Welcome Dialog

Welcome to the Community!

We have a brand new look! Take a tour with us and explore the latest updates on Adobe Support Community.


Camera Raw: Canon R5 Raw images are underexposed

3 Votes
Engaged ,
Aug 22, 2020 Aug 22, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Canon R5 RAW images are underexposed by 1.5 to 2 stops when imported into Lightroom. 
Bug Fixed
TOPICS
Desktop

Views

210

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 1 Correct answer

Adobe Employee , Oct 21, 2020 Oct 21, 2020
Greetings,   Updates for the Adobe Photography Products were officially released on 10.20.2020 that include fixes for these issues. Please install the most recent update and confirm that your issue is now fixed. Please let us know if you encounter any issues. If you have large numbers of affected previously-edited images you can: Use the Library Filter to only show images from the Canon R5 with edits. In LIbrary - Grid Select All Use Quick Develop to adjust exposure to -2/3 (Small L...

Translate

Translate
76 Comments
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 22, 2020 Aug 22, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

You can't know anything about the exposure without viewing a raw Histogram and none exists in ACR or Lightroom. 

The images appear too dark with perhaps a default rendering. You can adjust image brightness with the controls provided, but this has nothing to do with exposure (Exposure only takes place at image capture, the result of the amount of light striking the sensor so just Aperture and Shutter). 
If you want to evaluate actual exposure, you need a tool like RawDigger to view a raw Histogram. 

Articles on exposing for raw:
http://www.onezone.photos
http://schewephoto.com/ETTR/
https://luminous-landscape.com/the-optimum-digital-exposure/
http://digitaldog.net/files/ExposeForRaw.pdf
https://www.fastrawviewer.com/blog/mystic-exposure-triangle
https://www.fastrawviewer.com/blog/red_flowers_photography_to-see-the-real-picture
https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/exposure-for-raw-or-for-jpegs
https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/beware-histogram
https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/calibrate-exposure-meter-to-improve-dynamic-range
Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Aug 22, 2020 Aug 22, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

What I meant is that they are very dark when imported even though the exposure is correct in camera. I have to bump up the exposure to 1.5 to 2 stops. This didn't happen with my other Canon cameras. 

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Aug 22, 2020 Aug 22, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

What do they look like imported into ACR?  Since ACR and LR use the same algorithms, you can determine whether LR, ACR or the algorithm is at fault.  What do the metadata say about the photos.  You say they are 1.5 to 2 stops underexposed when demosaicked, but do the metadata match your original camera settings that you say are correct?  If I read the 9.4 release notes for the R5, it seems to say that support is preliminary.  That suggests further optimizations will come in subsequent releases.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 22, 2020 Aug 22, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Adjust brightness as desired and make an import preset. Now again, they may be under exposed but there is no way to view actual exposure in LR. Upload a raw, I can examine in RawDigger or you can with its demo.
Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Aug 22, 2020 Aug 22, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I am not seeing any problems with the R5 RAW images I have imported. Using LR Classic 9.4

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Aug 22, 2020 Aug 22, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Well when the images are imported I see a jpeg preview which is the right exposure but then then when it loads the RAW, it becomes very dark. Would you say that is normal? Didn't happen to my other cameras. 

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 22, 2020 Aug 22, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The JPEG preview has no bearing on the raw exposure. Again, exposure of raw can only be evaluated with proper tools outside of LR.
Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Advocate ,
Aug 22, 2020 Aug 22, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

the jpgs have camera settings baked into them and LR doesn't recognize those settings.

this is an incredibly common issue and there are countless articles about the subject. 

https://www.google.com/search?q=lightroom+changes+color+after+import

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Aug 23, 2020 Aug 23, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

What you are seeing IN Camera is a JPG file that is Embedded into every RAW file. No camera that I know of uses the RAW data to show you an image on the cameras built in screen.
Also that embedded JPG is using whatever options you have set in the cameras menu system, the RAW data does not use them.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 23, 2020 Aug 23, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LR recognizes the jPEG the camera generated for previews and you could keep them but they are useless and don't represent the JPEGs (or previews) LR  must build to represent the current rendering settings. So it rebuilds them. Been this way since day one. 
Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This is what has been noticed. When you open RAW files from the R and the R5 of the same image using Canons DPP the exposures are fairly equal. When you open those two flies using LrC 9.4 the R5 files are about 1/2 a stop darker.            

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Advocate ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

isn't DPP compensating for the in-camera settings?

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

When you open RAW files from the R and the R5 of the same image using Canons DPP the exposures are fairly equal. When you open those two flies using LrC 9.4 the R5 files are about 1/2 a stop darker.             
No, the exposure is the same, the rendering isn't. 
This has absolutely nothing to do with exposure. It has everything to do with some default rendering that lacks 'ideal' brightness which can easily be corrected. 
Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I've noticed this also - same settings, same scene, all auto in-camera stuff turned off (lens corrections, etc.), same WB setting, same aperture, shutter, ISO, same lens - open the RAW files in DPP and the exposure is within 1/6 of a stop, actually very slightly brighter on the R5. Open the same two images in LR, and the R5 image is roughly 1/2 stop darker across the frame. 

The cameras appear to be exposing the same, but LR is rendering the CR3 file from the R5 slightly darker for some reason. Yes, it can be adjusted in PP, and I've set up a preset to bring things closer (modest changes in the calibration panel as well to true up some colors) to what it should be. 

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

 Yes, it can be adjusted in PP...

What's important here is EVERYTHING you see in ACR or LR is 'PP'. It is always rendering based on some setting; the default out of the box or one you've made. It never shows you the actual raw which would look something like this:

http://www.digitaldog.net/files/ThisIsRaw.jpg

The exposure is what it is, why LR might preview one raw from a camera differently than other isn't unusual (even from the same manufacturer). 

The point is:
1. If anyone here is concerned with actual exposure of the raw data, no Adobe product gives you that data. 
2. An image can look ' over exposed' (actually too bright) or 'under exposed' (actually not bright enough), a slider called Exposure doesn't affect exposure at all. It affects the brightness via rendering the raw along with lots of other sliders. 
3. IF the default doesn't appear as you desire, make a custom default. 
4. An optimally exposed raw will nearly always look way, way to bright with the out of the box default settings. Which is why those of us shooting optimal raw exposures always have a custom default setting to ' normalize' the rendering for ideal raw exposure. 
5. The JPEG preview from a raw is based on the exposure for that raw and if it looks 'ok', the likelihood is the raw is grossly under exposed. That camera JPEG is over-written in ACR/LR based on its current rendering settings and again, this has no bearing on the exposure of the raw. It is simply a preview with one, maybe close or close to ideal rendering or one that isn't anything like the ideal rendering. 
Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm just concerned with the rendering itself - it seems like Adobe isn't accurately rendering the exposure on-screen and thus requiring additional adjustments. When I open a RAW file to further develop, I like some fidelity to what was originally captured. I'm not saying that adjustments aren't going to be needed, but I would expect to be starting at a point that doesn't "appear" to be underexposed.

I noticed that if I instead use a camera-generated JPG, the exposure retains that 1/2 to 2/3 stop greater brightness. Of course, you lose the dynamic range benefits of the RAW file that way, but the initial presentation on the screen is truer to what was photographed.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This is a known issue and I've linked this thread to our internal bug report. It should be fixed in an upcoming release. 
Rikk Flohr - Customer Advocacy: Adobe Photography Products

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thank You!

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

 it seems like Adobe isn't accurately rendering the exposure on-screen and thus requiring additional adjustments.
There is nothing ' accurate' here. The raw is essentially a grayscale file. It has to be rendered into RGB and that's done based on the current settings. 
You use say Adobe Standard profile, you get one rendering and a different rendering doing nothing else but picking a differing DCP profile. Or a slight adjustment of WB etc. Nothing here is accurate, it's all subjective. 

I noticed that if I instead use a camera-generated JPG, the exposure retains that 1/2 to 2/3 stop greater brightness.
Again, the camera generated JPEG is just another subjective rendering of the raw data produced by a machine, not a human. It isn't any more or less accurate than any other preferred (subjective) rendering and it isn't based on the exposure of the raw. 
You could make a default adjustment of /2 to 2/3 stop greater brightness, open the raw, it would look as you desire. And that's probably what you should do but recognize again, the actual (optimal) exposure is still unknown. You must view the raw data to know about that attribute of the raw data. 
Of course, you lose the dynamic range benefits of the RAW file that way
No, you lose it by not exposing the data ideally in the first place! And that toothpaste is out of the tube by the time you're in LR/ACR. See:

https://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/calibrate-exposure-meter-to-improve-dynamic-range
Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I think you're posting in a more intricate, detailed level than I am - which is Ok because I'm learning a little something here too. 

I shoot raw because it has additional latitude over the JPG image, but the camera's rendition of what the final JPG will look like is very good. 

I have actually made a preset "tweak" that includes about 1/3 stop increased brightness, a little adjustment to the contrast, and some tweaking of the colors in the calibration panel to try to mimic, as best as I could, what my camera-produced JPG image renders. It helps having that little color checker panel as well.

Yes, I agree, it's all somewhat subjective. What it actually looks like - vs - what you think it should look like, what you remember it looking like, and what Canon, Adobe, and the Dell monitor think it looks like - well, it's a lot align.

Thanks for the insights and the links.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Lets hope this won't take half a year and longer like other acknowledged bugs. Could be worth betting what happens sooner, Canon resupplying the R5s or Adobe fixing something. 😄

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 24, 2020 Aug 24, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I shoot raw because it has additional latitude over the JPG image, but the camera's rendition of what the final JPG will look like is very good. 
Exactly, Ideally you want to stick with the raw data. The JPEG engine that processes the raw massively clips and compresses highlights. We often don't when editing the raw. This compression can clump midtones as much as 1 stop while compressing shadow details! People incorrectly state that raw has more highlight data but the fact is, the DR captured is an attribute of the capture system; it's all there in the raw but maybe not in a camera proceed JPEG.

A raw capture that's 10 or 11 stops of dynamic range can be compressed to 7 stops from this JPEG processing which is a significant amount of data and tonal loss! So when we hear people state that a raw has more DR than a JPEG, it's due to the poor rendering or handling of the data to create that JPEG. The rendering of this data and the reduction of dynamic range is from the JPEG engine that isn't handling the DR data that does exists as well as we can from the raw! Another reason to capture and render the raw data, assuming you care about how the image is rendered!

And with ideal exposure for raw, you can better deal with DR as outlined. 

Now Rikk states this rendering is a bug that will be fixed, but again, the exposure is what it is, so in the meantime, adjusting the rendering brightness to compensate should be a temporary fix. 
Author “Color Management for Photographers" & "Photoshop CC Color Management" (pluralsight.com)

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Aug 29, 2020 Aug 29, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

We just photographed a wedding using three Canon EOS cameras (5D Mark IV, 1DX Mark II and new R5) and imported just over 10,000 RAW files (multi-day, two photographers) as usual into LR Classic as we have done for many years with success. I can confirm that every photograph from the R5 initially looked fine when LrC was reading the internal JPG made in camera, but once LrC made its own 1:1 previews, every R5/CR3 image was presented around 2/3 stop too dark/underexposed and looked very flat (in dire need of some color saturation). I also note that LrC applied ZERO noise reduction whatsoever to CR3 files on import and that's unfortunate as it needs a bit of NR as usual to make images look best. The CR2 files from the other two cameras looked perfect as usual so it was easy to pick out the unfortunate R5 CR3 rendering. I believe there is an issue here and we anxiously await an update to LrC to address this as we live or die by LrC in our business. Many thanks.   Denis Reggie - Atlanta

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Aug 29, 2020 Aug 29, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thank you! Please get a software update to us as soon as possible to fix this issue.

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Contributor ,
Aug 30, 2020 Aug 30, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thank you for acknowledging this bug. 🙂

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines