DNG or TIFF for PSE10 editing?

[Anastasia]

I just purchased a new camera and adobe tells me that I need to upgrade to PSE11 for ACR compatibility. I will not do that, I just bought 10 six months ago!

So my choices for raw editing are TIFFS, which is what the software that came with my camera converts raw into, or dng. I'm pretty new to editing so I'm not sure which is preferable for editing in PSE10. Any advice would be appreciated. Camera is panasonic G5, 12 bit.

[dje]

I just purchased a new camera and adobe tells me that I need to upgrade to PSE11 for ACR compatibility. I will not do that, I just bought 10 six months ago!

So my choices for raw editing are TIFFS, which is what the software that came with my camera converts raw into, or dng. I'm pretty new to editing so I'm not sure which is preferable for editing in PSE10. Any advice would be appreciated. Camera is panasonic G5, 12 bit.

My suggestion would be to download the free DNG converter from Adobe, convert your Panasonic RAW files to DNG and then process in ACR/PSE.

If you use TIFF's generated from the Panasonic software, you will be doing your initial RAW processing there rather than in ACR. I don't know how good the Panasonic software is but it probably isn't as versatile as ACR/PSE.

Dave

[Colin Southern]

DNG without hesitation.

[Anastasia]

If you use TIFF's generated from the Panasonic software, you will be doing your initial RAW processing there rather than in ACR. I don't know how good the Panasonic software is but it probably isn't as versatile as ACR/PSE.

Thanks so much for your response.
I thought if I used TIFFs I would import them into ACR and do raw processing there. Is there a disadvantage to doing this? or you really just like the dngs better?

[Colin Southern]

I thought if I used TIFFs I would import them into ACR and do raw processing there. Is there a disadvantage to doing this? or you really just like the dngs better?

Once the file has been turned into a TIFF format image, it's no longer a RAW image, and a lot of information has already been discarded. Additionally, DNG editing is done parametrically; the changes are made to the settings - not the actual pixel data and are thus reversible at any time.

[dje]

Thanks so much for your response.
I thought if I used TIFFs I would import them into ACR and do raw processing there. Is there a disadvantage to doing this? or you really just like the dngs better?

See Colin's last response. He knows these things !!

Once the file has been converted into a TIFF, the de-mosaicing and some default adjustments of the RAW file have already been done in the Panasonic software.

On the other hand, with the DNG conversion, the file remains a RAW file - all it does is change the format to the Adobe "Universal Standard".

Dave

[Colin Southern]

Once the file has been converted into a TIFF, the de-mosaicing and some default adjustments of the RAW file have already been done in the Panasonic software.

Hi Dave,

The biggest difference is actually the fact that once it's converted into a TIFF it goes through gamma conversion, which loses a lot of info.

[dje]

Hi Dave,

The biggest difference is actually the fact that once it's converted into a TIFF it goes through gamma conversion, which loses a lot of info.

Thanks

[Anastasia]

Thanks for all the info everyone! Great help. Sounds like dng is the way to go. Using ACR I guess I'll edit the dng in 16 bit, then convert to psd and 8 bit for the additional edits in Elements. Does this make sense? But as an aside, I wonder- if the conversion into TIFF losses info, then why is it so much bigger??

Also, is there an advantage in my situation-( having 12 bit camera, elements 10 which is for 8 bit) to using lightroom for my editing rather than the elements version of raw?

[HMW12]

Re LR vs PSE - really depends on what you want to do. You could start in LR and then if there is something you can't do export to PSE.

[dje]

Thanks for all the info everyone! Great help. Sounds like dng is the way to go. Using ACR I guess I'll edit the dng in 16 bit, then convert to psd and 8 bit for the additional edits in Elements. Does this make sense? But as an aside, I wonder- if the conversion into TIFF losses info, then why is it so much bigger??

Also, is there an advantage in my situation-( having 12 bit camera, elements 10 which is for 8 bit) to using lightroom for my editing rather than the elements version of raw?

Editing in 16 bit in ACR makes sense and then in PSE you have no choice but to convert to 8 bit before you can do much. So - do as much as you can in ACR with the 16 bit file.

When the RAW file is converted to TIFF, de-mosaicing has been done so each pixel requires 16 bits for each of the three colours. In the RAW file, each pixel is represented by just one set of 12 bits as the colour inter-polation (de-mosaicing) is yet to be done. Hence the bigger file.

Lightroom has the same editing functionality as the full ACR that comes with the full Photoshop. So if you buy the latest version of Lightroom you will get that full functionality and it should also handle your Panasonic RAW files.

Dave

[Colin Southern]

Using ACR I guess I'll edit the dng in 16 bit, then convert to psd and 8 bit for the additional edits in Elements. Does this make sense?

One can't "edit in ACR in 16 bit" per se - ACR only works with the native RAW file. You do however have a choice as to what format you export out of ACR in; normally you'd want to use 16 bit at that stage, and then drop down to 8 bit later if you want.

But as an aside, I wonder- if the conversion into TIFF losses info, then why is it so much bigger??

A raw file has incomplete colour information which is reconstructed by the RAW converter using an interpolation algorithm during the demosaicing phase of conversion; once that's occured you then have 6 bytes describing each pixel instead of only 2. Plus, RAW files are losslessly compressed - TIFFs may or may not be compressed depending on saving options chosen.

Also, is there an advantage in my situation-( having 12 bit camera, elements 10 which is for 8 bit) to using lightroom for my editing rather than the elements version of raw?

Lightroom is a parametric editor like ACR so it doesn't mess with actual pixels ... it only describes how a program should display the pixels (and thus is non-destructive, but also somewhat limited). PSE on the other hand changes actual pixel data. LR and ACR are functionally equivalent in terms of image manipulation (in fact, they share the same processing engine -- assuming same versions).

[MajaMolly]

Additionally, DNG editing is done parametrically; the changes are made to the settings - not the actual pixel data and are thus re!versible at any time.

Thank you for this information. This is what I was wanting to know/understand in my thread on NEF and DNG files... what happens to the data when the files are converted to DNG. Now, I get it.

[Anastasia]

Thanks so much Dave and Colin! So glad I found this site. I (and others too it sounds) are definitely understanding more now. Off to convert files....
Have a great day!
Anastasia

[Colin Southern]

Thanks so much Dave and Colin! So glad I found this site. I (and others too it sounds) are definitely understanding more now. Off to convert files....
Have a great day!
Anastasia

You're very welcome Anastasia.