Library module Conversion of JPG/TIFF to DNG

[CloudedGenie]

Operating System: Windows 10
Lightroom Version: Classic CC

When possible, I shoot in RAW format (often with JPG on the D800E, so that I have a smaller file available quickly for social media). However, on the older compact cameras and mobile phones, I only have JPG originals. I also have a heap of photos scanned in TIFF format. There are also a few photos where I only have the Nikon in-camera JPG, because the CF-card with the NEF files got damaged (the JPGs were saved to the SD card)

I’ve almost convinced myself to convert these non-raw camera orginals to DNG format - I know it basically just adds a wrapper for the metadata and development settings (it won’t magically turn it into a raw file). However, it will also make it clear which JPG/TIFF files are camera originals.

I am not planning on converting my raw files to DNG.

Now the question: Will this conversion limit the portability of the files to another DAM system if it should become necessary?

 

[Victoria Bampton]

Potentially, yes. It just depends on whether they've chosen to support DNG properly or not.

 

[CloudedGenie]

@Victoria Bampton,

Thank you for that comment. Any new system I look at in future would have to support DNG, because that is the RAW format my iPhone 7 generates. With that in mind, I guess the question is how closely the “wrapped” DNG resembles a real raw file from a data handling point of view?

 

[clee01l]

Your only benefit is cosmetic. JPEGs and TIFFs in another wrapper. You could accomplish the same thing by renaming these images and Prepending "Original" to the current file name. I have a mixture of file types in my LR catalog. Some from phone cameras that only generate JPEGs. Others are derivatives from External Editors. I find them pretty easy to distinguish based upon file names, keywords and my workflow labels.

 

[Linwood Ferguson]

With that in mind, I guess the question is how closely the “wrapped” DNG resembles a real raw file from a data handling point of view?

What do you mean by "data handling". Metadata? probably the same. Image processing? It's a JPG or a TIFF. A JPG has already had a loss of quality, a loss of bit depth, and had exposure and white balance baked in. It is difficult to edit. Converting to another format does not make it any easier. Same with TIFF though if it's 16 bit you retain more flexibility, but the wrapper makes no difference in terms of imaging processing (assuming the processing tool can use it to begin with).

Honestly I am unclear what problem you are trying to solve by converting already processed images to DNG. I cannot see a lot of harm, but I'm missing the benefit.

PS. Sorry for the echo, Cletus is a much faster typer than I am, I think.

 

[LouieSherwin]

Years ago (circa LR3) I took a serious look at keeping my raw files in DNG format. At the time I was also looking at the two other raw converters, CaptureOne and DXO. Although both claimed to support DNG it turned out to be only in a limited fashion. I know that the situation has improved since then but it is still not yet the "universal" format the Adobe has hoped for. Perhaps someone has done a comparison of DNG support.

Now if Canon or Nikon would do the sane thing (IMHO) and drop their propriety raw format and switch to DNG that would swing the pendulum over permanently. However, something about ice water in Hell comes to mind.

-louie

 

[clee01l]

how closely the “wrapped” DNG resembles a real raw file from a data handling point of view

I think you have a misconception that DNG implies RAW file. The wrapper that you reference is a header block. It instructs what ever app that opens the file about the information found in the data block. The data block is copied unchanged from the source JPEG/TIFF etc to the target DNG file.
FWIW, the DNG file specification is derived from the TIFF/EP6 specification as is the NEF file specification and of course the TIFF file specification which was the precursor to NEFs and DNG.

 

[CloudedGenie]

Honestly I am unclear what problem you are trying to solve by converting already processed images to DNG.

@clee01l, @Ferguson,

Unfortunately the problem I’m trying to solve is much more basic — I am an idiot, and this is intended to protect me against myself...

Since I usually shoot NEF+JPG, I have in the past gone back and deleted the in-camera JPGs for specific shoots or periods (usually because I’m desperate for space on my portable HD). This is not a problem - I only keep them to measure my LR development against. I should do better than the camera processor... However... I forgot that there were a number of files on one of our Outback trips, where the CF card was failing. I managed to recover most NEFs, but there were about 10 photos where I only had the in-camera JPG stored on the SD card. In my rush, I selected ALL the JPGs (this was a year later) and deleted them. I only realised early this year that there were specific shots that I remember missing!

I finally managed to find them on an old backup disk that was supposed to be deleted... and put them back.

There is however another concern. Lightroom doesn’t write to my RAW files. It will write XMP files. It has no qualms writing to my JPGs and TIFFs though... Since those are camera originals, should that happen? Or should we have an XMP?

Or is there a simple, elegant, idiot-proof (or idiot-resistant) method?

 

[Hoggy]

Since I usually shoot NEF+JPG, I have in the past gone back and deleted the in-camera JPGs for specific shoots or periods (usually because I’m desperate for space on my portable HD). This is not a problem - I only keep them to measure my LR development against. I should do better than the camera processor...

FWIW, while doing this is great for learning - I did it myself, too.. At some point I realized that it did not matter what the in-camera jpg looks like. Whatever I came up with from scratch is what I wanted to come up with at that particular time - and these become points I save as snapshots and sometimes additionally, virtual copies as well.

There is however another concern. Lightroom doesn’t write to my RAW files. It will write XMP files. It has no qualms writing to my JPGs and TIFFs though... Since those are camera originals, should that happen? Or should we have an XMP?

LR doesn't make a distinction that those are camera originals. The same would be true of DNG (regardless of source) - it will write to the file. .... **IF** you do a 'save metadata to file'.
There are two preference in catalog settings related to this behavior: 'Automatically write changes to XMP (which means ".xmp" for raw, or inside jpg-tiff-etc), and 'include develop settings in metadata inside jpg-tiff-etc' (which refers to just the edits made in the Develop module).

There's another option in preferences->general to treat jpgs next to raws as separate photos. If unchecked, the jpg in the raw+jpg pairs will be treated as a sidecar and LR will do nothing further with them. Then for the in-camera jpgs that have no associated raws, you will know that it would be an original.

Or is there a simple, elegant, idiot-proof (or idiot-resistant) method?

The simple, elegant, and idiot-proof way would be to not shoot raw+jpg, as per my first paragraph - just raw.. Considering the problem with corruption, you may want to have your camera save raw to the both card slots as well - at least for 'important' shoots.

 

[clee01l]

Or is there a simple, elegant, idiot-proof (or idiot-resistant) method?

Don’t shoot RAW+JPG. If you are deleting them eventually anyway, why not spend your efforts at removing the existing paired JPEGs. Then, go forth and sin no more.
I find the imported D810 NEF conversionto be good enough to work with. Often all I need is a little cropping and it is mostly finished post processing.

 

[CloudedGenie]

Thanks guys,

I’ve been convinced about the NEF+JPG. Or at least as far as Lightroom is concerned.

When we travel, shooting NEF with a small JPG on the D800E allows me to use the SD card reader for the iPad and have a good-enough file for Facebook without having to deal with the massive NEFs or having to open the laptop. But... I don’t have to import those files into Lightroom just because I have them!

And the option to save the development settings in a sidecar file takes away the last reason for DNG.

Christelle

 

[clee01l]

When we travel, shooting NEF with a small JPG on the D800E allows me to use the SD card reader for the iPad

You can put the RAW NEFs on the CF Card and the JPEGs on the SD Card and only import the CF card into LR.

 

[CloudedGenie]

You can put the RAW NEFs on the CF Card and the JPEGs on the SD Card and only import the CF card into LR.

That is what I do now, so the only difference would be to not import the SD card as well.

And I’ll have to change the settings so that MOV files are saved to the CF card instead of the SD card. I’ve probably taken 10 videos with it since I bought the camera...