View Poll Results: Do you convert your Camera Raw to DNG??

Voters
23. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    8 34.78%
  • No

    15 65.22%
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: DNG VS Camera Raw

  1. #1

    Default DNG VS Camera Raw

    Hi,

    Would like to check if anyone here actually convert their camera raw file into DNG.

    and would like to know more about the "goodness" of DNG. The thing that i know of is smaller file size ( its a lossless compression format) as compared to Camera Raw.
    Last edited by Leofric; 3rd November 2009 at 12:01 PM.
    EoS 1D MK2| 24 - 70 f2.8L | 70 - 200 f4L

  2. #2
    Member catohcat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    291

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    + I dont need a special photoviewer to view DNG files, even Internet Explorer read them.
    + DNG is universal & best format for archive. Like PSD, you can still open your DNG with all metadata in the future photo editors 10, 20 yrs later.
    + With DNG I can achieve color tones of different camera profiles, even making one myself. So no more "I support Canon 'cos it's skin tone", "I support Nikon 'cos it's vibrance" blah blah.

  3. #3

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    hmm, i didn't know DNG is smaller than RAW... if so then i might start converting all to DNG.

  4. #4

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    Some people have to convert to DNG as newer camera raw files are not supported in some older software... i.e. Photoshop CS4 is needed for the latest canon cameras.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    270 degree of Singapore
    Posts
    6,741

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    When convert RAW or compressed RAW files to DNG, will it be miss out any info where the original RAW file carry? Just wonder.

    Does the DNG convertor provide by Adobe run on it own in Window, or does it require photoshop or lightroom to run. And how user friendly is it?
    Sony Alpha 700 hobbyist

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Hougang Ave. 7
    Posts
    890

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    When converting raw files from my Pany GF-1 to DNG it is bigger. For Sony A850 it is smaller for my CS3. Very strange ?

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    270 degree of Singapore
    Posts
    6,741

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    Quote Originally Posted by frederickykfoo View Post
    When converting raw files from my Pany GF-1 to DNG it is bigger. For Sony A850 it is smaller for my CS3. Very strange ?
    May be Pany have a better compression method than DNG, while Sony compression is not as good as DNG (if there are no info/data loss)?
    Sony Alpha 700 hobbyist

  8. #8
    Member Darkman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    86

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    One reason to convert to DNG is not so much that Camera Raw does not support newer RAW formats, but because later Camera Raw software may not support older RAW formats. DNG, being universal, is purported to be supported forever. Maybe that's also the reason why Leica opted to use DNG as their native RAW format.

  9. #9

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    Quote Originally Posted by 2evans View Post
    Some people have to convert to DNG as newer camera raw files are not supported in some older software... i.e. Photoshop CS4 is needed for the latest canon cameras.
    probably Adobe wants ppl to either buy and upgrade to CS4 or use their DNG convertor.. haha
    Last edited by Leofric; 3rd November 2009 at 02:36 PM.
    EoS 1D MK2| 24 - 70 f2.8L | 70 - 200 f4L

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,717

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    One more adv i think is that you do not need to save the "sidecar info" like keywords etc. I can't rem exactly but it was mentioned in the Scott Kelby CS4 book.

  11. #11

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    Quote Originally Posted by Leofric View Post
    probably Adobe wants ppl to either buy and upgrade to CS4 or use their DNG convertor.. haha
    Pretty much,

    Customer spending money to buy newer CS4 > Adobe spending money to support newer cameras on CS3


  12. #12

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    Seems like dng doesn't preserve colour accuracy. For me, converted raw files have a slightly different colour than camera raw. Since camera raw has camera profiles, its colours tend to be more accurate. Anyone has different experiences?

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Somewhere Out There
    Posts
    2,573

    Default Re: DNG VS Camera Raw

    I would convert for my own work and the debate will continue.

    I would convert to DNG so that when I upgrade to newer cams, I don't have to keep upgrading Photoshop to keep up.

    As for having color shift, I do not see a reason why there should be one. After all, DNG is just rewriting the RAW codes. Even if there is one, it should be very easy to convert in Camera RAW or make final adjustments in CS.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •