices