Saving files in Camera RAW format vs DNG

[rhendricks]

Hi All,

Does anyone have an opinion about archiving in the Camera Raw formats? Would it be better to save my RAW CR2 images as DNG's? At this point all of my post processing software is Adobe, PS & Lightroom. I just don't want to be shortsighted!

I'm about to begin moving all of my photos off of my C drive and leave only my operating system. I was thinking it might be a good time to convert them if there is a benefit.

Thank you in advance,
R

[OldClicker]

Hi All,

Does anyone have an opinion about archiving in the Camera Raw formats? Would it be better to save my RAW CR2 images as DNG's? At this point all of my post processing software is Adobe, PS & Lightroom. I just don't want to be shortsighted!

I'm about to begin moving all of my photos off of my C drive and leave only my operating system. I was thinking it might be a good time to convert them if there is a benefit.

Thank you in advance,
R

I would keep them in the original RAW format. Anything else has less image data. - TF

[GlenHumphries]

I'm not sure image data would be lost in transferring form one raw format to another, but I keep all of my archives as camera raw (.nef for nikons), and export to dng any that i want to process, because it has integrated metadata.

[drg]

Save your files as both Camera RAW (Native Format) and DNG, disk space permitting.

There are future reasons to have DNG files as well as some sharing options that DNG is making easier for some files, especially older, or original RAW formats from Canon and even the original Camera files from MF Digital Backs.

With Adobe products chances of having file incompatibility is much lower than with some editors so it may not give you the immediate advantages that it does with other software.

There is a Photography Review resource article, DNG - Format for the Future that you might want to read. I won't repeat here what I have already written about DNG, other than to emphasize I keep finding additional reasons to include DNG in my workflow.

One part of the specification that is often missed is that the entire original RAW file can be encapsulated in the DNG wrapper for archival purposes, and by doing so a file recovery system that recovers DNG will work. Some RAW specs are odd enough that file repair software doesn't always work. This way you don't lose any information.

DNG can contain all of the original RAW data and thumbnails and changes, so it has some pluses. They can become very large files as a result!! Something to keep in mind for other than a long term, put on the shelf storage format.

I hope this is a help in your decision process. Let me know if I can clarify any other details.

[fx101]

But for practical use, the DNG is close enough if not exactly like the original RAW file. Unless you are printing on a lightjet at 40x30 you won't see any difference at all, and even then in most cases the files will be identical. ACR and Apperture work quite well. In some cases Apperture treats the DNG file a little differently than a camera native file (such as a .nef or .cr2) but that only occurs when making adjustments. The same quality image with identical colours can be yielded from both versions. ACR seems to keep both formats consistent as far as I can tell.