raw vs dng

Hello all,
I just really got into photography and i have a lot to learn...I'll probably ask a zillion questions and ask for lots of feedback on photos.

My question for right now is: Is there an advantage to converting from raw to dng in lightroom; besides having more than one copy of the original?

(i prefer shooting raw instead of jpeg - just curious about converting raw to .dng and if there are any advantages in doing so?)

 

You wind up with a slightly smaller files size so over time you'd save some disk drive space.

Unlike other proprietary RAW files, edits aren't stored in a separate 'sidecar' file that also has to be moved with the original image, if in fact you want to move stuff around.

I don't know of many people who bother converting their RAW files to DNG.

 

so in essance, the dng has less baggage (sidecar files) than the raw and saves on disk space over time? however that perk of having the baggage -or history of edits- is that you can see what you have done? but if this is the case the goal should be no edits and aim for the perfect shot?? (which I am far from doing)

or am i completely misunderstanding...which is entirely possible.

 

I use Lightroom and convert everything to DNG, because I would like to believe in the future if I was ever not using Lightroom, I would have files that are more easily readable. Carrying the edits if the file is moved is not important to me, because I like to start with a "fresh" palette when I am doing PP. So if there is already processing done, and it had been some time since I worked with the file, I would hate to introduce unnecessary degradation of the image by overprocessing it, you know what I mean?

 

Could you name one of those "some of them already do" that ships cameras with .DNG instead of their own proprietary RAW format?

DNG is proprietary to Adobe. At the present time:

 

JustPeachy is my girlfriend. right now we are trying to figure out the best way to store the pictures. Our current setup is to shoot in RAW, and then import into lightroom, on different computers. The way we are doing now is to convert to .dng, but this creates a .dng on my hard drive, a .dng on her hard drive, and of course the original in .raw on the network drive.

I’m just trying to figure out what the best solution to not having multiple copy's spread out across every computer. The way I am leaning right now is to leave the .raw's on the network storage, and access the .raw over the network. I would also need to setup a way of creating a copy of the network storage, just to make sure that the original’s are not lost. I’m open for advice on other methods, but from how its sounding, there are no major advantages to converting to .dng, since adobe is willing to support raw formats currently. (at least no major advantages from what I am gathering)

 

Yeah, I shoot Pentax, and I have the in camera option of sooting the proprietary Pentax raw .pef files, or shooting .dng format. I shoot everything straight into .dng raw and I think it's great.

 

Kelby makes the case for converting everything to .dng for the fact that the metadata is incorporated, the smaller file sizes, AND due to the fact that it is not proprietary (although it is an Adobe format, it is open to all the manufacturers to utilize). One of these days, I'm going to convert my old stuff. For now, all my new stuff is converted to .dng as I import it.

 

Here's a list:
Cameras that write DNG

Not sure when it was last updated so it's possible there are more.

If your favorite RAW processor drops support in the future for an older camera you once shot RAWs with, then DNG would be handy. I don't really think this will ever happen though (within reason). Plus, who's to say that Adobe will support DNG in the future?

I think that this reason alone will convince companies like Adobe to continue to support cameras no matter how old. ACR (for example) still supports the original Nikon D1 which came out in 1999. Also still supported is the original Canon 1D.

I could be wrong though, only time will tell.

EDIT: Big_Mike beat me to it

 

Thanks to both you and Mike for the lists. :thumbup:

The possibility of Adobe changing their mind about supporting DNG sometime in the future, is why I posted the Wikipedia quote.