Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by hootpie, Jun 1, 2009.
Which do you use and why?
I use it because I have more data to work with when processing.
I also use it for peace of mind because it's the actual original image from the camera, and not a compressed version. I could use that to my benefit at some point if it ever came down to it Say someone steals and image, I may be able to prove by having the RAW.
There is no point in NOT shooting in RAW today with how cheap memory is.
It's like... Having a ferrari, and only using it to go grocery shopping or something. Not using it to it's fullest.
raw, no real point in spending the time for DNG.
I think you need to learn the difference between raw, jpeg and dng
Not even the selling point that Adobe will continue to support it indefinitely?
Are there any reasons someone would want to use DNG?
wraps up any sidecar file into one package
I guess the whole scare tactic that they won't support old raw formats is
and even if that were true, how hard would it be to keep your old version or any number of conversion programs and batch them all at once
Theres no reason to do it IQ wise, you lose some metadata in the transfer, but IIRC it can hold more afterwards
This may be a silly question, but how exactly do sidecar files work?
From what I understand, the sidecar (.xmp right?) has the preview as well as the metadata, is that correct?
While I have you in here I'm going to ask you a non-related question.
What is the "way" of doing things in Lightroom (in general)? I've been playing around with it and have done this so far:
-Imported RAW files (save a copy and add to catalog)
-Exported to JPG
You can't actually save changes to a RAW file right? So in LR are you simply taking a RAW file, processing it, then exporting JPG's and keeping the RAW file as-is? I notice that LR maintains any and all changes you make to an imported picture in your catalog even if you close it–is that standard operating procedure?
I guess I'm just a little hazy on exactly how I'm supposed to be using LR in the most ideal way possible.
yes. so you want the files together. if one gets separated from the other you'd be shit out of luck for any edits you did
I gotta hit the sack, I'll come back tomorrow
You can answer this tomorrow as well. I read a post by you in another thread about how you an do autosaving (something along those lines) of xmp's. How exactly does that work and how is it managed? Is it literally just a file with the same name as the RAW file except it ends with .xmp instead of .cr2 or whatever?
sounds good, thanks.
Press G, to go into grid(?) mode. Highlight all images that you want to save xmp file on, then right click > metadata > save metadata to file
That'll write xmp files onto your disk.
edit: I use DNG, I don't keep all my RAW files just ones from photos that I love. It would be such a headache to try to weed through RAW files that have xmp vs ones that did not. I might try a different way of exporting to facilitate me keeping original NEF files but we'll see.
edit2: If I export using 'original' format option, it'll export as a combination of NEF and XMP to a separate folder of my choosing, this is probably what I will start doing now. DNG is smaller in comparision to NEF, but like people were saying on this thread disk space is cheap as hell.
yes because a 50D can not be edited through CS3 and neither can the 5d2 or any new camera Canon sells. And for those purchasing software may not want to move up. So you use the RAW editor that came with the camera to convert to DNG and then edit in LR or CS3.
RAW vs DNG I think is cause RAW is not a file type - .CR2 and .NEF is and DNG is not partial to a propitary file type
i always hear this argument, but never agree with it. yes, memory is 'cheap' but unless you know WHY you're shooting in raw, as well as the extent to which it can improve your image, there's no reason to do it.
'cheap' is a relative term, anyway. what's expensive to some may be simple change to others.
you are unaware of the DNG format. This is not a RAW vs. JPG question. That answer is obvious. RAW vs DNG is really personal preference, not a space consideration or information consideration. DNG is basically adobe's version of RAW that they are trying to use to standardize the format. 5 manufacturers of DSLR's will have 5 formats of RAW.
Ah I understand. Thanks.
Why would they stop supporting raw if cannon uses it now, I mean the backwards compatibility is there and you can always re export as DNG later.
well RAW encompasses .cr2, .crw from canon and what, .nef and whatever else from nikon, olympuses version . . .
some of this is personal preference. I have lightroom import the photos to the location I want X:/photos/main genre/individual folder/year/month + day
I'll then sort them, depending on how big of a shoot, either just flag the keepers in a small shoot or rate 1-5 in a big shoot, then hide the non keepers
then usually off to PS for sharpening/any custom actions you couldn't do in LR
Then export, separately for web vs print
All the changes you do are saved in that sidecar file. If it goes missing, the image will appear as shot. No permanent changes ever happen to a RAW file, so you can always go back to the original or any step along the way. You don't lose your history when you close like in PS
I don't keep a folder of jpegs, I export to jpg for web purposes, upload then delete the jpgs locally. Unless its for a project of some kind.
I also keep a duplicate of my photo HDD off site, and have the LR library backed up
you can change how it auto saves, either after every click is done, which is slower, or theres an option to manually update .xmp files manually. As long as you aren't accessing the files from another program and hoping the edits/info from LR will be there, doing it manually is a faster option
CS3 Edits shots from the 50D just fine. Images from newer cameras on the other hand...
The idea of DNG really is a good one and the camera companies are being pussies by not wanting to support it. Its like standardizing the 35mm format in film, its all the same no matter what you use to develop it.
Its really silly that each company is keeping their proprietary format and that they do not share it with all the editing companies. Its even more silly that every time a new camera comes out, the RAW file is slightly different and that all the editing program companies need to backward engineer the RAW file again and then in order to make up for their money at R&D, will not support the new file in the old software.
If there was a standard RAW file, such as DNG, it would make everything much easier. All the editing would be the same from all editors and therefore the photographer would not have to worry about which editor makes the best conversion, they could simply use the one that they like the best.
Camera companies are not making so much money from their editors that its worth it to them to protect their file types and how to process them.
I use the .NEF files because I use Aperture, so no reason to convert to DNG, but I do really like the idea and do wish that they would simply all swallow their damn pride and realize what is best for all the photographers using their products and standardize the RAW file type. Right now DNG is the most obvious since it has the most behind it right now, but some standard type would really be a smart answer for the digital world.
Is sorting by year>month+day more of a professional thing to do? I'm assuming so because the thought of having my thousands of pictures sorted by anything other than "mom's xx'nd birthday" "my 24th birthday" etc. would be obnoxious.
Is there a reason you don't sharpen in LR?
If I have not manually created a sidecar file I'm assuming it does not exist, right? Is creating a sidecar as simple as CTRL-S to save the metadata? Does it automatically save it in the same location as the raw file?
Does this go for personal as well as professional pics?
Again, this is done with ctrl-s right?
totally personal preference. I have one friend, well ex friend now but thats a new thread, that does a entire new catalog for each wedding. what ever works for your brain is whats best. Personally I sort by genre first, so landscape/personal/weddings/wildlife . . ., then by a sub folder, phoenix az . . . then by year, then month + date
yea, it sucks for sharpening and noise removal. for sharpening I use Kubota Magic sharp in the production pack, which is available in a certain thread thats still on the front page
it has one as soon as you import it. at import it gets keywords, any global presets, metadata etc. But as far as saving any individual changes you do after import, that can either be autosaved or manual only
pics are pics, no different to me