Nature Photographers Network
This is the preserved archive of the original Nature Photographers Network. The community continues at naturephotographers.network.

Adobe DNG converter

Discussion

15 replies
Posted by David Kjaer on January 13, 2009 at 1:55 PM
As I have decided at this stage not to buy Photoshop CS4 and as Adobe do not support CS3 with the latest RAW plugins I am having to use the Adobe DNG converter so that I can open files from my EOS 5D MkII in Adobe Camera RAW.

My question is do I lose any quality/info from my file by doing it this way!

David
Posted by Tim Marks on January 13, 2009 at 1:58 PM
I convert all off Nikon D300 NEFs to DNG (I archive the NEFs) and can see no difference between the two formats. All information appears intact
Posted by David Bostedo on January 13, 2009 at 3:45 PM
The only thing you may lose David are some of the features in Canon's own RAW conversion software (picture styles, focus point utilities, etc.). Other than that, I've never seen or heard of a problem with DNG conversion. It's possible that the converter will treat it somewhat differently on default settings, so you may initially see differences, but that's just based on the converter configuration and settings - nothing inherent in the file.
Posted by John Mumaw on January 13, 2009 at 6:30 PM
An added bonus is that DNG files are about 20% smaller than your RAW files.
Posted by Nat Coalson on January 13, 2009 at 6:33 PM
Converting to DNG is always the best way to go, even if your raw converter supports your particular camera model. The benefits to using DNG far outweigh any downside. All your original image data will remain intact.

However - as David B pointed out, you will lose proprietary metadata such as autofocus points and any camera styles applied.

Adobe's DNG Profiles will let you apply rendering styles similar to Canon's software, though... and with the DNG Profile Editor you can preview and apply the profiles to your DNGs, even without CS4 (or Lightroom).

DNG Profiles and Profile Editor here
Posted by Ed Cordes on January 13, 2009 at 7:30 PM
If the DNG is a smaller file does it achieve this via compression? I have often thought of trying DBG, but have hated to take the chance that not all my original data would be preserved. So, you guys feel it is just as good as our original RAW files out of our cameras?

EDIT: Is the original metadata detailing camera, lens f stop SS, date etc. preserved and converted?
Posted by John Mumaw on January 13, 2009 at 8:52 PM
The DNG file is compressed using a 'lossless' compression, so absolutely no data is lost.

The original camera metadata aside from the proprietary data noted above is indeed embedded in the DNG file.
Posted by Larry Puckett on January 13, 2009 at 10:15 PM
Why not open the files in DPP 3.5, make your system dependent edits there and then transfer the image directly to PS as a TIFF? You an open the TIFF in ACR and save as a DNG or go ahead and process in PS.


Larry
Posted by David Bostedo on January 13, 2009 at 11:42 PM
Larry - Most cameras have raw files that need to be handled slightly differently, so each new camera that comes out needs to be supported by the raw converter. Adobe typically only supports new cameras in its newest versions of ACR, which can only run along with its newest version of Photoshop. So the 50D won't ever be supported in a version of ACR that can run with CS3.
Posted by Larry Puckett on January 14, 2009 at 10:37 AM
David--well that's funny because I can open my 50D files in ACR in CS3 right now! Not supposed to happen and I was surprised myself--Larry
Posted by David Bostedo on January 14, 2009 at 11:19 AM
You'll be able to open just about any raw file Larry....but the conversion that occurs may be strange. For instance, I altered my Canon S2 IS to shoot raw. These raw files would convert just fine, and would look OK - except that all the reds became very magenta. That's because the S2 IS raw files weren't supported by ACR. That's the kind of thing I'm talking about.

It's possible that a newer camera would convert just fine - if it uses the same sensor and file format as another, for instance. (I'm not sure if you can tell ACR to treat a raw file as though it's from another camera, but I think you can.) But frequently this isn't the case.
Posted by Steve Foss on January 14, 2009 at 11:52 AM
Larry, since the 50D came out (October) a bit before CS4 hit the shelves (November), Adobe did update the RAW plug-in for CS3 so ACR can open 50D RAW files. Not so on the 5D2, which came out later.
Posted by Larry Puckett on January 14, 2009 at 12:25 PM
Thanks Steve, I had not heard that since our big thread on the 50D last month. At that time the word was that none of the Adobe raw converters could handle the 50D or the 5DII so I was using DPP until last night. BTW, I am enjoying the camera, especially Live View, although in that mode it is a battery hog--Larry
Posted by David Bostedo on January 14, 2009 at 3:15 PM
Oops - my bad. I assumed the 50D was in the same boat as the 5DII.
Posted by Steve Foss on January 14, 2009 at 3:17 PM
I live to serve. :wink:

Now, I just wish I HAD the 50D and CS3. :biggrin:
Posted by David Kjaer on January 14, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Many thanks to all for taking the time to reply to my question and sharing your knowledge!

David :toast: