I use CR2. I do understand that many like the DNG as any software that can process RAW can open the file. I also understand the concept of having a universal RAW format. DNG does not use side car XMP files for metadata, but rather embeds it into the DNG itself. However, for my purposed I have found these things not to be a big advantage.
Perhaps in the future I will convert my RAW files to DNG, but for not I'll stick with CR2
The biggest advantage to DNG is archivability. DNG is a single standard open format that is likely to be supported for many years to come.
CR2 is not a single format. The CR2 files from different cameras require different conversion and there's no guarantee you will find a converter ten years from now capable of opening images from a discontinued camera.
I agree with Guy about the potential benefit archivability. However, for the present and foreseeable future all new software has been backwards compatible with the older CR2 (and NEF for that matter) formats. Lightroom in particular has DNG converters that will allow you to convert at any time - now or in the future, so if you don't want to convert now you can do it later if you find it meets your needs.
I am concerned that the DNG conversion algorithm really produces the image as was intended by the camera manufacturer. After all the info off the sensor is merely a series of 1's and 0's. Canon has developed the CR2 format, and allowed it to be open sourced, so the image presented on our monitors is as Canon intended. So, DNG must interpret the raw data and make the judgements to present the image on the monitor using Adobe's algorithms. It seems to me there must be at least subtle differences in the conversion process.
On another line of discussion, Rodney, I am not sure why your colors are funky in LR. My 1DMK2 and my wife's 40D are presented very well in LR. I wold make sure that you have the Camera Calibration in the Develop Module set to either Adobe Standard or Canon Camera Standard or Neutral. If other picture styles are selected the colors will be affected. If you still have issues reset all LR preferences dealing with image processing to be sure something didn't get set wrong in error.
So, DNG must interpret the raw data and make the judgements to present the image on the monitor using Adobe's algorithms. It seems to me there must be at least subtle differences in the conversion process.
That's exactly what happens with CR2 (or any RAW) files in ACR and Lightroom.
One big difference between RAW and DNG files is that the DNG files are usually about 10% or so smaller. That can add up to plenty of HD space after awhile.
Posted by Pedro Bento on April 15, 2009 at 6:54 AM
I've noticed differences between ACR and DPP when working on a sunset image at the beach taken with my 40d. There was a good mix of orange clouds and blue sky but ACR did not do a very good job of rendering the blues, they were overly warm and grayish. When I processed in DPP with the neutral picture style and then transfered it to photoshop for final adjustments the blues ended up much deeper and closer to as I saw them. I tried adjusting the white balance manually quite a bit in ACR but just could not get the same results as DPP. Maybe I'm just inexperienced in ACR but DPP just seemed more natural.
Discussion
8 replies- What format do you use?
Thanks
Perhaps in the future I will convert my RAW files to DNG, but for not I'll stick with CR2
CR2 is not a single format. The CR2 files from different cameras require different conversion and there's no guarantee you will find a converter ten years from now capable of opening images from a discontinued camera.
Guy
So you are throwing away any possibility of using an alternative converter than those offered by Adobe.
Some of the colours in lightroom are crazy compared with DPP. In addition the lens correction facility is great too.
So I say if there is a problem in 10 years convert it then.
When Canon support DNG I will convert everything Adobe might not exist in 10 years either. What will you do with your DNG files then!
I am concerned that the DNG conversion algorithm really produces the image as was intended by the camera manufacturer. After all the info off the sensor is merely a series of 1's and 0's. Canon has developed the CR2 format, and allowed it to be open sourced, so the image presented on our monitors is as Canon intended. So, DNG must interpret the raw data and make the judgements to present the image on the monitor using Adobe's algorithms. It seems to me there must be at least subtle differences in the conversion process.
On another line of discussion, Rodney, I am not sure why your colors are funky in LR. My 1DMK2 and my wife's 40D are presented very well in LR. I wold make sure that you have the Camera Calibration in the Develop Module set to either Adobe Standard or Canon Camera Standard or Neutral. If other picture styles are selected the colors will be affected. If you still have issues reset all LR preferences dealing with image processing to be sure something didn't get set wrong in error.
Well at least with the last image I was working on
That's exactly what happens with CR2 (or any RAW) files in ACR and Lightroom.
One big difference between RAW and DNG files is that the DNG files are usually about 10% or so smaller. That can add up to plenty of HD space after awhile.