- Joined
- Dec 7, 2007
- Messages
- 3,066
- Location
- Puget Sound
- Lightroom Experience
- Intermediate
- Lightroom Version
- Classic
I generally try to avoid posting questions about topics like this as the discussion often head into the direction of Coke vs. Pepsi, Canon vs. Nikon, Ford vs. Chevy, etc. I understand why folks do and do not care for DNG, and and I am fine with that as everybody needs to do what works best for their own work flow. Having said that, I am considering a move from DNG files back to raw files for use within Lightroom, but before making any decision, I would like to consider some of the pros and cons of switching as it relates to my particular work flow.
I presently maintain two backup copies of both my raw files as well as their DNG counterparts (without an embedded original). I have been doing this since I started shooting raw in 2006, but I suspect that I am not taking advantage of some of the features that DNG files offer. And, in light of an issue that I am currently having with v.8.6 of Adobe's stand-alone DNG converter, making a switch is now more of a possible reality than an consideration.
As I do not save my adjustments back to my files and rely on my catalog (and backups of my catalog) to maintain my post processing work, my present work flow really just relies on the base files being available to LR, in DNG or raw format. And, while DNG has offered the ability to verify files, that is also a feature that I have not taken advantage of to date. So, I am wondering what DNG features I will be giving up by importing raw files into LR instead of converted DNG's?
I know I will save drive space by not converting, but that is not really a big issue for me. On the other hand, my importing process will be substantially sped up as I will no longer need to convert files.
I do not have a dislike for DNG, so I am not looking for reasons to discontinue using it as much as I am wondering if I am taking advantage of what it offers for my work flow, and making sure I understand what features I would give up if I stopped converting files. Any advice would be greatly appreciated, and let's try to keep the fervor to a minimum as there is no right or wrong answer.
Thanks,
--Ken
I presently maintain two backup copies of both my raw files as well as their DNG counterparts (without an embedded original). I have been doing this since I started shooting raw in 2006, but I suspect that I am not taking advantage of some of the features that DNG files offer. And, in light of an issue that I am currently having with v.8.6 of Adobe's stand-alone DNG converter, making a switch is now more of a possible reality than an consideration.
As I do not save my adjustments back to my files and rely on my catalog (and backups of my catalog) to maintain my post processing work, my present work flow really just relies on the base files being available to LR, in DNG or raw format. And, while DNG has offered the ability to verify files, that is also a feature that I have not taken advantage of to date. So, I am wondering what DNG features I will be giving up by importing raw files into LR instead of converted DNG's?
I know I will save drive space by not converting, but that is not really a big issue for me. On the other hand, my importing process will be substantially sped up as I will no longer need to convert files.
I do not have a dislike for DNG, so I am not looking for reasons to discontinue using it as much as I am wondering if I am taking advantage of what it offers for my work flow, and making sure I understand what features I would give up if I stopped converting files. Any advice would be greatly appreciated, and let's try to keep the fervor to a minimum as there is no right or wrong answer.
Thanks,
--Ken