![]() |
|
|
#1 |
|
New Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 40
|
Never really tried it before, but was wondering whether most of u guys actually use Digital Negative(dng) for their workflow. Since dng can be read by any CS and Lightroom, is it a better idea to convert all my NEFs to DNG instead?
something like NEF->DNG->Lightroom->CS3? ![]() |
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: East of SG
Posts: 234
|
IMO its always best to save to the native format of your camera with RAW. When you convert from a native RAW format to DNG, there are bound to be some information lost in order to fit into the DNG file format.
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 639
|
I seem to remember that it's a lossless conversion
__________________
Parka Blogs |
|
|
| Sponsored Link |
|
|
#4 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: East of SG
Posts: 234
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Member/Tangshooter
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Punggol 21
Posts: 1,603
|
err.. technically not very sound leh.. once the image is quanitze and sampled by a scanner into the computer for processing, there is already an image loss in resolution ( quantisation error or commmonly known as resolution ). It is not possible to have "lossless" sampling other than using the conventional enlarger lens. Something is wrong somewhere...
![]() |
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Chapel Hill, US
Posts: 875
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 639
|
Just read up on the help section in Photoshop & Lightroom. Says that one can choose a lossless compression when going from RAW to DNG. On side note, a typical zip/rar/dmg file also uses lossless compression.
I like the fact that the metadata is saved onto the DNG photo itself. That's unlike the RAW which writes an additional XMP file. Metadata standards are universal. Won't be any loss during conversion.
__________________
Parka Blogs |
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
New Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 40
|
so are most of u using dng or raw? was thinking of converting all my raw to dng. tho dng convertor has the option of embedding the original raw into the dng but it'd just bloat the file size.
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 639
|
There's a very good discussion on Adobe's forum
http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc43848 Anyway, I use DNG for the slightly smaller file size and metadata in single file advantage. If Adobe say there's it's lossless compression, I'll take it. Choosing file formats is like choosing belief systems. Why would I believe camera makers more than Adobe? See what I mean?
__________________
Parka Blogs |
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: ClubSNAP
Posts: 5,552
|
what you can do is that you can tweak your NEF first, den convert to DNG... also can.. i will only generate the dng if theres a need to... other wise.... i will keep the NEF from the conversion. no any particular reason. just playing safe. DNG is also smaller in file size too...
__________________
blog. http://blog.touchstudios.com.sg |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|