To DNG or not to DNG ??

[Rooeey]

How many people stick with just DNG ??

I am thinking of dropping CR2 and going DNG delete RAW on import but am a little concerned i may be cutting off my nose despite my face....

How ever what i am asking is would Adobes DNG format more likely become the mainstream and be around longer as Adobe is the most prominent software provider for Digital image enhancements and adjustments...

 

[Victoria Bampton]

I've been undecided about DNG for a long time, but I've just finished a stack of research for a magazine article.

The end result is I've kept a single proprietary file backup set, which were already on DVD's, and the rest I've converted to DNG.

You could say I'm converted!

 

[DonRicklin]

Just haven't gotten around to going DNG, yet, though my Pentax K-1'D can output them directly.

Don

 

[eaglekepr]

I passed on DNG at first because I needed direct access to the XMP data (in a text editor) to update the lens names (for my Canon Rebel XT which only saved it as "75-3'' mm" instead of "EF75-3''mm f/4-5.6 USM") and EXIF info from my manual lenses. EXIFToolGUI now allows me to do this a bit easier and I think it will work on DNG's but for now I don't have any need to convert. I'd bet on Canon CR2 being around for quite some time, and if I DO ever need to convert, I'll just do it in batches at night before going to bed

 

[Halfje-Bruin]

Tried DNG but I had some files I needed to process with CaptureNX2 and that required the original NEF files. Also backup is a bit easier as the XMP files change and not the NEF files (unless processed by CNX2).

 

[Victoria Bampton]

Yeah, needing to be able to use the manufacturer's own software is the main con, at least until the manufacturer's decide to play ball. The xmp's is a side point - you can get LR/ACR to create xmp sidecars just by setting the DNG's to read-only.

 

[rhynetc]

I convert to dng on import and backup the NEFs to external HD at that same time. I like having all the info in the dng file rather than having to work with sidecar files. And I haven't actually accessed any of the backed-up NEFs since I started this workflow last year. Don't know if I'll need to access them, but they are there...

 

[kirbinster]

What is the value of DNG? I shoot Nikon NEF raw and save that way. On import into LR I have it make a backup to another drive. I have no concern that .nef might ever be dropped, as I can always convert it at that time with my software.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

What is the value of DNG? I shoot Nikon NEF raw and save that way. On import into LR I have it make a backup to another drive.

The shortlist

• Publicly documented format - ideal for archive, will always be able to open them
• No sidecar files
• New profiles are embedded
• Smaller file size (lossless compression algorithm is better)
• Checks that the file isn't corrupt (before you wipe the cards!)
• Backwards support for older PS/LR versions
• Preview can be updated to show processed image in other software

I have no concern that .nef might ever be dropped, as I can always convert it at that time with my software.

I always felt the same way, until I started researching more carefully. Now I'm not so sure! Some early Kodak formats from less than 15 years ago are already unsupported by the manufacturer. Other manufacturer's are out of the market or have been bought out. Whilst it's less likely with Nikon and Canon, even they're laying people off, and NEF is not a generic format - each time they bring out a new camera, the software has to be updated. Canon 'accidentally' dropped support in DPP for one of their cameras a while back, before then adding it back in. The companies don't advertise the fact that they're dropping support, and personally I don't fancy having to keep checking that each of my old file formats are still supported.

 

[MontyM]

The shortlist

• Publicly documented format - ideal for archive, will always be able to open them
• No sidecar files
• New profiles are embedded
• Smaller file size (lossless compression algorithm is better)
• Checks that the file isn't corrupt (before you wipe the cards!)
• Backwards support for older PS/LR versions
• Preview can be updated to show processed image in other software

.

I agree 1''% Vitoria. I like dng....

 

[BruceM]

Hello, new to the forum and to Lightroom.

I'm learning LR by reading/following through the steps in Scott Kelby's Book, LR2 for digital photographers.

One of the topics I was practicing last night was adding/editing Metadata, EXIF Data, etc to my RAW files. (I have a Canon Xsi, therefore CR2's)

What I'm wondering is, if you convert to DNG, is it still possible to edit this data after conversion, or can it only be edited with files in their original format, in my case, CR2?


Thanks

 

[Denis Pagé]

Welcome to the forums Bruce!
No problem at all after conversion. Just that you will not use DPP with DNGs. What is in the XMP files with the same name as your CR2 files (If you wrote by Cmd/Ctrl-S or by enabling "AutoWrite to XMP") will be embedded within the DNGs.

 

[Brad Snyder]

Bruce, Welcome to the forums.

Yes, you can change it at any time. The complications come in when you want to see the changes in other applications/programs.

Do you have a specific goal in mind, or just generally asking?

 

[BruceM]

Bruce, Welcome to the forums.

Yes, you can change it at any time. The complications come in when you want to see the changes in other applications/programs.

Do you have a specific goal in mind, or just generally asking?

Not really a specific goal, basically just figuring out in my mind how I want to store my files. I'd like to keep it as simple as possible and am considering using the DNG format. I don't use other programs, so I'm thinking I should be alright.

Thanks for the info all.

 

[Kiwigeoff]

Not really a specific goal, basically just figuring out in my mind how I want to store my files. I'd like to keep it as simple as possible and am considering using the DNG format. I don't use other programs, so I'm thinking I should be alright.

Thanks for the info all.

I use DNG for the simplicity too Bruce - "keep it simple" works for me!!

 

[stasber]

I archive my original CR2 files and import as/work from DNG.

In most cases the DNG is generally just as good as the CR2 format, though in a few cases I found the CR2 to have a bit more definition. All in all I'm happy using DNG (for about 18 months now) and there's nothing much to split hairs about really quality wise. I was persuaded by all the good things mentioned already by others.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

In most cases the DNG is generally just as good as the CR2 format, though in a few cases I found the CR2 to have a bit more definition.

How did you work that one out? Are you using the same software to process both the DNG and the CR2 in those cases? The reason I ask is if you've selected 'Preserve Image' rather than 'Convert to Linear Image', then the DNG file has exactly the same raw mosaic data straight from the sensor, without any processing applied, just in a different wrapper - so the results should be identical.

 

[PatrickC]

So far we're sticking with shooting nef + jpeg, imported as single image into LR, treating the jpeg as a sidecar.

I'm not quite sure why; I suppose it gives an option to use the jpeg immediately out of the camera, though we've never done this so far.

Ultimately I think we will accept the need to 'standardise' everything with dng (or whatever the flavour is at the time), possibly when I get soooo old I can't trust myself to keep up with the technology. But for now I just feel we should hang on to the nefs, and if we're going to do that there doesn't seem any point in making another kind of copy.

After all, it's a Nikon proprietary format, and Nikon haven't disclosed every aspect of their processing, so I just feel we should be keeping the option open to 'keep it in the (Nikon) family' - despite never having used the odious Nikon processing software!

Patrick Cunningham

 

[pknoot]

DNG for the catalog, RAW files saved on disc as backup. I agree with all of Victoria's reasons. Personally, not having the sidecar files (to lose or get corrupted) is a real plus!

 

[Rooeey]

DNG for catalouge and RAW for back up ......Sounds like a good idea for me from now on.......

 

[MikeCaine]

DNG for catalouge and RAW for back up ......Sounds like a good idea for me from now on.......

That's exactly what I do. RAW files are stored on a Drobo and DNGs are used in Lightroom and iView Media Pro. Having them in DNG format allows me to round trip them between LR and iView and keep all of the adjustments and information in the one file

 

[BruceM]

Well, from all I've read here I think I'll "go with the flow" as they say. Convert to DNG and back up the RAW images to an external HD.

BTW - this forum is a great resource. I've only known about it for a few days now and am genuinely impressed with the level of knowledge and the willingness to share that knowledge. I look forward to following along and hopefully in the future I'll become proficient enough with LR that I'll be able to give back.

Cheers

 

[Mark Sirota]

I use DNG for the simplicity too Bruce - "keep it simple" works for me!!

Interesting -- I stick with NEF for the simplicity.

 

[Kiwigeoff]

Interesting -- I stick with NEF for the simplicity.

So you don't write settings to xmp sidecars Mark? I found the sidecars a bit messy for me - and I can get quite messy already !!!:lol::lol:

 

[Mark Sirota]

Nope, no XMP for me -- no benefit for my workflow, other than the possible belt-and-suspenders backup. But then I'd have to back up those XMP files, but I currently don't back up my image files after the initial upload to the computer, so that would be a major change. And there's the (admittedly now minor) performance hit of writing those files.