- Feb 1, 2010
- West Sussex, UK
- Lightroom Experience
- Lightroom Version
- Classic 8
Thanks. I had assumed you meant the Smart Previews, but wasn't sure, so thanks for the clarification.
I do not use Smart Previews. They do not seem like an intelligent use of disk space since I do not use Lightroom without hard drives plugged in. Thanks for turning me on to the fact that they are dng files. Learned something new today.So does nobody use Smart Previews?? - they are DNGs!!:surprised:
I don't think the use case is all that relevant for Smart Previews yet. If you are highly mobile and keep your master images on a NAS or other detachable drive, then you might want to create and carry Smart Previews along. At some point in the future when low powered tablets and smart phones are more integrated into our workflow, accessing SPs via the cloud may become practical. Adobe is looking to the future in developing the SP concept now. (Built it and the need will develop for the apps to support it.)So does nobody use Smart Previews?? - they are DNGs!!:surprised:
I think part of what seem to get in the way is when one is running a cloud backup service in the background (CrashPlan, Dropbox, etc.). All of those apps can be configured, of course, to exclude certain directories, which is what one would have to do in order NOT to be backing up the revised DNG files whenever the metadata changes get written out to the DNG. [After reading the DNG vs RAW discussion over at Luminous Landscape I want to be clear that I am NOT claiming that this need to fine tune the backup strategy to accommodate a DNG workflow is in any way an argument against the existence or use of DNG! My only point is that it adds a bit of complexity to the backup process, which for some seems to be a disadvantage that overcomes the advantages that come with DNG and leads them to eschew the use of DNG]It's amazing how often people still claim it's a disadvantage of DNG that you have to keep backing them up. That's just not so.
The fault is that you haven't re-assessed your backup strategy. Keep a virgin copy of your DNGs - they are the backup of the photo data. You can then go on saving metadata from LR but think of it in terms of sharing metadata with other apps. Don't worry that you need to back up the DNGs to which metadata is written by LR - it doesn't include all your LR work anyway. Instead, backup your catalogue - the combination of the catalogue and the virgin copies gives you 100% coverage.
I solved that problem for myself when my SOOC RAW files were DNG by simply not updating the metadata in the original files. The LR catalog keeps all of the metadata Catalog backup are routine and backups of those backups are too. If I ever move away from LR, I'll have time and opportunity to merge XMP metadata to the originals....My point here is not to say people should use DNG, but that "huge backups" is not a convincing reason to avoid it...
Oooh...if we go down THIS road the fireworks over "to DNG or not to DNG, that is the question" will seem quite small...we'll probably overwhelm the server and Victoria will have to move the board again.A decision as difficult as deciding whether ObamaCare is a good or bad idea, and just as controversial!:crazy:
It won't happen. Politics and religion are not subjects for conversation here. Although "To DNG or not" is bordering too close to religion.Oooh...if we go down THIS road the fireworks over "to DNG or not to DNG, that is the question" will seem quite small...we'll probably overwhelm the server and Victoria will have to move the board again.
It's often the canary in the coalmine. For example, I had an email this week from a guy whose Time Machine backup drive got fried by a lightning strike. He was trying to back up to a new drive, but it kept failing. Why? Because some of the files had become corrupted. But they were NEF's so he didn't know. Hadn't looked at them in a while. If they'd been DNG files, he could have run the DNG Validation overnight every few months. He'd have discovered that they were corrupted, and copied them back from his backups. Except he wouldn't have just copied them back - he'd have hunted down the cause of the corruption too, before it affected too many of his files.Can you explain what this "verification" means to you? Why do you consider it so important?