DNG vs. Canon Camera RAW

[Dr_Maybe]

Right now I'm using the canon raw plugin w/ photoshop and bridge.

I like the idea of having my pictures in an "open" format. But I don't have any urgent use for it. Canon RAW works for me now. So is there any use in converting to DNG? If it was automatic and not time consuming I might do it.

Do you automatically convert all your RAWs to DNG after importing them from your camera/CF cards? Do you have DNG in your workflows and why?

 

[Super Macho Man]

There are two advantages of DNG, 1) is that it is a documented, standardized, "archival" format. So that if you save a bunch of images onto a DVD and put it into a safe and forget about it, and get it out in 10 years, you'll hopefully have a better chance of being able to open them again vs. the raw sensor data in a Canon-format raw file (if DNG catches on). 2) is that DNG is supposed to be more interoperable, for example, instead of software having to support the particular raw format of each particular camera (they're mostly all different), it only needs to support one format: DNG. If you are happy with your Canon raw files at this point, I would say don't bother with DNG yet, but keep it in the back of your mind.

 

[YS2003]

The benefits of using DNG would be:
-DNG is open and documented format, instead of each camera maker's proprietary format (which they may not support it in the future).
--DNG imbeds meta data in itself instead of "side car" meta data file which will go along with camera maker's proprietary file. That means one DNG file contains both the image data and meta data.

So far, I am using Adobe Bridge and Photoshop CS2 in my workflow. As long as I move the Camera Raw files using Bridge, XMP-based meta data file will goes with the Camera Raw files (which are camera maker's proprietary file format). But, if you move the camera raw files outside Bridge, you have to move XMP files yourself if you want to keep the meta data attached to the images.

When I reach the point when I need to archive my image files, I am going to use DNG format which also contains the proprietary.

I put in copy right info on my images in the meta data, along with other keywords so that I can search and sort the picture easily.

 

[Dr_Maybe]

Thanks for the helpful answers.

 

[xptom@xphomesta]

One of the supposed benefits of converting to dng is that the file is compressed. However, I find that converting either canon.crw or canon.cr2 files to dng show no compression or may even be larger.

I tried converting a nikon.nef file to dng and realized almost a 2/3 reduction in size.

Any thoughts on what is going on here?

 

[jared_kipe]

One of the supposed benefits of converting to dng is that the file is compressed. However, I find that converting either canon.crw or canon.cr2 files to dng show no compression or may even be larger.

I tried converting a nikon.nef file to dng and realized almost a 2/3 reduction in size.

Any thoughts on what is going on here?

Yes, Canon's RAW files are compressed and Nikon's are not.

 

[xptom@xphomesta]

Thanks.
I have searched high and low for an answer. Now I have it.