This content has been marked as final. Show 4 replies
I suppose everyone has their own plan for how they archive their images. If I have some important images I think I would probably just create an archive of the original raw images, and then another archive of the different DNG variations. Personally, I can't see any real advantage to archiving a DNG file with the original raw embedded. Others, I'm sure, can justify doing this. But I don't want to do it. Basically, it's up to you.
For example if I have RAW images, let's say from the stone age and I forgot to convert them to DNG, will it always be possible to convert these forgotten RAW format files in a DNG in the future?
That is a good question and one no one can answer not even Adobe. If
management or whatever should change at Adobe in the future they could
decide to remove support for old cameras. Cameras like those that are 5 or
10 years old (we are talking in the future here). I would imagine that...
A) Adobe would warn user's ahead of time.
B) You could keep an older copy of DNG Converter that does support those.
With that the only time limiting factor is the operating system a time may
come where the program simply won't run.
So nothing is guaranteed. However, I think for the foreseeable future
support for even the oldest of cameras that are currently supported is
pretty safe. Nothing is forever however.
As far as I know, there is no need to keep an older version of the DNG converter. Camera support is cumulative. The latest version of the DNG converter will support every raw file format that ACR/DNG converter has ever supported.