Orquid "Phoenix"

Orquid "Phoenix"

by ceinmart

submit your photo


Hall of Fame
View past winners from this year

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Tag Info

Hot answers tagged

14

There is something particularly conceptually wrong with throwing away the stuff that comes out of your camera. If your camera shoots in DNG, then that's what you work with. If it shoots in RAW, the same. If it shoots in either, you have to figure out what the difference is in terms of metadata that is supported, as well as all of your workflow. When your ...


11

Whatever you do, do not throw away your original RAW files. DNG is not a replacement for them. Perhaps your workflow requires you to convert into DNG's, but for the love of god do not throw away the originals. If you do, then one day you will find that you will want to use a piece of software that doesn't support the DNG format as input.


9

DNG can be a rather complex beast. The file format is similar to TIFF, in that it is not specifically an image format itself, but more of a container. A "normal" DNG image will store metadata, the primary image in TIFF format, and possibly a thumbnail image. Depending on how DNG is used by any given program, the reality may differ. It is possible to store ...


9

All image previews are stored as JPEG files of various sizes inside of a .lrprev file. The loading speed of the preview images will likely not change much if you switch to DNG. The benefit of DNG is that it is an open standard format, and can keep the metadata in the same file as the image data, which simplifies portability. On the flip side, you would incur ...


7

Disclaimer: this is what I recall from having read about the prospect of going all-DNG for file archives. I might be a bit fuzzy or off. DNG is a standard format, with specific properties. The raw files produced by a camera have a unique format, which does not precisely map to the DNG spec - camera manufacturers are being a bit cagey about file formats. ...


7

Fast Picture Viewer is $9.99 and works just fine on 64-bit Windows 7 (I'm using it myself). You can also install the 32-bit codec and then view the folder with Windows Live Photo Gallery, which will generate the thumbnails for you. Other applications, like Explorer, will then be able to use these thumbnails - but you'll have to reopen WLPG every time you ...


6

agreed on not throwing away the original raw; Many import systems allow you to embed the RAW inside the DNG, so it's there if you need it; I personally do that on all of my images. I use DNG primarily because that format includes the metadata sidecar as part of the DNG, where for RAW files, the metadata sidecar is generally a separate file. Bundling this ...


6

DNG files are based on the TIFF/EP standard, ISO 12234-2, (they're essentially bitmaps with extra metadata) so if you start out with an appropriate TIFF I/O library that will get you part way, but you'll need to fill in the extra data required by DNG, which could be tricky. Raw converters need to know more than just the pixel intensities. Other relevant ...


5

The preview image tends to be used as a thumbnail in the computer, it can be used to quickly glance at a bunch of files and figure out which is the one you want. It's up to you, but I recommend keeping the preview image. It doesn't need to be full sized, but the small image should be worth it.


5

The DNG documentation is freely available from Adobe and they include an SDK, though I haven't checked the SDK for language options, very likely something like C or C++, but you never know these days... :) In any case, the specification is open and freely usable.


5

I guess technically speaking, DNG (although it is called a raw file or raw file archive) is not really raw in the truest sense. A "RAW" file is one that is essentially a direct dump of data from a camera's image sensor and image processors (i.e. Digic 4 in Canon), without any format conversion or processing applied. Such raw files are tuned to the hardware ...


5

RAW is RAW. If you convert it to anything else, it is no longer RAW. Sure, you have more bit-depth than converting to an 8-bit format and you don't have an image yet (not all color channels are present at all pixels) but if you really want to keep your originals, you should keep your originals. Sorry if this goes against common lore but it can't be any other ...


4

All you need do is install the relevent codecs, which are available from Canon for CR2/CRW (32-bit only), Nikon for NEF (32-bit only), Olympus (32-bit only), Panasonic (32-bit only), Pentax (32-bit only) & Sony (32-bit and 64-bit) The hack to run the 32-bit version of Windows Explorer (even on a 64-bit OS) no longer works on Windows 7, in my experience. ...


4

Benefits or disadvantages aside, you can't import JPEG as DNG in Lightroom (to my knowledge). If you import a JPEG file in "Copy as DNG" mode, LR will prompt an error dialog saying, in substance: "Non-raw files were not converted to DNG". What you can do, however, is select your JPEG file in LR, and export it as DNG, then re-import that DNG file. DNG is ...


3

According to Attila Acs: You can compress new DNGs: if I import them using the Lightroom “convert to DNG” command, they are compressed You can also compress DNGs already in your Lightroom database: Select the photos in your catalog and choose “Metadata -> Update DNG Previews & Metadata”


3

The only real gain is the ability to apply non-destructive edits to the image and to reset them inside the file, as you noted in your message. Bear in mind that it can't totally put you in the same position as the RAW source format since the actual sensor data is lost along with anything discarded during the JPEG compression phase. Beyond that, there really ...


3

The biggest advantage to me, is that it's an extra step in my workflow to convert my 5D2 raw files to DNG. That extra step translates into more time in the post processing step. I'm going through 20GB of photos I just took while in spain, and converting them to DNG before I got started with it, would be a pain. I could save the resultant images as DNG, or ...


3

Think this way: maybe in the near future Capture NX may have a nice interface. You start using it but all your original NEF files are gone. To my acknowledge Capture NX is one of the best sharpener for NEF files. Don't throw away your NEF files. I was in the same situation as you. I converted all my NEFs to DNG. You know, DNG is "universal", smaller files ...


3

On the import tab choose "Copy" instead of "Copy as DNG", then you will retain the large data amount. One of the benefits of using DNG is that it uses less space. But normally it is only a 20% improvement. It would be helpful to know your camera model, so we can see waht raw format it is (compression or not, number of previews, etc.. The raws contains ...


3

I think you should be able to do it using "exiftool" --- I tested on a Linux PC, via commandline, and with a Sony ARW image, so your mileage may vary --- I have no DNG to test with. The command is basically: exiftool '-previewImage<=myown.jpg' test.arw (the quotes are needed in Unix to prevent the shell interpretation of <=). I have a bit of ...


2

Another advantage is that the manufacturer's raw files are better supported by post-processing software. For example, the raw converter I use, Bibble, supports basically all Nikon DSLRs and add support for new models quickly. The way they do this is to obtain raw files from each camera and test those and tweak as necessary. This is done using NEF, not DNG. ...


2

There's one particular difference that I'm aware of: proprietary RAW formats contain complete data, while the DNG standard has a specific format, which may not match up to a RAW format. I'm aware some vendors, Nikon in particular, have been encrypting some of their RAW data so that it cannot easily be converted, if at all.


2

If you're happy throwing away the original RAW files then you can save a little disk space. I've converted CRW (Canon RAW) to DNG and I typically end up with files about 20% smaller with all the information there. Of course disk space is cheap, and Canon and Nikon RAW formats are likely to be supported for a long time to come. And Ricoh is another camera ...


2

If you are up for it, Aptina provides documentation of many aspects of the products, (I think) intended for manufacturers of add-ons. But if you sign an NDA you can get access to the documentation library, where presumably you can learn what you need to write code yourself. See their FAQ.


2

Converting an image file from the manufacturer's raw format to .dng will strip all of the information in the maker notes section of the EXIF data. Since all Adobe products ignore the maker notes to begin with, if you only use Adobe products you will not see a difference in this respect. There are additional things that the conversion strips as well. For ...


2

PEF is Pentax's proprietary RAW format. DNG is the semi-standard owned by and promoted by Adobe. In reality, there's no practical difference. They both hold the same information. It seems like there might be an advantage in having a standard format, but as a practical matter, RAW converter software needs to be updated with information for each camera ...


2

Apparently there is a more recent build of CHDK for this type of camera that can be found on the forums: http://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=7864.0 Downloaded & installed it and works fine now. The newly generated DNGs are free of dead/stuck pixels now...


2

Good news, Aperture now supports Leica M Monochrom DNGs! Enjoy.


2

Sounds to me that it is more likely to have been a failure saving the file over the network. Network backups are nice for archival storage, but horrible for live work due to the extremely slow load times for relatively large files. The process I generally use is to initially transfer my files to my high speed scratch SSD array (striped). I then ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible