"This was Candid Camera, for sure...
Thanks for making me feel a little better. (I don't drink, so have an extra for me.)
Fred "

If you keep going like this, you will drink!

Good Luck
Wil

Fred,

Take a deep breath.  Pour a scotch and soda.  Take the first sip.  Re-read the first post from the OP.  That should tell you that this whole exercise was impossible.  If you can accept that, the remaining sips will ease your mind and let you put this behind you.

Good Luck
Wil

Fred,
You're wrong about Lightroom.  In Lightroom, you can set a preset in the print module that will remember everything about the print job and print driver.

This may not be important to the current OP's problem, but QU isn't the only application that saves print/.printer settings.

Wil

Just to be complete QU can now read and process .dng files with the new DNG specification.  It won't convert camera raw files to .dng, so if you want to use this file specification, you'll have to make the conversion in other software.

As far as updating for the 5DIII.  I don't use QU for any raw processing, just printing.  I update from time to time just to support Mike who has given us so much for so little for a very long time.

Wil

I have no reason to believe it will be very soon. 

The new DNG specification has been out for quite some time and has nothing to do with new cameras, but none of the Q versions support it.

Q is just slow to come to the game in many ways.

Wil

I have been waiting for QU to support the Canon 5DIII and the current DNG specification.  It hasen't happened jet and I'll not pay the update fee until it supports both.  Why so long without support for these two.  Most other photo software have already supported both.

Wil

This isn’t the place to write an epistle on the differences in Qimage and other photo manipulation software.  If you like your workflow in Qimage you are all set.

As you have found out, there are some things you need Photoshop for that Qimage doesn’t do.  But as most have found out, Qimage does many things just fine.  In my opinion, its greatest strength is its layout capabilities.  No one else comes even close when you have very special and custom requirements like a twelve month calendar with different layout requirements for different months on each page – different image orientation and/or number of images.  But even then, if you want advanced text printing on each image, you’ll need Photoshop with its advanced text capabilities.

Image editing in Qimage is very basic and easy to use.  If you need more advanced editing features like local adjustments (increasing the exposure on just that one tree in the shadows), you’ll need another editor in addition to Qimage.  You must keep in mind that more individual control comes with increased complexity.  “You pays your money and you takes your choice.”

You also need to decide if keeping up with your image files by the “folder method” works for you, or do you need a more advanced database solution?

Only you can answer these questions, but all the photo software that I know about, except Qimage, allow you to download the full version and use it free for 30 days.  You can download them and try them for yourself.

In addition, the price and update costs make Qimage a steal.

Good Luck!
Wil

Andrea,

This seems to be a general issue with Qimage.  Both thumb and real dng are useless with Canon 5DII dng files.  I suspect that Qimage has not been updated to the latest dng specification, and that causes the problem.

I have just checked a dng file created with the earlier dng specification, and it worked just fine.  If Qimage is updated to deal with the latest dng specification, I suspect you can use your dng files in Qimage.  If not, you won't.

Wil

Andy,
I mis-spoke.  I have just checked a Canon 5DIII dng file in Qimage and Qimage makes a mess of it -- unusable.  If you want to use Qimage for 5DIII files, you'll just have to wait as Mike said.  Sorry about that.

Wil

Andy,
You can download the free 6.7 RC Adobe dng converter -- convert your Mark III RAW files to dng.  Qimage can then read them.

Lightroom 4.1 RC supports the Mark III directly already.  As far as I know it is the only one that does besides Canon.

Wil

If you are using any application (Lightroom, etc) that can make .dng files, you can export to .dng and Qimage can read those files.

Wil

The point should have been that you can't print a RAW file in Qimage and keep any RAW edits done in LR.  LR and Qimage don't understand each other's RAW edit "filters."  It would be nice if they did.

To print the RAW without rendering to TIF or JPG and keep the RAW edits, you must stay in the same application.

I think Qimage was the first to do non-destructive editing on files.  If I remember correctly, the first capability in Qimage of that was on already rendered files -- TIF, etc.

If you don't like the processing of the big boys, LR and Capture One, staying in Qimage is the way to go.  The problems are for those, including me, who prefer the LR processing.

The real problem is that for some tasks, Photoshop is still required.  It's required less now than in the past, but still some things require it to get the job done well.

Wil

1. Qimage has layout features that are not available in LR4.

2.  Both applications make superb photos.  I have yet to find an unbiased observer who could tell the difference in the prints from LR4 and Qimage in a blind test if both applications were set up properly -- not hard to do in either application.

3.  LR4 has a complete database solution -- you either love it or hate it.

3.  You can print your edited RAW file in LR4 without converting to TIFF or JPEG.

5.  LR4 has a much more complete and superior RAW conversion module.

6.  If you edit RAW files in LR4 and then print in Qimage, you must render the image (convert it to TIF of JPG) to preserve the editing you have done in LR4.

7.  Without a lot of hassle, can't edit in Qimage and return those edits to LR4

8.  If you are printing a single image on a page -- one or more copies of the same orientation, there is little advantage of converting from RAW to TIF or JPG in LR4 and printing in Qimage.

9.  If you want a more complete layout capability like 3 - 4 x 6 prints on one 8.5 x 11 sheet, or different layouts on different pages, converting from LR4 to TIF or JPG and printing in Qmage is a must.

10.  If you like the RAW conversion in Qimage and want the most complete layout possibility, Qimage is your best bet.  That is, if you don't want the database stuff.

11.  I have both and use them where they best fit my needs.

Wil

I am a long time Qimage and Lightroom user.  I used Qimage long before Lightroom made its entrance onto the sceen.  In those days, Qimage was an application that made print layout and printing top quality.

Now we have Qimage competing with every other RAW converter, and that saddens me a great deal.  It is apparent that future enhancement with Qmage will come in the RAW conversion process at the expense of improving the layout and printing side of Qimage – and they do need some work.

Here’s the problem for Qimage:
The current “non destructive” mode of RAW conversion – which I completely support, presents the problem that different applications do not understand, and can’t process, the editing instructions generated by another application.  That means that Qimage can’t apply any editing instructions for a RAW file edited in Lighroom, and Lightroom is in the same situation reqarding files edited by Qimage.

Since Qimage can’t understand Lightroom instructions, it is necessary to “render” the RAW file in Lightroom before Qimage can print it.  That makes it a one way street and requires extra disk space for the printing.  It gets worse, if any change in the original editing instructions are desired, the whole process starts over again to reprint.  This may not be a huge problem with just one or two prints, but the problem multiplies quickly as files are added to the job.

Users who have embraced Lightroom and all its powerful features will not accept Qimage as a RAW converter and give up any of what Lightroom offers.  This is not a debate, it’s just a fact.  Some may prefer the Qimage RAW conversion model, and I have no debate with them.  I hope you will have no debate with me and others about preferring Lightroom for managing RAW files.

Qimage made its name and reputation on “printing.”  In some cases, it still is alone in what it can do in layout.  But the layout capabilities in Lightroom are coming on fast.  The printing capabilities of Lightroom have increased with each version.  In print jobs where a single image, or multiple images in the same size cell is satisfaction, there is no advantage in using Qimage and some disadvantages – if you do it in Lightroom, the file doesn’t need to be rendered.  You most likely won’t believe me, but Qimage offers no advantage in print quality from Lightroom.  The Qimage advantage is solely in print layout capability.

I am completely comfortable with rendering RAW files in Lightroom and exporting to Qimage for job layout and printing where Qimage provides features not available in Lightroom.

After all this ramble, what do I want?
I really want a version of Qimage dedicated to job layout and printing only.  Some improvements this new version needs:

1.  The ability to provide binding margins for images for a photo book -- different for each job.

2.  Ability to print odd and even pages for automatic printing front and back – similar to Adobe Reader.

3.  An improvement in the text functions to be as good as Photoshop so I won’t have to go to Photoshop for this issue.

4.  Watermark feature to provide a copyright that positions correctly for either landscape and portrait.

I hope Qimage stays alive, and I hope to get some updates for the issues I have raised.  That’s why I paid for Ultimate.

Wil

Thanks Mike,
Wil