Converting raw to DNG

[gaijin]

I wonder how prevalent it is to convert from raw to DNG... When importing into LR3 for instance. I think I'm aware of the supposed advantages of DNG and of some at least of its drawbacks. Do you think that making that conversion is worthwhile? Is DNG here to stay?

[Glenn NK]

This one is a bit like "should I use a filter for protection of my lenses"? Quite controversial.

DNG was developed by Adobe as a universal format and is open for all to use. Many photographers use it; many don't.

I'm not fully aware of the advantages of it - what are they?

For my use, there is no point in converting as it doesn't offer me any apparent advantages. If I was to convert to DNG, then there would be no point in saving the RAW files, so I'd probably delete them to save HDD space. However, I'm reluctant to do so because it's possible that (Canon in my case) may come up with a better converter than presently exists in LR.

Glenn

[rambler4466]

1 DNG files do not need XMP side Car file to store edits, metadata and key words. You only have one file to keep track of

2 DNG files are smaller

3 DNG is an open format, you will be able to open them in the future

No need to convert other than RAW files

[Colin Southern]

I use DNG exclusively - wouldn't have it any other way.

Another major advantage is the ability to open files shot by later generation cameras on earlier generations of Photoshop.

[Glenn NK]

Interesting thread on LL entitled, "DNG for everyone".

Glenn

[Black Pearl]

This applies to Nikon, might be the case for other brands but I don't have enough experience with their software.

Nikon Capture NX2 does a better job of opening a NEF file than every other RAW converter. I'm not saying its the best conversion software, far from it. It is hopeless at sorting multiple shots and is even less intuitive than Photoshop - a feat unto itself.
But....
For getting the very best quality image from a Nikon NEF file it is better. I've ran back-to-back tests several times and every time NX comes out on top. The other thing is NX is improving all the time so if I feed one of my D70 files into it now I can get more from it than I did eight years ago when I shot them. If I had converted all my older files to DNG when it came about and still did it with current ones I'd have lost this ability.

I don't always use NX as it is slower to use when I'm sorting lots of images and most of the time I don't really care about the pixel level quality.
But when I do I want my native NEF file to work on not a generic one.

[herbert]

Despite the advantages of DNG (smaller files and a single unit for the raw data and the metadata) I do not convert my files. I regularly backup my photo storage to secondary/external drives. Since my raw files never change they have to be backed up once. Any raw edits I do can be stored in a tiny sidecar file that is backed up after each change along with the Lightroom catalogue. With a DNG the entire thing would be backed up which is slower. If you are using incremental back-ups then this could cause significant increase in storage and slow the back-up process.

However in practice I only really process a photo once. So if I had a DNG it would only change a few times anyway. In the end I decided I can live with the extra 20% storage of my raws, I can import them faster, and back them up efficiently.

[ <-- Edit: Colin pointed out below that the following is not true. Demosacing is not performed for conversion to DNG. Sorry for the mistake.

The more interesting point is that the demosaicing is performed when you convert to DNG. In 20 years time, if I ever want to revisit my old photos I will not get the advantage of modern demosaicing algorithms. But I do not think this is worth worrying about either. Tens seconds in photoshop can make more difference than some magical new demosaicing method.

--> ]


In practice I think it makes no difference. However it is still nice to have a reason for your workflow, even if you admit that it makes no difference.

Alex

[MrB]

Interesting thread on LL entitled, "DNG for everyone".

Glenn

What/where is LL?

Philip

[chris h]

Recently got back into photography,this was first thing i came across,was unable to open my cr2 files from my 7d into cs3.due to photoshop advancing.so unless i upgrade,im stuck with converting to dng

[Black Pearl]

Recently got back into photography,this was first thing i came across,was unable to open my cr2 files from my 7d into cs3.due to photoshop advancing.so unless i upgrade,im stuck with converting to dng

Or you could use the fantastic Canon software that came free with your camera. Software that does a brilliant job of opening CR2 files and can even remote capture straight from a tethered Canon.

[John C]

What/where is LL?

Philip

Apparently, he means "The Luminous Landscape," a website about landscape photography. There is a recent thread on their forum about DNG files. Here's the link:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/fo...?topic=62337.0

[Geoff F]

Or you could use the fantastic Canon software that came free with your camera. Software that does a brilliant job of opening CR2 files and can even remote capture straight from a tethered Canon.

Which software, Robin?

All I got with my 7D was Canon DPP.

Adobe CS5 has a good Raw converter but prior to that I used Raw Therapee; because I considered the Raw converter attached to my previous software (Photo Plus X3) was rather poor.

[Black Pearl]

DPP mate.

It's a very good bit of software, does a great job of opening Camon RAW files and it's free. Export to Photoshop once you got the image looking the way you want for any further fiddling and printing.

[MrB]

Apparently, he means "The Luminous Landscape," a website about landscape photography.

Thank you, John.

Philip

[Glenn NK]

Apparently, he means "The Luminous Landscape," a website about landscape photography. There is a recent thread on their forum about DNG files. Here's the link:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/fo...?topic=62337.0

My apologies to Philip, and my thanks to John.

After reading it, I'm staying with sidecar files for now because there is a strong probability that future versions of ACR will interpret the RAW file from the camera better than it does now. Actually in the short time I've been using Lightroom, each version has improved the conversion. It seems as though the conversion engine is a work in progress.

Glenn

[Boatman]

I didn't see any comments regarding the fact that DNG is fairly universally supported in software packages while many camera's RAW formats may not be. If, for example if an older version of Photoshop does not support your camera, your ONLY option is to use DNG. I don't see any major drawbacks to DNG and wouldn't be surprised to see camera companies start adopting it as their standard RAW format.

[Colin Southern]

The more interesting point is that the demosaicing is performed when you convert to DNG.

Um, not sure where you got that from Alex -- it's a option with the DNG converter, but is isn't even the default behaviour of ACR -- not sure about LR, but I'd be surprised if it was.

[Colin Southern]

After reading it, I'm staying with sidecar files for now because there is a strong probability that future versions of ACR will interpret the RAW file from the camera better than it does now.

Hi Glenn,

This still doesn't make a lot of sense to me I'm afraid ... DNG files are still RAW data and they still contain the same information as the camera-generated RAW file; it's just in a standardised format. I can't think of any reason why improvements in converter technology would be able to do a better job with the same data just because it's in a proprietary format.

[Colin Southern]

.so unless i upgrade,im stuck with converting to dng

I wouldn't say "stuck" Chris; DNG is a blessing, not a curse.

[PBelarge]

I used to convert all my files when downloaded to LR into DNG. I have since altered my method.

I have been storing my original Canon (CR2) files to 2 different locations.
I now download my CR2 files to LR (remember the download is information, not the CR2 file) - the files are much smaller and the process in LR is so much faster - and yes I have a fast CPU.
I will convert the CR2 file either when I work on the image or not at all. I have recently been going through my LR catalog and deleting the images I am not working on, it is very easy to reinstall them if I need to.

Even though storage is not expensive, I have noticed LR slowing down when I convert so many images to DNG, hence my new approach.

BTW: it is not difficult to convert a file/image captured by any camera at any time, if one needs to.