saving file formats

When I'm saving a Raw file conversion, to make and edit copies from, what is the best format to save it as? I'm given the options:
Photoshop - .psd
JPEG 2000 - .jpf
Photoshop PDF - .pdf
Photoshop Raw - .raw
PNG - .png
TIFF - .tif

I've heard that a new DNG format is a format that (apparently unlike other everyday formats) will be readable by all different software in years to come and that it should be used to save all raw images as a hard copy. If this is so, what readily available software will save in this format?
Thanks for your help.

This is largely a matter of personal preference, so be prepared for some diverse responses......

For my money, I archive my photos in their native raw format- CR2 in my case. Reason being that the raw files themselves are never altered. A separate file is created when you apply adjustments, and those adjustments are reapllied the next time the image is opened, but the original file itself never gets altered.

Second best in my book is a 16 bit psd (Photoshop) file. This is a lossless format that can save large amounts of image data that leaves lots of room for editing.

- Joe U.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by filafera

When I'm saving a Raw file conversion, to make and edit copies from, what is the best format to save it as?...

---

Adobe DNG is the best of all worlds, mostly for the reasons you've already given. It is the first universal RAW file format, and is quickly being adopted as the industry standard.

Adobe provides a free DNG converter.

As for Medley's comments, the DNG coverter gives you the option of converting to DNG while saving a copy of the file in its native format, all within the single file. While this (obviously) doubles the size of the file, it does give you that security if that's something that concerns you.

I keep my RAW files (In my case Nikon NEFs), open in Nikon capture, tweak to what I want, and then resave it as a NEF for the same reason Medley described. Once I get the file the way I want, I'll save it as a jpg or open the file in PS from Nikon Capture, do all my editing. My little rule of thumb is if it takes me more than a few minutes to do my editing, I'll save a copy as a PSD file to open/edit later. Once I'm done I save it as a jpg, so I end up with 3 versions of the same image.

BTW, Who Framed Roger Rabbit is awsome!

Besides what has already been said about keeping the RAW file... PSD and TIFF are the 2 formats that will keep the most information.

When you open a RAW file with Photoshop CS2, the RAW editor starts up (in case you don't already know that) and after editing.. you get the option of either opening the file in photoshop to continue editing, or save... saving from there, usually yields the option of saving as DNG....

I guess now that you have given the info about DNG I am triple times more curious to research it!

Steve any links in particular you think would help? ( I am just procrastinating here! :D )

Marc

Hi guys, thanks for all your help! It's good to know that I was sort of on the right path and can forge on a lot surer footed!
The reason for my concern regarding Raw files is that I read an article that said a lot of camera manufacturers future generation software will not be able to read and open a Raw file that was taken today (even though the brands are the same), hence the recommendation of DNG files.
Thanks again :)

Definitely, DNG helps ensure that photographers will be able to access their files in the future.

http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/

Does DNG, keep all the editing information that PSD files keep?

Roger

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by readingr

Does DNG, keep all the editing information that PSD files keep?

Roger

---

Yes, and more. DNG is touted as an alternative to proprietary RAW formats, and includes the same amount of information and editability as RAW does.

Here's my problem with the DNG format

1) certain government entities have expressed a, shall we say "stubborn reluctance" to switch from their current use of the Tiff format to the DNG format. As a result, Adobe (which owns the rights to the DNG format) has introduced an updated "version" of the DNG format (1.1.0.0) that is an extension of the Tiff 6.0 format. This makes it possible (though not mandatory) to have a file that is simultaneously DNG and Tiff-EPS compatable. To me, this represents a compromise on Adobe's part- should it really be necessary to have new versions of a universally standard file format? Adobe's DNG data sheet for hardware and software developers now includes instuctions for making DNG readers compatable with earlier versions of the file format. Isn't that exactly the kind of thing that the DNG format was supposed to prevent???

2) One of the current best uses for the DNG format is to make newer camera models compatable with older Adobe software. Here's an example: Adobe Camera Raw support for Photoshop CS2 stopped with ACR v3.9. The newest version of ACR for CS3 (v4.0) adds suport for Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ8 Raw files. Normally, these files are not compatable with CS2. However, using Adobe's DNG converter to convert them into DNG (1.0.0.0) files makes them readable by CS2's software (which includes support for the earliest DNG format)

So, how long before Adobe comes to grips with the realization that supporting the DNG format cuts into their own profits, as well as being a format that (to date) lacks universal acceptance?

Certainly, the DNG format is a useful tool for the digital toolbox. I'm just not convinced of it's viability as a stable universal format. Not yet anyway.

Food for thought.

- Joe U.