I've been using Lightroom for a little while now and have been importing my files as raw files. Lately I've been reading quite a bit about importing as DNG files. Which format do you use for your libraries and what is the major advantage of using DNG (other than metadata)?
It depends. If I don't think I'll need to use another program such as DxO, which can't understand DNG files, then I'll usually import and convert. I love the fact that DNG allows me to write my metadata into the files themselves. In the future, if I want to switch to a different cataloging program, I can import the files and have all of the metadata waiting for me.
Citezein wrote:
It depends. If I don't think I'll need to use another program such as DxO, which can't understand DNG files, then I'll usually import and convert. I love the fact that DNG allows me to write my metadata into the files themselves. In the future, if I want to switch to a different cataloging program, I can import the files and have all of the metadata waiting for me.
Ditto - almost exactly my reasons - difference being I always import DNG. I figure I can export as TIFF or PSD to those oddballs that don't recognize DNG. I've wondered why DxO doesn't support DNG yet. Weird.
regards,
Jon
When I look at converting existing images in the library it asks me if I want to "Embed Original Raw File", I thought that was the whole point of converting. Why would I not want to check this option? What does it do if I don't check this box?
Because of the proprietary and somewhat secret nature of the original raw files, some folks are concerned that the routines used to convert from proprietary raw to "open" DNG raw may cause a loss of information, information that might be useful now or in the future as camera manufacturers make improvements and changes to their raw convertors.
Embedding the original raw file in the DNG then is sort of a "belt and suspenders" approach to protecting your raw data. You have the "open" DNG data in case the camera manufacturer stops supporting the proprietary format and you have the original raw file in case it is determined at some point that the conversion to DNG lost something in the process. The cost of this conservative approach, however, is much larger file sizes.
I am not aware of any proof yet that DNG causes any loss of important information but maybe somebody else will chime in.
The alternative that will achieve pretty much the same thing is just to keep both files - the original raws and the DNGs.
Eyeball wrote:
I am not aware of any proof yet that DNG causes any loss of important information but maybe somebody else will chime in.
The alternative that will achieve pretty much the same thing is just to keep both files - the original raws and the DNGs.
Well there's always something the camera people tuck away in the RAW files that DNG knows nothing about. One such piece of data is the focus points in a Canon. They don't come through. To me that's no big deal because very few things allow you to see them anyway.
To the OP - in a nutshell embedding teh RAW file will increase the DNG size by teh size of the RAW file. Not too sure how you get it back out. Most folks if sufficientlt paranoid will convert to DNG on import and Lightroom has an option to copy the original to a separate location. If you're in doubt - try it until you're convinced that the DNG is a perfectly acceptable format. As stated - I love it because I can update teh metadata in the DNG itself and not have to worry about losing teh sidecar files (XMP).
Regards,
Jon
So for the more experienced people that have been shooting RAW and converting for some time. Are you embeddin the RAW file in DNG, aving the RAW file as a separate file or just converting to DNG and deleting the original RAW file?
I'm always a bit conservative and import in RAW (Nikon NEF). This format will be supported for a long time and by the time it is not, I have more then enough time to convert my RAW files.
If I would use DNG, I would embed the original RAW.
I always keep the XMP files together with my RAW files in my archive.
I import my RAW photos into Lightroom, and then save them on an external hard drive, then I also convert Raw files to DNG, and save them on an external. So I end up having the original RAW files and converted RAW files to DNG. That way I feel more comfort in knowing I have the file. Some may argue this takes up a lot of space but all my time and effort into my photography warrants me spending a little on some external storage drives.
I keep my files in the propietary RAW format until the order has been delivered to the client. This saves time when my system does the nightly backup. The backup only has to update the XMP files and not the entire DNG. After delivery, I convert to DNG without embedding the RAW and delete the original NEF. Then the files are added to my archive library in iView Media Pro. I have two copies of the DNG on HD and one on CD/DVD kept off site. I only use the DAM portion of LR for active projects. Once the job is complete I delete them from LR. Doing this keeps LR lean and mean. YMMV
butchM wrote:
I keep my files in the propietary RAW format until the order has been delivered to the client. This saves time when my system does the nightly backup. The backup only has to update the XMP files and not the entire DNG. After delivery, I convert to DNG without embedding the RAW and delete the original NEF. Then the files are added to my archive library in iView Media Pro. I have two copies of the DNG on HD and one on CD/DVD kept off site. I only use the DAM portion of LR for active projects. Once the job is complete I delete them from LR. Doing this keeps LR lean and mean. YMMV...Show more →
I don't. I keep it in CR2. I think there will be enough lead time if CR2 becomes unsupported to just unleash some super utility to convert everything on my network then.
Be aware that if you do go DNG and choose to embed the original Raw, the resulting DNG file will be roughly 2x the size.
John - DAM - Digital Asset Management - basically keywording etc.
Tim is right, DAM is Digital Asset Management and the Library Module in LR is a simple DAM. More accurately, LR is a IAM - Image Asset Management and not quite complete with that as you cant deal CMYK, EPS files, images that exceed the 10,000 pixels dimension, etc. This is why I still prefer iView Media Pro for long term DAM as it will work with just about any file you can save to your HD.
Adobe will support DNG forever and they will be around forever. I am not saying Canon and Nikon are going to leave us hanging, but who is going to put Adobe and their format out of business?
