LR users-Do You convert to dng?

JustJazzie · Mar 28, 2015

I'd never heard of a dng file until I opened Lightroom. I've researched it a bit and I *think* I understand what it is. However, most of the information I've read comes from adobe who would obviously have good things to say about it. I did a quick search on here, but hadn't found a thread specific to DNG's in the few pages I scrolled through, hopefully this isn't a repetitive question.

Anyways, do you convert to dng? What's your reasoning?

pixmedic · Mar 28, 2015

I load the raw files into lightroom, then when im done, export as a jpeg.

snowbear · Mar 28, 2015

^This. If I need to do extensive edits (read PS) I'll convert to PSD first, then export to jpg as a final step.

TreeofLifeStairs · Mar 28, 2015

snowbear said:
^This. If I need to do extensive edits (read PS) I'll convert to PSD first, then export to jpg as a final step.

Right. I don't think I've ever saved a file as a dng.

weepete · Mar 29, 2015

Same. Raw straight to Jpeg or save as a psd if heavy editing is needed.

astroNikon · Mar 29, 2015

RAW imported directly in LR, then exort as JPEG

If your LR is not compatible with your camera then you have to use DNG. You'll have to upgrade to the latest LR to get the most recent compatible drivers. Adobe does not create new camera drivers for older versions of LR.

sscarmack · Mar 29, 2015

I just have LR automatically convert to DNG when I import, as well as rename file name, as well as copyrighted and meta tagging.

JustJazzie · Mar 29, 2015

Thanks for all the responses so far. I accidentally told LR to convert my first import to DNG since I had no idea what I was doing. Im surprised more people don't use it. I wonder why. :head scratch:

snowbear · Mar 29, 2015

I've considered using it, but I haven't had a need , so far. I'm not planning on upgrading my camera anytime soon so NEF (and my version of LR) are working fine for me. If I do move to another body, I'll have to change something, but I'll worry about that if it happens.

Ysarex · Mar 29, 2015

In theory DNG is a good idea. It would be advantageous to all of us if the camera manufacturers adopted a uniform standard. Adobe has tried to claim DNG was created to serve that purpose but that idea hasn't gotten any traction from the major camera makers.

In reality the camera makers raw formats remain proprietary. The risk/concern in using any raw format is support and ongoing support. You need software support to process your raw files. When I started to consider switching cameras about two years ago to Fuji one of my first questions and concerns was available support to process the Fuji RAF files. I decided I was interested in the camera but I initially delayed because of raw file support.

The problem with DNG is the same concern; support and ongoing support. Will converting to DNG expand or limit the support you have available for your camera's raw files?

For example: You shoot Canon and your camera outputs CR2 raw files. You use LR and on import convert all your raw files to DNG. Any advantage? Well Adobe's DNGs will be smaller than the Canon CR2s: enough to make a difference. That sounds good. Did you lose anything? In terms of using LR, no. But then you see some photos of a friend who has the same camera and lens. They look better than yours. They're cleaner and clearer overall. You ask your friend how they do it. How are they processing their raw files? They tell you they use Canon's own DPP to originally convert the raw files because they discovered that Canon's DLO function (exclusive to DPP) really makes a difference and once they saw that they decided it was worth using DPP. It's free and it's on the CD that came with the camera. You decide to try it. Oops! DPP won't open DNG files. So in converting to DNG you gave up a function/feature of your camera that Canon created and supplied with the camera.

That's one "for example" -- there are many others. Before you do something you can't undo be sure you won't be surprised later.

Joe

3Dogs · Mar 29, 2015

I prefer to convert to DNG on import. Not a huge reason why..but I prefer to support an open standard. One thing I like best is I can save all my 'edits' in the DNG rather than having a sidecar file. Not sure if I was doing it wrong when using NEF...or if that was a previous limitation. I also think windows can read and display the image in a DNG easier which is nice because I use windows explorer a lot to view my folders and it is just like viewing a jpg image in that regard. Technical write ups have some additional benefit of converting to DNG such as it being slightly faster and embedded file verification etc.