Posted by Ben Musgrove on January 1, 2009 at 3:52 PM
Hi All,
First of all HAPPY NEW YEAR to you all!
I am wondering what peoples thoughts are on File Formats. I have been using my standard RAW format ".CR2" for the past year. However I am now considering a change for 2009 and using the DNG RAW format instead.
Is this a wise decission or will it cause me more hassle that it will good?
Any thoughts would be gratfully received.
Posted by Phillip Noll on January 1, 2009 at 5:23 PM
With DNG you can choose to embed the original raw file within the DNG so you never lose it. The resulting DNG is a bit bigger though. I have begun converting all my raw files to DNG--its a nice container for my raw files and metadata and its open source.
DNG is safer in the long term, in my opinion. It would make little sense for software manufacturers to continue supporting older raw formats for years after the cameras that produced them are discontinued. To their credit they have not dropped any yet, to my knowledge, but I wouldn't count on that being the case 5, 10, or 20 years from now.
Guy
Posted by Larry Puckett on January 1, 2009 at 8:32 PM
What are the advantages of a DNG over a TIFF? Which is most likely to be retained as the archival format for the future?
What are the advantages of a DNG over a TIFF? Which is most likely to be retained as the archival format for the future?
DNG is still your digital negative having all the attributes of your original RAW file. It is suggested that you always save either the RAW or DNG version of your files and when optimizing them in PS saving the optimized file as TIFF. The TIFF file will be MUCH larger. If you ever want to rework an image you can either tweak the TIFF (which is why I now save my TIFF files with layers intact), or start over again using the RAW or DNG file.
Guy has a great point about support for older RAW formats in the future. Will ACR, of Canon DPP still open the CRW files from my now long retired 10D??? As DNG gradually becomes the universal standard this issue will disappear.
Posted by Ben Musgrove on January 2, 2009 at 3:38 AM
Many thanks everyone for your advise!
Think I'm going to convert my files to DNG and embed the original raw file within the file as Phillip Noll sugested. It sounds like the safest option even if it does take up a little more space.
Posted by Paul Inglis on January 2, 2009 at 10:41 AM
Hi Ben,
I keep my original RAW files (.nef) and a converted .dng file together in one folder. I then convert to 16-bit .tiff. If I need any other files such as .jpg for the web I'll do it at the time required from my .tiff file.
Discussion
6 repliesI am wondering what peoples thoughts are on File Formats. I have been using my standard RAW format ".CR2" for the past year. However I am now considering a change for 2009 and using the DNG RAW format instead.
Is this a wise decission or will it cause me more hassle that it will good?
Any thoughts would be gratfully received.
Guy
Larry
DNG is still your digital negative having all the attributes of your original RAW file. It is suggested that you always save either the RAW or DNG version of your files and when optimizing them in PS saving the optimized file as TIFF. The TIFF file will be MUCH larger. If you ever want to rework an image you can either tweak the TIFF (which is why I now save my TIFF files with layers intact), or start over again using the RAW or DNG file.
Guy has a great point about support for older RAW formats in the future. Will ACR, of Canon DPP still open the CRW files from my now long retired 10D??? As DNG gradually becomes the universal standard this issue will disappear.
Think I'm going to convert my files to DNG and embed the original raw file within the file as Phillip Noll sugested. It sounds like the safest option even if it does take up a little more space.
I keep my original RAW files (.nef) and a converted .dng file together in one folder. I then convert to 16-bit .tiff. If I need any other files such as .jpg for the web I'll do it at the time required from my .tiff file.