dng file from external software loses profile and appears corrupted

[DavePinMinn]

I don't SEE any posts about this, and I THINK it's the external program, but just to check, 'cause when I go complain to Topaz my guess is they'll blame Lightroom.

Lightroom 12.3, DNG converter 15.3.0.1451, camera is Sony Alpha 1 with current firmware. 

RAW was shot with profile CameraST, Lightroom shows Camera ST.

Open RAW ARW file, do basic exposure adjustment to see if the image is worth working on.  Open Topaz Denoise AI 3.7.2 OR Photo AI 1.3 (both current versions, very recently installed)...

Run the external software, process and get back a .dng file.

Back in Lightroom, profile is still CameraST, but LR says "Profile Missing".  The dng file looks very different than the RAW file, and when the basic adjustments are synched to the .dng the image looks perceptibly different than the RAW.

I don't RECALL this happening with earlier versions of the Topaz software, but I may have missed it.  Is there something in the dng file coming back to Lightroom that could cause Lightroom to not have the profile and/or treat the dng file as corrupted?  Is there some other simple, stupid thing in Lightroom I may be missing?

[DdeGannes]

Are you following the instructions from Topaz, see the link below.

https://support.topazlabs.com/article/134-the-recommended-raw-workflow-in-lightroom-classic

[DavePinMinn]

First, do a sanity check for me - my presumption is that if I take a RAW image and send it to denoise or photo AI (or any other noise reducing product), I should get back an image (hopefully a "raw" dng), that looks virtually identical to what I sent, except that the noise has been mitigated (and in the case of photo ai, perhaps somewhat sharpened).  But the image should otherwise not change or change in such a slight way that no, or only very slight changes have to be made.  Am I correct, or is it normal to get back a dng that requires significantly different processing due to changes in the external software?

As far as I can tell, there is no plug-in extra for Denoise AI.  That's why I ran it standalone.  I don't see a way to run Denoise, do RAW processing and get back a dng file from the external editor in Lightroom.

I also tried this with an older version - Denoise V3.6.2 and it does the same thing.

I also tried Denoise with a Nikon D500 file and it does the same thing there. The Camera Matching profiles are gone in Lightroom when the dng file is imported back in, and the DNG looks different than the original.

Photo AI doesn't appear to be as bad in that when the image comes back to Lightroom it doesn't lose the camera matching profile, but the dng image is perceptibly (to me, it looks a LOT) different than the raw and responds to adjustments differently.  I've attached 4 images with the Histogram and Basic palette visible.

This is the original RAW

Original Image

This is the RAW with basic exposure adjustment prior to sending to Photo AI

Basic Exposure Adjusted

This is the untouched DNG returned from Topaz AI. 

Untouched Return Image

This is the DNG after it's synchronized with the original RAW image.  It looks very different.

Synchronized Return Image

[DdeGannes]

@DavePinMinn , these are just my thoughts, as I do not have the Topaz DeNoise application you are using. In the article I attached in my initial reply it refers to "our demosaicing algorithm", which leads me to believe the DNG file that is returned to Lightroom is tiff data in a DNG wrapper, it is not a raw DNG.

Later in the article there are recommended procedures, have you followed those instructions? See the screen capture.

[DavePinMinn]

I'd need a link to the information above.  But, yes, I suspect I've read all of it, and probably followed the instructions.  But I'd have to read whatever this one is.

It would make sense that if topaz is generating something that isn't a legitimate DNG it would cause the problems I'm seeing in Lightroom.  The lost profiles, the totally screwed up images.

One bizarre thing is I believe this used to work a few versions back.  'Course I was using a Nikon at the time, so it could be another bizarre problem between Sony and the rest of the world.

I've put an entry in the Topaz forum.  Hopefully they'll have some idea.

[DdeGannes]

@DavePinMinn ,

you stated, "I'd need a link to the information above"

I provided the link in my original response in the thread.

Lightroom Classic has there own proprietary processing procedures and profiles for rendering raw images from digital cameras.

So if a raw image file is processed by LrC it will have a different look than the same raw image processed Topaz labs.

They both have their own proprietary processing engine and profiles they will never match exactly.

 Use the application that provides the look that appeals to your taste.

[DavePinMinn]

Thanks for the replies.

OK, so they're proprietary and different, and the expectation should be that Topaz' output would likely be perceptibly/significantly different than it's input.  I'll see what, if anything, comes from asking in the Topaz forum, 'cause that seems like it would be a problem for a lot of Topaz users.  But, not relevant here...