To DNG or not to DNG

[ARH18]

Lightroom Version Number

7.4

Operating System

1. macOS 10.13 High Sierra

Hi, sorry if this has been asked before but I'm struggling to find an answer!

I use a Nikon D750 and shoot in RAW (NEF). I transfer the NEF files to the hard drive on my mac from the camera card. When importing to Lightroom I have been advised to use the copy to DNG option, which I have been doing for a while. This gives me a few problems, one is that the storage is of course doubled, the original NEF file is never used as the DNG file is the one edited, if I choose to delete the DNG file from Lightroom and the hard drive it doesn't delete the NEF file which means I have a number of NEF files sitting on the hard drive which I don't want and if I forget to delete them through Finder then I'll never find them and continue to have wasted space.

So to my questions...

What's the advantage of copy to DNG over just importing the NEF files?

Is there any reason to not edit NEF files directly?

What do others do, how to overcome wasted storage and making the NEF files redundant?

Is it worth keeping the NEF files once converted to DNG?

As ever with this type of software there are so many options and often the solution comes down to preference or opinion - help!!

Thanks,

Andy

 

[PhilBurton]

With respect to file formats this actually makes no real-world sense.
The DNG format is based on the TIFF-EP standard.
And so is every modern proprietary raw format...


Tony Jay

Tony,

If various RAW formats and DNG are all based on the same TIFF standard, then "logically" Nikon's discontinued Capture NX 2 should be able to process Canon CR2 or a DNG file. Of course, we all know that is not possible. Or any RAW developer software should be able to process a DNG.

The "standard" is the totality of what's in it, not just a component included from other standards. I've worked with people who sit/sat on standards organizations, and standards organizations try and use as much as possible from other standards, e.g. every standard that uses text probably uses ISO 639, ISO 639 Language codes. Why do anything different?

Look at market dynamics. Nikon and Canon believe that they can be more innovative if they don't use DNG in preference to their own RAW formats. Microsoft created its own "standards" with Office. About 20 years ago, Microsoft adopted the "embrace and extend" strategy. Read this for me detail, and then tell me if you think that standards don't matter. Embrace, extend, and extinguish - Wikipedia. I worked at Sun Microsystems when Java first became popular and then watched Microsoft effectively destroy Java on the desktop. About the same time, I saw firsthand how Microsoft used its market dominance to successfully attack the Netscape browser. For a while, I worked as a business partner to Netscape, and they were powerless to stop the attack.

I think we have beaten this topic to death. I hope everyone will realize that CR2 and NEF will be around for a long time, with full support from the relevant software companies.

Phil Burton

 

[Tony Jay]

Tony,

If various RAW formats and DNG are all based on the same TIFF standard, then "logically" Nikon's discontinued Capture NX 2 should be able to process Canon CR2 or a DNG file. Of course, we all know that is not possible. Or any RAW developer software should be able to process a DNG.

The "standard" is the totality of what's in it, not just a component included from other standards. I've worked with people who sit/sat on standards organizations, and standards organizations try and use as much as possible from other standards, e.g. every standard that uses text probably uses ISO 639, ISO 639 Language codes. Why do anything different?

Look at market dynamics. Nikon and Canon believe that they can be more innovative if they don't use DNG in preference to their own RAW formats. Microsoft created its own "standards" with Office. About 20 years ago, Microsoft adopted the "embrace and extend" strategy. Read this for me detail, and then tell me if you think that standards don't matter. Embrace, extend, and extinguish - Wikipedia. I worked at Sun Microsystems when Java first became popular and then watched Microsoft effectively destroy Java on the desktop. About the same time, I saw firsthand how Microsoft used its market dominance to successfully attack the Netscape browser. For a while, I worked as a business partner to Netscape, and they were powerless to stop the attack.

I think we have beaten this topic to death. I hope everyone will realize that CR2 and NEF will be around for a long time, with full support from the relevant software companies.

Phil Burton

Your logic is flawed here - one does not need to change very much to make a raw format unique.
I would suggest that your research, and therefore knowledge of file formats is lacking...

The fact is that every modern proprietary raw file format is indeed based on the TIFF-EP format (strangely enough another Adobe invention that has now ISO standardisation).

Yes, it appears that the topic has indeed been beaten to death - by those with entrenched "don't confuse me with facts" attitudes!

Tony Jay