6 Replies Latest reply on Jul 22, 2014 9:14 PM by areohbee

    LR 5 import as Fuji.RAF or DNG ?

    errio

      Hi there,

       

      I'm a beginner with LR and also have a brand new Fuji X-T1 which I'm beginning to learn step by step.

       

      Question: Is there a difference in importing RAW-files into LR5.5 between "Copy" or "Copy as DNG" ?

      Slower/ Faster?

      Difference in processing?

      Difference in quality?

       

      Thanks for your help....

       

      Errio, France

        • 1. Re: LR 5 import as Fuji.RAF or DNG ?
          Hal P Anderson Level 6

          It's a bit slower: it takes time to convert to DNG.

           

          No difference in processing or quality.

           

          DNGs tend to be smaller than the RAFs they are created from, and they have a built-in checksum that Lightroom can check to make sure the image hasn't been corrupted.

           

          Hal

          • 2. Re: LR 5 import as Fuji.RAF or DNG ?
            errio Level 1

            Hi Hal,

             

            Thanks for your quick and fast reply.

            All is clear to me!

             

            bye, Errio

            • 3. Re: LR 5 import as Fuji.RAF or DNG ?
              erudolph

              Can, and in future will, the Adobe DNGs be readable as raw files by other raw file converters?

              • 4. Re: LR 5 import as Fuji.RAF or DNG ?
                areohbee Level 5

                erudolph wrote:

                 

                Can, and in future will, the Adobe DNGs be readable as raw files by other raw file converters?

                Predictions of the future by users in this forum may not be accurate.

                 

                But right now, Adobe DNGs may not be readable by other raw converters.

                 

                I strongly recommend keeping the original raws to maximize odds you have something that will be readable.

                 

                Rob

                • 5. Re: LR 5 import as Fuji.RAF or DNG ?
                  erudolph Level 1

                  Thanks for that Rob.  So you can either use the native raw format, or embed it along with the converted DNG?  Why not use the native format?

                  • 6. Re: LR 5 import as Fuji.RAF or DNG ?
                    areohbee Level 5

                    erudolph wrote:

                     

                    Thanks for that Rob.

                    You're welcome erudolph.

                     

                    erudolph wrote:

                     

                    So you can either use the native raw format, or embed it along with the converted DNG?

                    Yes, or not embed it, but don't delete it either.

                     

                    erudolph wrote:

                     

                    Why not use the native format?

                    For raw files:

                     

                    Native format:

                    • More software can read it, today, including camera manufacturer's software.
                    • XMP metadata is in separate sidecar files.
                    • Embedded preview is what camera produced, or manufacturer's software.
                    • Camera calibration profile must be in a directory shared by camera raw and Lightroom, which means if you give a RAF file which depends on a custom camera calibration profile to somebody who does not have said profile installed, it won't look right, and since such profile is not in catalog, or sidecar.., it really must be included as a separate file and manually copied to the proper location. If you set up a new computer with Lightroom and don't copy custom camera calibration profiles over, all photos using custom calibration profiles will silently revert to the default profile, until the correct profile is present, if it ever is..
                      • Same problem with lens profiles, but since lens profiles are not stored in DNG files either, they have the same problem as proprietary raws in that regard.

                     

                    DNG format:

                    • Has validity check codes for corruption detection.
                    • XMP metadata is embedded (in the raw file, instead of a separate sidecar file).
                    • Embedded preview is what ACR produces (not what camera/manufacturer's software produces).
                    • People often cite smaller file sizes, but how much smaller (if any) depends more on the embedded jpeg preview than anything else.
                    • People often cite "openly documented" as a plus, but whether that will have any practical advantage depends on the future which nobody knows (the other file formats are documented too, just not quite as "openly" - for example: NEF documentation is freely available from Nikon as part of their SDK, but you have to fill out a web form to get it.
                    • DNGs include camera calibration profile (but not lens profile).

                     

                    I use native format, because readability is priority #1 for me (and I prefer my xmp in sidecars), but a lot of people prefer DNG for 2 reasons:

                    1. Because of it's practical advantages (e.g. listed above).
                    2. Because Adobe and it's community of supporters are pushing hard for DNG to win "the format war". It's important to the camera/software equipment vendors which format your files are in, even if not to you.

                     

                    Rob