DNG vs RAW - What, Why, and should you convert?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 20 фев 2023
- Not sure whether to convert Raw files to DNG? Or whether you’ve done the right thing over the years, keeping your files in your native camera raw format? Well let’s answer those questions now and tell you the differences, pros and cons between using DNG’s over your camera native Raw file.
Read the full blog here: www.theschoolofphotography.co...
Support us:
Get 10% OFF our Online Courses here - bit.ly/3Jt12kZ
Our Recommended Photography Equipment - bit.ly/photog-gear
Check out our Book here - bit.ly/2KZDw2U
Check out our eBook here - bit.ly/photog-ebook
Grab a Freebie:
Get our Free eBook for learners of photography here - bit.ly/2DwNS4c
Get 15 Free Lightroom Presets - goo.gl/xvTPT7
Music by Epidemic Sound. Try for free here - share.epidemicsound.com/wBdh6
Create a website with Squarespace. Free trial here squarespace.syuh.net/TSOP
Free trial of Photoshop and Lightroom here - prf.hn/l/9mEZ58x
Get weekly tutorials and special offers delivered straight to your inbox, subscribe at www.theschoolofphotography.com
Join our learning community on social media:
Facebook ► / theschoolofphotography1
Instagram ► / theschoolofphotography1
Follow my personal photography work here:
Facebook ► / marcnewton
Instagram ► / marcnewton
Vero ► vero.co/marcnewton
And remember - Learn photography properly at The School of Photography
NB: Above are some affiliate links and TSOP will receive a small percentage of some purchases made.
#shootinginraw #photography #photographytutorials
I used to use DNG but I am not anymore. Two things to consider: If you save metadata to your files and you backup your files, you have to backup the full dng instead of a small raw file. This makes backups much more efficient and can also save a lot of space if you keep older versions, since you only backup the xmp-sidecar multiple times instead of the dng. Another thing is compatabilty. E.g HDR-DNGs from Lightroom cannot be read in Capture One. Also Adobe Super Resolution DNG cannot be read properly by some programs. So you have to weigh in these things and see if the outweigh the advantages of DNG
One point to mention: ACR can be set to always use XMP sidecar files with DNGs. So if you don't like to have changes always written to the DNG (for whatever reason), you can have it that way!
Having used a stand alone version of Lightroom for many years, I had to convert to DNG when I changed my camera because my version of Lightroom didn’t cover my camera. I didn’t want to switch to a subscription version of Lightroom because I couldn’t justify the cost. When I changed my computer last year, I then found I couldn’t open the DNG files, luckily I always save the RAW files onto DVD so I still had the originals. I found that Affinity software that covers all my needs and opens DNG files, apart from catalogue activities, so I downloaded the stand alone version of Adobe Bridge only to find that my carefully indexed could not be found because Bridge doesn’t recognise the old Lightroom indexing! It is a good job I file in year/month folders so things are easy to track.
I would suggest you think carefully before switching to DNG.
Also I can still open Nikon Raw files that are twenty years old so longevity doesn’t seem to be a problem but I would suggest that once you have edited your ‘keepers’ to add to your portfolio you convert to high quality TIFF or JPG to lock in the adjustments you have made making printing easier, you can always reduce the quality of that file to make copies for web or other purposes.
I had no problems opening D100 files. From what…2002? The manufacturers will support their RAW format. Adobe may not.
Thank you very much for taking the time to break all of this down for us. I was already pretty familiar with DNG as opposed to RAW files and was already following your idea of turning everything into a DNG.
But it's also nice to have someone, who's more knowledgeable than myself validate my opinion!
I look forward to watching more of your videos in the future; this is the first one. I have subscribed and again, thank you.
You're very welcome! 👍
Brilliant. Searched the question in RUclips, found the answer explained clearly and consicley.
Subbed.
Welcome aboard Nick, glad you liked it 👍
Great Explanation!! Thank you!!!
You're welcome! 👍
Very clear and concise - thank you!
You're very welcome John 🙏
I’m just very happy Leica opted for DNG as their native raw format. It was one of the factors when deciding to switch fully to Leica for my fashion and beauty photography. That and the fact that last year, Capture One and Profoto started to support Leica. We were already converting the raw files of published work into DNG for archival purposes. Not for disk space (we keep the raw as well), but like you said: you never know 15 years from now…
Thanks for sharing Jacob 👍
Really educational video, thank you!
You are welcome 👍
As always....great insight.
Glad you enjoyed it 😊
Excellent explanation. Thank you.
You are welcome 👍 😊
Thanks for your great teaching.
You are very welcome 🙏
Biggest drawback of DNG is that you cannot use the original image processing tools of the manufacturers as they only support their own RAW format. Once converted and for saving space also deleted the original ones, then no chance to come back and use the original tools for your old photos.
Standards in any industry always keep having the problem of lagging behind latest technology and that's the reason why manufacturers use their own format: if they come up with a great invention or new feature they don't need to wait to get it implemented as a standard. They just can implement it themselves and might be able to keep it as an competitive advantage. That's also the reason why you don't see any standards in the car industry except for the gas nozzle size or charging plug. Not a single screw is standardized in the car industry after more than 100 years!
And because of this it is somewhat questionable if DNG will actually live longer than CR3 or NEF. And then any image processing tool that wants to attract customers will likely support old image formats as well ... especially as they aren't that many and isn't that complicated to implement.
And even if Lightroom would stop accepting RAW formats in 20 years you still could use Adobe DNG-converting tool then. So I don't see any reason to convert now.
Much more concerned than about file format I am about the incompatibility among imaging tools: if your preferred imaging tool seizes to exist (e.g. because of bankruptcy or any other reason) and that could happen already tomorrow and not in 20 years, then you have no chance to convert all your editing into the new tool. If you edit your images in Lightroom with changing colors, using masks, and so on, you have no chance of converting these editing steps to any other imaging tool that exists today (like Capture One, DxO PhotoLab, ...). So if you want to modify an older image in a different tool then you have to start from scratch.
And for that reason it is much more important to have lifetime-licensed imaging tool than a subscription based tool or consider how long your imaging tool might survive. In comparison to that the file format is basically irrelevant.
So at the end the question is rather if your imaging tool will survive the next 20 years, not the file format!
I like the use of an XMP file. It allows me to complete my post-processing without actually writing changes to the original file. That writing process introduces the risk that the original could be corrupted. Yes, the risk is low, but anytime you write to a file, the risk is there. Multiple updates = multiple writes = higher risk.
@@phillipbanes5484 No change is made to the original. All changes are recorded in the XMP file and then applied when you view the image in LR.
@@phillipbanes5484 If you make changes to an image and then hit RESET, it just removes the changes from the XMP...again without actually making any change to the RAW.
LR classic doesn't write any edits to DNG Files. The image editing in LR will be written to the LR catalog file
@@phillipbanes5484 That was not my intent. Lightroom handles camera manufacturer RAW files using an external file to record changes. LR and Photoshop make changes to DNG files by updating the file itself. While I don't have experience with all applications that process RAW files, I would guess most handle this in exactly the same way. One of the reasons for doing this is that camera RAW (NEF, CR2, etc) are considered almost sacred and should never be changed. I happen to agree with that approach and prefer that my application never mess with them.
At least Adobe Camera Raw can be set to always use XMP sidecar files, even with DNG (under "Camera Raw Preferences > File Handling > DNG File Handling"). I'm not sure if this is possible in LR too (on DNG export).
Bingo!...i needed this explanation so much.
Sony / Lightroom user here. I bought a second body only to have my old LR unable to import the files unless i used the Sony proprietary software....been using a DNG converter ever since.
👍😊
Thank you for this informative video
You are welcome Douglas 👍
thank you, very helpful!
You're welcome 😊 🙏
I found out the hard way that the NIKON GPS information is stripped by the DNG format - others may be also since the "standard" for EXIF information varies between camera brands (extended ESIF information).
I used to keep my .NEF and .MOS camera raws because I thought that was the "purest" thing to do. But I eventually realized the issues with maintaining sidecar files was too much of a hassle. Besides, ACR will pass all proprietary raws through a DNG sieve during Photoshop loading anyway. So I've been converting my raws to DNG for at least a decade now, and have no regrets. Plus the Adobe software environment is basically seamless with DNG. The only exceptions to DNG are JPGs for proofs/email, and TIFs for film scans and saved print finals.
Thanks for sharing 👍
Thank you!
You're welcome! 👍
Just started LRc & didn't know DNG! Thanks for clearing up afew things.
Happy to help!
Hi Steve. I'm extremely grateful to you for these tutorials, as I have found the videos fascinating & very informative. Question? Now that I have a DNG file do I really need to keep the original RAW file? I only ask this because, I'm now looking to cull a lot of hard drive space back.
Thank you, glad you like us. Well I delete the camera raws after copy to dng on import to save space. Hope that helps 😊
At one time I switched to converting my NEF raw files to DNG on import. Shortly after I stopped. My issue was related to exactly what was being presented as a positive at about 5 min in the video. It is nice having all the edits in the DNG file but when you make any processing change the file registers it as modified and your backup software will want to update the file. This may be fine for local backups but when you have your files sync'd to something like Google Drive every time you change the processing of an image Google Drive will want to upload the entire DNG file. Leaving them as NEF means it only needs to re-upload a small XMP file or your LR catalog. It clogged up my Google Drive syncing so much that I abandoned it and went back to just using the native raw file.
I've been working with DNGs for many years, and never seen any downside to it. As the man said, the main reason I do it is to save space. I have many tens of thousands of images, and the ability to save space with a slightly smaller file format is valuable to me.
Thanks for sharing! 👍
Space isn't any problem today but an aging HDD is !
I also convert to dng, but a lot of times I just see the dng icon instead of the image on my Mac’s finder window, is there a fix?
I take both routes. I store the original files on backup drives where file size doesn’t matter so much, as you don’t need them all online at once. Importing into Lightroom on to a NAS I convert to DNG because Sony uncompressed raw files are huge and you get a massive saving in disk space. That’s with the A7R4, I have the A7R5 now where you get the option on lossless compressed raw, plus mraw, so the file size issue is less important now. I don’t like sidecars either, I know at some point I’ll accidentally move a file and forget the sidecar.
could you please make a video on ccd cmos, emccd and other types of sensors available and their differences
Thanks, good idea, I never thought of. I use PS CS6.
You're welcome 😊
I’ve been wondering about dng files for, well for ages.
Yup I see this availability when importing into Lightroom but never quite got around to look into it.
I think I will convert to dng from now on. Thanks
Happy to help! 😊
Excellent video but after reading comments I am once again, unsure and confused. I have a fuji and it sounds like you have one? If so, does converting to DNG cancel the issue of fuji files being too sharp (or the worm issue)? And lately, I dont even notice it - maybe LR has changed? (fuji files are Xtrans and LR handles Bayer files). There is the ENHANCE feature now but do I use enhance for any image I want to print? And then when I open it up in SilverEfex it ends up as a Tif anyways. And it seems when I print, it looks excellent. If I sound overwhelmed, I am and I have read and watched more videos through the years. I would love to be consistent in my workflow and be confident about it. Yes, I am presenting a few isssues but they are intertwined.
Things may have changed in Lr, will have to check
Here's another reason to use DNG. When I bought a Lumix G95, I found that my editing software, the Photo Director 8 (and if you ever use Cyberlink, you know there is new version every year but they don't update support for previous version) does not support the RAW file. I converted them to DNG and then I could use them again.
In the past i converted to dng in lightroom until i entered a photo competition and found they would not accept DNG if selected as a finalist.!!
Bird Photographer of the year rules
DNG files are not permitted unless this is the native raw output of your camera;
That is such a shame David. Pass this video onto them and ask why. It would be good to discuss it with them actually. It doesn't make sense.
Again, that statement alone doesn't make sense! Thanks for mentioning it here David 👍
That’s to bad, because at least Ricoh have DNG as a native RAW file. I also believe there are other brands that use DNG as native RAW. So we cannot enter “your” competition.
I find with my Fuji raw that if I convert to b&w and dng in DXO, with no other adjustments, and from there work in Photoshop. Especially necessary with high iso work. Comparisons were not as clear with my Canon raws, but very clear gains with Fuji.
Some mobile phones too can save images as dng files. My Samsung note 10 can. Re. Jpg -> dng conversion, Topaz Labs Gigapixel can do it. It also gets rid of the jog "blotches". Topaz also has a dedicated ai conversion product (the name escapes my mind) but it hasn't been updated in years.
Your tutorials are exceptional- thank you. One question- will it impact print quality in any way? Assuming no as usually printing from an exported image that is PNG or other. And off back of this question- what is your preferred file format to print in quality wise. Understand that what print service is being used has an impact but would love your thoughts as you have always been right on the money. 👍
Thank you Penny. It won't effect the edit or quality of the edit. The printing is different as you can export in different ways. I export jpegs for print. You can find out more here www.theschoolofphotography.com/courses/lightroom-course-online
Hope that helps 😊
What you never mentioned If you're shooting pentax camera it has its native raw file But it also has dmg in the camera settings
In my pentax k1 I can chose the native (pef) or dng as a raw file. I have set on dng so it's dng right out from the camera.
Can anyone recommend an alternative to Adobe products for processing dng files? My Mavic Pro cine saves the raw files as dng. TIA
Useful content, capably presented without distracting hype. Amiable host. Just subscribed. Ricoh cams also use DNG as RAW format. My understanding is that Adobe created the DNG standard as the photo equivalent of their PDF format for documents; however, unlike PDF, the big camera makers did not adopt the DNG standard.
Ever edit a RAW file (DNG or otherwise) on a smartphone native app? I tried and it appears to work, but I can’t determine if, in fact, the smartphone is merely working with and editing the JPEG preview file built into the RAW files. What’s your take? Cheers!
Thanks Paul, never done it on a smartphone
Grea video. If i convert to a DNG and put the files on an external drive and make edits in LRC, can I put the external drive on another computer and see and re-edit this original edits? Will the LRC edit sliders on the new computer be set to the same settings as the first sliders, so that I am able to change those first edits? Or will the DNG edits be baked in of the second computer?
Hi Tom, the edits are saved within the DNG so if you open it on another computer the edits will be there. More details here www.theschoolofphotography.com/courses/lightroom-course-online
Is their a way I can get my Sony a7iv to produce the raw files that Nikon produces? Thought I was upgrading when I switched to Sony. Pictures look dull
Very good arguments--you've swayed me back to DNG. I've converted some images to DNG but have hesitated converting my entire collection. I use DxO ViewPoint and often it will ask for the original RAW fie as part of its correction--and it doesn't accept DNG versions! Maybe they fixed that in the latest version. I also found that, for my Olympus RAW files at least, the DNGs were actually slightly *larger* than the ORFs! That was few years ago. Are there more "efficient" DNG converters now?
Glad it was helpful! 👍
My far greater issue than DNG vs RAW is the unavoidable conversion to TIFF when using NIK collection plugins or PS when working mainly in LRC. First major drawback is leaving the ever so great feature of the non-destructive workflow of LRC. Secondly the option to later adjust white balance properly is lost or the use of presets yield different colouring results. How are you dealing with this? Did I miss something?
Been using DNG and now with files that are even older and which have been delivered to clients over 5 years ago, I use DNG lossy compression to save more space on my server :)
Thanks for sharing Stefan 👍
I routinely used to convert Nikon RAW (NEF) files into DNG files and strip out the embedded JPG to save space AND this worked WELL for my achieving of many years worth of shooting AND yes I did this in LR to ensure the sidecar data was written into the DNG.
However, for the last 12 months or so what is clear is that the Lossless RAW files from the Nikon Z9 contain Lens Correction data and other data which is lost when converting into DNG using the Adobe converter. I (and many others) HATE the way ACR/LR converts Nikon Lossless RAW files from the Z9 and have achieved FAR more attractive results when using DxO Pure RAW 2 or Capture One. Even when using Camera (rather than Adobe) profiles Adobe's RAW conversion is still poor (the same has been true for Song, Canon and Fuji files from new cameras/sensors).
When I shoot Hasselblad I use Phocus 3.7.2 (currently) to convert (or develop) these RAW files -- not least because Phocus does a far better job in applying Optical corrections AND it applies Hasselblad's Natural Colour Science processes to these images, whereas ACR and others do not.
When one "imports" Hasselblad RAW files 3FR these are converted into a much smaller fff file type, this has been called the Hasselblad DNG equivalent of a DNG file.
NOW - when one exports say a Z9 lossless RAW file from DxO Pure Raw 2 one obtains a linear DNG file (this is one with all the corrections and adjustments applied); whereas when one exports from Phocus as a DNG these files are NOT linear DNG and as a result have no adjustments or corrections applied. The data is just the basic stripped DNG. Currently the best way to export from Phocus is as a 16-bit TIFF using the Hasselblad LRGB* colour space (which is similar coverage to to Profoto RGB) -- the consequence is that a 100mp RAW file comes in as a 240MB 3FR, is converted to a 120MB fff BUT becomes a 500MB TIFF file AND so one needs lots of additional storage and a MAC/PC with good high-speed processor. We have asked H to look at providing a Linear DNG export option "if this would allow smaller files sizes to be exported" but so far there has been no movement.
Phocus is a good tool, but nowhere near as capable as an image editor as LRC/PS or Capture One. So for me I have to move between tools to edit my work. AND that is fine.
Does changing from let’s say an Olympus RAW file to a DNG change any parts of the image itself? Any disadvantages to the visual properties? I assume that this also changes how it works in each camera manufacturers proprietary software?
It won't change any visual quality. Not sure about camera manufacturers proprietary software, you will have to ask them.
I just get a Canon R6 M2 and I can't see CR3 files on my Mac OS Big Sur. Only way to see the files on Preview is converting to DNG or use Photo Digital Professional (which is painfully slow). Is that a good idea converting all my photos to DNG to be able to see them on Mac OS Preview?
Hi, I'm not sure but I use Lightroom to view mine. Details here www.theschoolofphotography.com/courses/lightroom-course-online
Thanks, great video, well explained, I was always shunning DNG as I thought it an odd ball version. now I know better, But one question DNG versus TIFF??
For me, DNG as Tiff files are massive!
Nice. One question: you delet raw files after convert it to DNG ? Thks
Say goodbye to Makernotes if you do.
Thank you for interesting listening. Does anybody know how to convert a DNG file to FITS (=Flexible Image Transport System or FTS) file on a Linux without loss of quality?
Hello, Marc! Thanks for all your inputs. With this particular video, a question came to my mind: I recently applied to be a staff photographer with *A* platform (where the platform takes on the agent role), which indicates that I am to submit a number of RAW files to their website for assessment/accreditation. At first, I believed it was intended to review that my files were to match the info on my gear declaration, but somehow I feel that that information can be provided some other way. Also, it was not clear that by me uploading RAW files, that platform will become the owners of the images. What would be your professional opinion about this matter? Thanks in advance.
I'm not sure but I wouldn't be giving my raw files away unless they have specifically paid for them
@@theschoolofphotography, thank you! I will go with my gut feeling. Exif and metadata can always be shared separately.
Capture 0ne don't auto convert to DNG where as lightroom offer a choice. There is an opinion Capture one are best for FujiFilm would you think there is an advantage to Download Fujifilm C1 the convert to DNG ? Lightroom DNG or C1 RAF ? Apart from that, fantastic video, food for thought.
Hi Alan, I also use fuji and yes there are issues when working in Lr. The best way I have found is to enhance the dng before you work on it. I might do a video on it 🤔
I have never observed a quality loss from converting my ARW (Sony) files to DNG - except for the focus information, i.e. for a while I experimented with searching the frames from a continuous shooting with the technically best focus, using a third party software. But now I use my naked eye at 100 percent, as more parameters have to be considered. My ARW files are reduced round 50 percent in size when converted to DNG. When I gave up on Adobe (I really appreciate Photoshop and ACR, but I hate the monthly bleeding and the constant hyping of the cloud) - I had the interesting experience that my old Photoshop CS5 with its ACR version 6.0 didn't know my ARW files per 2022 - but the DNG version of the new files opened like a charm (and that license is valid until hell freezes over). But I get sentimental. Old ACR 6.0 has been replaced by Darktable (free raw editor, maybe the best, but hard to learn) and Photoshop by Affinity Photo 2, which represents a lot of value for the money (one pay). Thanks for the lesson.
If I copy as DNG when importing to adobe lightroom and photoshop does the original native RAW change to DNG? Or do I have both file formats to choose from if I want to on the harddrive?
If you are copying it, then it will be a copy. All covered in depth here www.theschoolofphotography.com/courses/lightroom-course-online
@@theschoolofphotography thank you! 🙂
Does dng still retain the lens information, for doing lens corrections in LrC
Yes
I shoot with pentax k1Mii It gives me a choice of DNG or there native RAW format. So to keep it simple I set it for DNG. On one card and on the other card slot set for JPG. My Pentax K5 only has one slot and it is set for both JPG and DNG.
I just grabbed a k1 mii....it's fekkin' awesome.....!
If you’re converting to DNG to save space surely you need to delete your original camera raw file😮. Not something I’d be comfortable with. I don’t see any advantages in converting at the moment.
Question: If I convert a Fuji RAW file to DNG, will it get rid of the problem of the 'worms' (caused by the X-trans sensor) in Photoshop or would I still have to use Capture One to be absolutely sure?
No it doesn't Colin, the best way I have found to solve this is to enhance the raw/dng file before you edit it. I think I will do a video on this as a few people have asked the same question 🤔
I look forward to seeing that. Many thanks for the prompt reply......and keep up the good work.
I like to convert to dng, but the issue is, I can’t always see the image preview I. The finder window in my Mac, a lot of images I just see the dng icon… is there a fix to
This?
Yes. On a PC you can download a image extension viewer app. Not sure if you do the same on a mac.
I have a Sony A7rV, which saves space by using "loss-less compression" when writing the raw files. This make a big difference over using "no compression" or "lossy compression". Does DNG support "loss-less compression"?
I think they do but not 100% on that one.
Import as RAW, convert the ones I want to keep as DNG, then delete all RAW files left over. Means I just have smaller files on disk and only the ones I want. Using RAW on import gives me something to filter when deleting all the rejected ones.
What about shooting orig. Canon cr3 rawfile, then apply for example KI noise reduction 50% on every file in batch, and THEN compressing all These files into dng lossy to reduced the size by 4 to 6 Times? I hate that the dngs that come out of the KI noise reduction are 3 Times bigger (6 Times for cRaw) than orig cr3 raw.
I tested it out, for example the denoised dng is 70 mb, but the reduced dng lossy (by Lightroom converting) is only 2,5 mb, so there is way too much compressing that I can See in 100% pixelview easily, Lots of fine Details are destroyed by this compressing. I would wish to set the degree of compressing manually. or is there another Tool what makes this possible?
It's open source but almighty Adobe still has it's hands in it. I have run into compatibility problems when trying to use DNG's among several different programs that are not Adobe, therefore I am back to using the native RAW formats.
Thanks for the info Gregory, do you mind adding the programs here so we know which ones?
1. Adobe invented the DNG format and made it available to everyone.
2. Apart from camera manufacturers' proprietary software, every program that can edit raw files will open and edit DNG files. DNG was made for precisely that purpose. The only problem that might arise for someone who is unaware, is that there are DNG conversion settings that should be taken into account. The version of the DNG conversion matters. So, while newer programs will open all the later DNG versions, older programs (or versions of those programs) might only open earlier versions.
For example Photoshop CS6, which I still use, will open a later version of DNG in Camera Raw (version 12.4) that Photoshop CS4 cannot open. But the solution to this is very simple. Do the DNG conversion appropriate to the editing program. So, when I was using Photoshop CS4 my DNG conversions were version 5.4, that Photoshop CS6 can also read - so I have no need to re convert them.
So, as I said, all RAW editing programs that aren't proprietary (Canon, Sony, Nikon etc) can open and edit DNG files.
Thank you, very, very much. I still use a standalone (v4) Lightroom so with Fujifilm, Sony and now Oly, I have always had to convert to dng before processing (with my first decent camera, Pentax files were ok straight out of the box). Thanks to this video, I now know that I haven't been losing anything.
You are welcome Steve, glad it helped :)
I'm using lightroom 6.14 because I refuse to pay for a subscription. In order for lightroom to read my a7R5 files I have to convert them to dng. The problem is the dng will only show the Adobe Standard color profile, but my a7R3 raw files from Sony show many color profile options.
DNGs are 3 times smaller then Sony ARW. Thank you! Now - only DNGs for me
DNG is not as "archival ready" as it may seem - the embedded XMP data might be processed differently by different apps (ACR data often can't be properly processed by non-Adobe apps, e.g. with perspective correction data). And one downside of DNG is that you can no longer use the camera manufacturers own app to process the file (unless the original RAW is embedded in the DNG, which can be extracted when needed). Why use the camera manufacturers app? Because it might be optimized when it comes to camera profiles and specific high-ISO noise reduction. Since I prefer future-proof good documented file formats (and Adobe does a good job there) and want everything in a single file (easier to manage) I use DNG and convert my RAW files to DNG. The downsides don't matter for me.
Was searching about lossy DNG as an option. Didn't go any answer...
Thanks for making this video. Does this apply when using processing software? As an amateur, I can not justify paying a monthly fee for Lightroom, so I’m now using On1 2023. I suppose file format consideration is not program dependent, but is a personal preference based on file size, file organization, etc.
Yes as long as they can process raw files.
I also use On1 and feel it is superior to lightroom. Have no regrets about switching. I prefer to own software not rent it
I use Nikon and when importing my images I do it through Lightroom as DNG files, my Nikon camera profiles are still there also Adobe.
Good to know Jason, there must have been a change 👍
5 thanks
👍🙏
Adobe has an option to save RAW settings into the RAW file instead of a sidecar XMP file.
The only reason I like the XMP file is that if I ever want to go back to my original image setting, I just delete the XMP file. If I re-open the RAW file in Photoshop at a later date, it opens with all of the new settings and you can't undo any changes you made last time. You can only re-adjust what you did before. There have been a few times when I've wanted to go back to my Original RAW file because I learned something new in editing/processing and want to start over from scratch.
With that said, is there a program that will easily turn RAW files into DNG's? For instance I have a program that will extract the JPG from the RAW file.
Hi Wood, you can reset dngs easily in Ps Lr or any program that processes them. Learn more here www.theschoolofphotography.com/courses/photoshop-course
When I get my Canon CR3 files on my Mac first thing I do is to set the Camera Standard or Camera Landscape profile. This is what makes the Canon look. It’s only one Click and no messing around with HSL an Color grading. When I’m going to loose this in the dng format than this conversion is not for me. I messed around with RAW files to get that Canon look and it’s impossible. It’s probably a matter of taste :)
Ricoh GRIII and IIIx use dng as the raw format.
I'm so confused. I want to save my photos as DNG. When I import them into Adobe Brigde I import as DNG. Then edit in PS. But when I try to save my work from PS, DNG is not listed as an option. What am I missing?
Thanks
If you've added layers etc. I believe you will have to save it as a .psd
@@theschoolofphotography Well, that's good to know and helps clear things up a bit. I've been searching online for an answer and this is the first I've heard this. Wish I would have known that from the beginning. I do use layers quite a bit in PS, but always flatten them before exporting. One thing I did just notice and find odd, is that i can edit to my hearts content in PS, then open in ACR and can save or export as DNG from ACR. Go figure.
Thank you for your answer, I appreciate it. And on another note, I find your tutorials to be very eary to follow and quite helpful.
Your explanation may be ok for camera's with a Bayer rgb-mosaic on the sensor. This is what most camera's have. But with the so-called X-Trans sensors from Fujifilm there is difference on results pending on which DNG converter one uses.
I am not aware whether Adobe is mastering the situation better now. But say 5 years ago they weren't.
It is better than 5 years ago Marc but still not perfect. There are ways to get it right in Lr and as a few people have mentioned it I think I will do a tutorial on it. Watch this space. 😊
@@theschoolofphotography OK good this is recognized and you will do a video. I am not using LR any further because of this and because of the licensing scheme of LR. But your followers Fujifilm users will surely benefit. (I use darktable.)
I'm more interested in the difference between TIFF and DNG than RAW and DNG. Is there any advantage to using DNG over TIFF?
Tiffs are much bigger files.
Tiff is not raw, and also larger due to containing color infomations. RAW files does not contain color infomation yet, they need to be debayerd first.
Last time I tryed DNG, was when I used a Canon 60d. I couldn't open the DNG files in Canon Digital Photo professional 4. I am currently using a Canon 5d mark iii and Canon 6d2. I don't use Adobe. Just stick with Canon own raw converter.
I am 100% with you. The sidecars are a nightmare when you want to do some house keeping in your Hdd and the universal archive format is the solution to my mind.
@@karlgunterwunsch1950 I understand what you say but I do all backups in hidden time at night and then I do not suffer from what you just mention. I use Chronosync, an extremely efficient 2D backup software since 12 years and never been in trouble with backups. And I maintain 2 backups in different locations, not on the cloud.m
If a raw file is converted to a DNG file and that file is smaller than the RAW file do you lose a number of megapixels converting to a DNG file?
No you don't Paul.
@@theschoolofphotography Cheers...
What a great video - I convert to dng haven't had a problem but always worried about it bit .
Thank you Christine 🙏
Yeah, I know exactly what you are discussing. I had Olympus and Nikon files accumulated over the years. I've never been a fan of sidecar files. When I switched to Leica, their native raw files are DNG and I use Capture One for editing.
Thanks for sharing Peter 👍
Interesting video. Talking about file size; when converting RAW files with DxO PureRAW 2, the file size increases rather drastically. A 40MB RAW ends up as a 114MB DNG file. That is a serious increase that I find hard to explain. Never tried converting RAW to DNG first and then processing it through PureRAW. Any thoughts or experience with this?
I just experimented with this after watching this video. I only did one file to test but the file size for an ARW -> PureRAW2 DNG was the exact same size as ARW -> Adobe DNG -> PureRAW2 DNG. So, no difference and It was still very large. I didn't look at image quality because I was just curious about the file sizes like you.
@@karlgunterwunsch1950 Okay, that makes sense then. I always keep my original RAW files and have only recently acquired PureRAW. But good to know for people thinking they have a DNG RAW file when converting in with PureRAW when in fact it's a TIFF in 'disguise' !
Converting my NEF to DNG with PureRaw it gives me almost triple the size file, 46-56MB to 138! Exporting them Nikon's NX to TIFF 8bit 136MB, 16bit 272MB. I cannot see how you have smaller file! With DxO Photo Lab from 53 to 80 with its .dop file (like XMP)
Use Lightroom or Adobe raw converter and do the same test.
@@theschoolofphotography Adobe doesn't "read" the new NEF properly and probably it will convert it wrongly...
Sometimes I feel like I'm the only one still converting everything to DNG - I'm glad that that's not the case.
Has anyone else seen this issue with Sony and DNG files? This video is from Sep - I haven't tested this recently - hopefully it was fixed, but I doubt it:
ruclips.net/video/g1laa6Ebfz0/видео.html
Leica is also DNG...
Picture profiles are only jpeg versions of RAW, they are not the RAw file. They will only show on jpegs from the camera.
Oh crap! Hell you have just scared me into a whole new other layer of Hard drive backup. Are you now telling me that I now need to add another layer of import by converting all my ingested file into DNG files before I edit them? The only thing that might help me to buy into this format is that the edits (I'm assuming non destructive edits, your video wasn't clear on this) are saved into a single file format. You suggest deleting all the native files (in my case NEF ) after the conversion. That's asking a lot!
You don't have to do that, it's just another system you could use. 👍
You also forgot to mention, that DNG allows you to save its preview in PNG format inside the DNG, which makes it super comfortable to preview RAWs w/o need to open LR.
I use to convert to DNG upon import to LR. But like you said, on a photography forum they said you lose a little bit of info. I have never tested it to see if the same photo in DNG or NEF is any smaller in size before editing. With that said, you can always convert to DNG in 20 yrs if need be. But the real solution would be is, to shoot Leica cameras & you will be shooting DNG from the get-go. Happy shooting. It has been a while since I've seen anyone bring this up. Happy shooting.
Thanks Thomas, you lose no quality when converting to dng.
I hate those sidecar files. Adobe used to have a raw database. I use the Adobe DNG converter program which also copies the files from the card at the same time. I wish camera manufacturers would use the DNG forma, it's nice that Apple does use the format for the iPhone. I thought Adobe created the format.
Thanks Dave 👍
Or every camera company could just be like Sigma or Leica and shoot straight to DNG in camera. Would make life easier.
Unfortunately, some competitions will not accept DNGs unless the camera uses a DNG as its native raw format - like Sigma for example. They specify that in their rules. PSA nature for example. They want the raw. Ditto LPOTY.
If you wants to get true magical canon colours then only which can give you true Canon colors is Canons own DPP...Lightroom own Camera matching profiles never come close.
You can't print a Raw file so it must be changed to a PNG or JPG. So the Raw file really doesn't matter.
One thing you didn't cover was the different versions of DNG conversion. For those of us who use who can't justify or don't like the Adobe subscription license model, so use older versions of Photoshop, the Camera Raw version does matter. I use Adobe's free DNG Converter to convert my RAW files. I stopped using Lightroom years ago, and do everything in Photoshop, which opens DNG files in Camera Raw for adjustments and corrections prior to editing in Photoshop. I like that workflow.
So, as I have tried to explain in a reply to someone else further down in the comments about DNG files being made for universal use...
Apart from camera manufacturers' proprietary software, every program that can edit raw files will open and edit DNG files. DNG was made for precisely that purpose. The only problem that might arise for someone who is unaware, is that there are DNG conversion settings that should be taken into account. The version of the DNG conversion matters. So, while newer programs will open all the later DNG versions, older programs (or versions of those programs) might only open earlier versions.
For example Photoshop CS6, which I still use, will open a later version of DNG in Camera Raw (version 12.4) that Photoshop CS4 cannot open. But the solution to this is very simple. Do the DNG conversion appropriate to the editing program. So, when I was using Photoshop CS4 my DNG conversions were version 5.4, that Photoshop CS6 can also read - so I have no need to re convert them.
As I said, all RAW editing programs that aren't proprietary can open and edit DNG files.
Adobe wants you to use DNG; that's why *I* will never use it.