1 2 3 4 Previous Next 122 Replies Latest reply on May 6, 2011 12:06 PM by areohbee

    DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !

    akosphoto.com

      This is not up for discussion , but only as an FYI to all and every one out there using DNG in Photoshops Raw interface:

       

      DNG done by CS5' s raw 6.x interface will make every DNG file compressed "with Loss" , its not lossless at all ...!!

       

      To the Adobe Team :

      ....why dont you let us Pro's know about the Fact that your camera Raw 6.x interface will "Compress" an original DNG file
      if a preview jpg is updated ( small option in the right top scroll down menu) within this Raw 6.x interface ?

       

      ...This is a huge Damage for a previous perfectly and integer (not compressed) DNG file, for your subsequent compression and re-saving of the DNG is
      NOT lossless.....on top of the fact that you do NOT inform us of a "compression" step here , and that we are NOT given an option in your interface of raw 6.x for this NOT to happen, as in :...."do not compress" when update preview jpg

       

      i have now destroyed 1500 DNG images , from a commercial client shoot,.. by updating all the DNG preview jpgs , ....all DNG files
      now show noise and other artifacts, especially in the always so critical blue chanel,.....this is a shoot where the shoot budget was
      over 50'000 $ !!...

       

      i also can not open the DNG files anymore in its proprietary software anymore neither,.... sinar capture shop ,....since your raw interface compressed all DNG files... a step that was not asked for...a step that is NOT needed....EVER !

       

      please everyone ,...spread this around !!

        • 1. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
          ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

          Please show some evidence (screenshots, etc) for your assertions of lossy compression, and a sample pre-DNG-preview-update DNG from the camera.  If you don't have a publically accessable file-sharing website, upload to somewhere like www.YouSentIt.com and post the download link, here.

           

          Does the Sinar software claim to be able to open DNGs created with Adobe's software or just the original DNGs from the camera?  Perhaps the Adobe DNG format version is newer than Sinar supports.

          • 2. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
            RASouthworth Level 3

            You stated "not up for discussion" but obviously it will generate a lot of discussion.

             

            I loaded a .nef, made sure update preview was checked, then saved it out as a .dng directly from ACR.  I loaded the .dng and saved it out as another .dng.

             

            I was unable to detect any change/compression on the second .dng, and it was the same file size as the first .dng, and both appeared identical to the original .nef.  Perhaps you should state your entire workflow, including type of camera, any processing done on the original raw files before saving out as .dng, your preferences settings, your save settings, etc.

             

            Added by edit - so now I understand (I think) the raw image started out life as a .dng, directly from the Sinarback.  Still need to know the total workflow.

             

            Richard Southworth

            • 3. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
              MadManChan2000 Adobe Employee

              DNG does not support lossy compression of image data for raw files. It only supports lossless compression for the image data.

              • 4. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                deejjjaaaa Level 2

                well... for example Sigma's .X3F files are being converted by Adobe DNG converter w/ mandatory (user has neither control no warning about) NR applied to the raw data - so the original raw data is totally lost afterwards... that was already posted here and Eric Chan did not say otherwise... certainly that does not mean anything to 99% of people, because Sigma Foveon based cameras are not exactly top sellers, except that you can't claim that DNG conversion (as implemented by Adobe - there are other converters out there... C1 can convert to DNG - albeit for less cameras, Pentax DCU can convert .PEF to .DNG, DxO can convert to .DNG albeit to linera DNG only... just to name few examples) is lossless (not compression, but conversion)

                • 5. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                  deejjjaaaa Level 2

                  > DNG does not support lossy compression of image data for raw files. It only supports lossless compression for the image data.

                   

                  may be he is referring to the masked to light areas of the sensor, Adobe DNG converter will discard such data read off the sensor for some cameras, right ? and some software needs that for example to correct banding... real life example were Pentax K20D files, where software was written to use such raw data to correct that defect - but the data was only in original .PEF file or native .DNG files, not after Adobe DNG converter conversion... you might argue that it is not "image data" - but it is data that was read off the sensor and that camera's firmware writes to the original raw file...

                  • 6. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                    Ad Agency

                    you obviously never updated the preview jpg in raw 6.3 and 6.4...after you made changes to a DNG in this interface.....otherwise you wouldnt say such here..

                     

                    raw is data,not an image,....any data can be compressed with less more loss.... but updating a preview image (that a second pic embedded in the DNG) this  should never trigger a compression of that very DNG you have open then....

                    • 7. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                      RASouthworth Level 3

                      Eric,

                       

                      That has always been my understanding, you need to reply to the op.

                       

                      Richard Southworth

                      • 8. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                        Noel Carboni Level 7

                        Ad Agency wrote:

                         

                         

                        DNG done by CS5' s raw 6.x interface will make every DNG file compressed "with Loss" , its not lossless at all ...!!

                         

                        I'm not saying you're wrong, but the phrase "done by CS5's raw 6.x interface" is meaningless as it stands.  No one can try to reproduce your problem with any level of confidence that they're following your exact steps.

                         

                        It would be extremely helpful if you'd lay out the specific steps you took to see the problem, using technically accurate terms.  I will be happy to try to reproduce what you're seeing, as I'm sure will others.  Make sure and describe what equipment you're using and what formats you're getting.

                         

                        It wouldn't hurt, as well, to put up a few images showing the problem you're seeing.

                         

                        I detect a level of panic in your posts - your mention of a large price tag, for example.  Try to keep calm; we'll help you get to the bottom of what's happened, and how to keep it from happening again.

                         

                        -Noel

                        • 9. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                          Noel Carboni Level 7

                          Do you have an original DNG file with which you can reproduce the problem?  If so, please provide a copy of that as well.

                           

                          -Noel

                          • 10. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                            Jeff Schewe Level 5

                            akosphoto.com wrote:

                             

                            This is not up for discussion , but only as an FYI to all and every one out there using DNG in Photoshops Raw interface:

                             

                            Actually, what is up for discussion is trying to figure out what you are doing and what problem you think you see and trying to fix the issue.

                             

                            In point of fact (with the exception of a few file formats that must be converted to Linear DNG for processing), converting a raw file to DNG will loose nothing other than the ability to use the camera maker's software–which a bit of education could have told you. Presumably, if you needed to work in Sinar's proprietary software, you would have been professional enough to have backed up the original raw files before converting? That's what I would have done (and do with Phase Once P-65+ files that I want to edit in Capture 1).

                             

                            Your raw files have not been compressed using a lossy compression. If you chose to compress the raws when converting to DNG then the DNG files would have lossless compression not lossy. You have the option NOT to use the lossless compression you know.

                             

                            The "preview" you see of the DNG is the "default" rendering...not by any means a final rendering in ACR. That's what ACR is there for...editing the DNG to optimize the image. I wonder how you are actually "viewing" the DNG previews? Are you looking in Bridge? Do you have high quality previews set to render in Bridge? Have you bothered to open the DNGs in Camera Raw?

                             

                            Unless you selected the option of embedding the original raw file inside the DNG (yes, there is that option) then yes, the conversion from raw to DNG is a one way trip. Again, if you backed up the original raw files (which even Adobe would recommend) you really haven't ruined the images except for the ability to use the Sinar software. And if you are a working pro, I would expect your workflow to be more refined and polished than what you've outlined in your post. The raw data in the DNG is all there...you just have to learn how to process it through Camera Raw.

                             

                            Really, if you are billing a client $50K for a shoot, you should really know what the heck you are doing.

                            • 11. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                              Ad Agency Level 1

                              THIS IS AS A REPLY TO JEFF SCHEWES IGNORANT AND VERY INSULTING STATEMENTS,..... I WILL RESPOND LINE BY LINE TO HIS FLAWED ASSUMPTIONS:

                              Actually, what is up for discussion is trying to figure out what you are doing and what problem you think you see and trying to fix the issue.
                              --nothing is up for discussion here ....definitely NOT from an avid amateur like you are !..i made this statement as an experience made and a discovery for you to splurge on ...not to dispute it!!

                              In point of fact (with the exception of a few file formats that must be converted to Linear DNG for processing), converting a raw file to DNG will loose nothing....

                               

                              nothing was converted with intend ever....raw cs5 does it without telling you,...every-time you update its preview jpg in its option scroll down menu(right top).....and thats a real point of a fact for people like you who can not read my first statement!!

                               

                              ......other than the ability to use the camera maker's software–which a bit of education could have told you......

                               

                              i work in research, so dont patronize me with your flawed assumptions !

                               

                              Presumably, if you needed to work in Sinar's proprietary software, you would have been professional to have backed up the original raw files before converting? That's what I would have done (and do with Phase Once P-65+ files that I want to edit in Capture 1).


                              .....i did indeed make a backup ..... and i certainly would never  let capture one software ever destroy my files,...... dont you know that C1 's algorithms are off the

                              charts interpreting and calculating proper colors ....wow ....

                              ...obviously you can not distinguish  a cheap Toyota from the seventies to a Ferrari....hence you using a Phase one back....and not a SINAR !

                               

                              Your raw files have not been compressed using a lossy compression.
                              .........actually , yes, Sinar does NOT compress its native DNG files in any shape or form....your Phase one does indeed ! and everyone else's does as well
                              again your ignorance is stunning me here!... and yet there you are accusing me of of not knowing what i am doing...
                              people like you are the reason why i wrote its not up for discussion....total waste of time...!
                              and yet here i am correcting you with every flawed statement you are making here....
                              If you chose to compress the raws when converting to DNG then the DNG files would have lossless compression not lossy. You have the option NOT to use the lossless compression you know.
                              ..........what the hell has this to do with anything i just discovered...??.. what in the world are you saying here....

                               

                              The "preview" you see of the DNG is the "default" rendering...not by any means a final rendering in ACR. That's what ACR is there for...editing the DNG to optimize the image. I wonder how you are actually "viewing" the DNG previews? Are you looking in Bridge? Do you have high quality previews set to render in Bridge? Have you bothered to open the DNGs in Camera Raw?
                              ...........i am not even getting into answering any of these utterly sloppy and stupid question you just asked here...you clearly have not read  my first discovery here....
                              but may be you  can not read???

                               

                              Unless you selected the option of embedding the original raw file inside the DNG (yes, there is that option)
                              ...........wow.you really have no idea what RAW means ....do you ....?
                              then yes, the conversion from raw to DNG is a one way trip. Again, if you backed up the original raw files (which even Adobe would recommend) you really haven't ruined the images except for the ability to use the Sinar software. And if you are a working pro, I would expect your workflow to be more refined and polished than what you've outlined in your post. The raw data in the DNG is all there...you just have to learn how to process it through Camera Raw.
                              may be you should go back to school to really learn what RAW means.......and i am not even using my PHD in Physics for this....any wedding photographer knows more than you ....!

                               

                              Really, if you are billing a client $50K for a shoot, you should really know what the heck you are doing.
                              i actually billed 120'000$ for this job ...... thats just for starters....

                              • 12. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                Jeff Schewe Level 5

                                Ad Agency wrote:

                                 

                                THIS IS AS A REPLY TO JEFF SCHEWES IGNORANT AND VERY INSULTING STATEMENTS,..... I WILL RESPOND LINE BY LINE TO HIS FLAWED ASSUMPTIONS:


                                 

                                 

                                Really, exactly who is posting what? So far, you've used two log-ins..."akosphoto.com" and then "Ad Agency". So, who are you?

                                 

                                As far as insulting, no, actually I resisted the urge to tell you what I REALLY think and tried to elicit more information. Ignorant? Well, I did kinda help write a book about Camera Raw (see: Real World Camera Raw) so you see, I actually do have half a clue (more than I can say about your writing here I'm afraid).

                                 

                                Sorry you think a P-65+ is a "Toyota" (BTW, you might wanna take a look at Sinar's financials, it's not at all clear they will survive the recent industry shake out). In addition to shooting the P-65+ on a Phase 645 camera I also shoot it on my Sinar camera. So, I'm familiar with Sinar yet I chose the P65+ for good reasons.

                                 

                                Again, what you are saying really doesn't make sense...perhaps English is not your first language? Try again and see if you can explain EXACTLY what you are talking about. You are free to keep considering me an idiot...spell it out for me. Think of me as a simpleton (if that makes you feel superior). But at some point, I think it'll be important to clear up what you think you think are experiencing...

                                 

                                BTW, so far, nothing you've said regarding your workflow indicates that you really know what you are doing...and I hope your client doesn't see your postings here (which is why you must be bouncing around between multiple log-ins huh?).

                                • 13. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                  Ad Agency Level 1

                                  what does the financials of the SINAR company have to do with anything here?
                                  again,.... you are on a tangent to misguide readers away from your obvious ignorance of being able to read the starting Topic paragraph...
                                  your thinking is of no relevance here ..especially because of your utter ignorance...to be able to read ...
                                  and yes you are right, swiss and german are my first languages, then i speak twelve others as well, and english is my 8th language.
                                  so "DO" forgive me ...if in my 8th language i do make a few grammar errors...
                                  but it is still incredibly clear what my statement was :.... that when updating a preview jpg of a DNG in an open CS5 RAW interface window, CS5 will compress your underlying raw data....something you seem not to be able to read .....so i gather your english...which is ....i am sure ...the only one Language you speak on the other hand .... is definitely a language you need to learn how to read ,...at this point.... dont you think so ?
                                  if you would have surfed the internet you would have seen my work.....and that's very serious stuff...serious GLOBAL stuff i do...compared to your work,...which seems to focus on books for amateurs....LOL
                                  so i guess...yo dont really shoot for clients out there..right?
                                  and there is nothing whatsoever i have revealed nor mentioned about any whatsoever workflow i am doing during my shoots.
                                  why are you mentioning any workflow here .....where in hell do you take this from.....???
                                  so do yourself a favor here, and stay out of this forum.....you clearly dont belong here !
                                  and yes...the postings are coming from 2 places...my ad agency,...and my shop as a Fashion Photographer , which i do for a good 20 years between Paris, London and New York.
                                  and yes ...imagine this......i actually do research...and do the globally very respected photography stuff only for fun.....on the side ...of my real job:  Research !
                                  and lets see ...what do you do again?.....books....for wedding photographers?.....
                                  stay out of here....
                                  let the forum people here discover something very serious....without your tangent-distractions on sinar's' financials....or my 12 language skills and my PHD in Physics
                                  grow up !
                                  i will not respond to anyone anymore here ....period
                                  not even to the guys who actually have serious questions to ask...
                                  imagine this....because of people like you
                                  ...again!

                                  • 14. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                    Jeff Schewe Level 5

                                    Ad Agency wrote:

                                     

                                     

                                    ...that when updating a preview jpg of a DNG in an open CS5 RAW interface window, CS5 will compress your underlying raw data....something you seem not to be able to read .....so i gather your english...which is ....i am sure ...the only one Language you speak on the other hand .... is definitely a language you need to learn how to read ,...at this point.... dont you think so ?

                                     

                                    Wrong...updating a DNG preview will have exactly ZERO impact on the raw data of your file. You are quite wrong if you think this...seriously...do the research (which you claim to be able to do).

                                     

                                    Ad Agency wrote:

                                     

                                     

                                    ...if you would have surfed the internet you would have seen my work.....and that's very serious stuff...serious GLOBAL stuff i do...compared to your work,...which seems to focus on books for amateurs....LOL
                                    so i guess...yo dont really shoot for clients out there..right?

                                     

                                    I saw your web site (it kinda sucks on mobile iPad BTW, might wanna look into HTML5 instead of Flash). I'm very familiar with the high anxiety and drama/trama of fashion photographers (actually, some of them are friends). You might wanna look at my own website www.schewephoto.com. Been there, done that, have the Tee shirt ya know?

                                     

                                    Ad Agency wrote:

                                     

                                     

                                    ...so do yourself a favor here, and stay out of this forum.....you clearly dont belong here !
                                    and yes...the postings are coming from 2 places...my ad agency,...and my shop as a Fashion Photographer , which i do for a good 20 years between Paris, London and New York.
                                    and yes ...imagine this......i actually do research...and do the globally very respected photography stuff only for fun.....on the side ...of my real job:  Research !

                                     

                                    Well, am I talking to a photographer or ad agency? In my experience, ad agencies really DON'T have a clue about digital workflow...and NYC shooters tend to rely on digital techs. Maybe you are different (so far, the way you are behaving here indicates it's par for the course).

                                     

                                    Ad Agency wrote:

                                     

                                     

                                    ...and lets see ...what do you do again?.....books....for wedding photographers?.....
                                    stay out of here....
                                    let the forum people here discover something very serious....without your tangent-distractions on sinar's' financials....or my 12 language skills and my PHD in Physics
                                    grow up !

                                     

                                     

                                    I'm pretty grown up...25 years+ award winning ad work. No, I don't have a PHD (personally, I've never met anybody with a PHD that could shoot their way out of a paper bag, but that's just my experience) but I do have a couple of degrees from RIT (highest honers BTW if that matters).

                                     

                                    You wanna do dick measuring? I'm your guy bud...you chose the wrong guy to get down into the mud with.

                                     

                                    Ad Agency wrote:

                                     

                                    i will not respond to anyone anymore here ....period
                                    not even to the guys who actually have serious questions to ask...
                                    imagine this....because of people like you
                                    ...again!

                                     

                                     

                                    Well, too bad...because something somewhere is whacked. If you think that by updating the DNG preview you are changing your raw image data, then it's all on you bud. The conversion from raw to DNG (except for a few formats that require Linear DNG conversion) is completely lossless. And what the heck do you care about updating the DNG preview? The only need to update the DNG preview is if you are using a 3rd party application that can't read the raw data (like some 3rd part database management apps).

                                     

                                    Seriously dooode, you need to fix your attitude. If you come down off your high horse, you might be able to learn something. Otherwise I suspect you need to start hiring  some digital techs that know a bit more about digital than you do (there are a lot of good ones in NYC, I would be happy to give you some names).

                                     

                                    :~)

                                     

                                    P.S. for the rest of the people reading this thread let me apologize in advance. The OP is a high strung fashion doode that is obviously flailing about and having some "issues" which are causing a degree of angst that is making the discussion a bit over the top.

                                     

                                    P.P.S. You are right...I'm getting rid of my P-65+ back and getting an IQ180 back shortly...60 MP ain't enough, I want 80 MP...

                                    • 15. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                      ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                      Your English seems fine, but maybe we have all been confused by term "lossy" and your meaning is different than what we all understand.

                                       

                                      You should not be surprised if one of the dozen replies to your initial posting have also had an attitude to it, especially since you seem to have ignored or not responded to all the other replies for 12 hours and choose the one you don't like.  Software can have bugs, and people are willing to evaluate evidence of the damage you say has been done to the RAW data, but are not going to believe you outright.  I opened some Sinar DNGs from another camera which were 42MB and then updated their DNG Previews and Metadata and the resulting DNG was only 26MB.  This did not surprise me nor did I think the files had been damaged.  But I also wouldn't expect all software that claims to work with DNGs to be able to open them after having their contents rewritten due to the preview update.

                                       

                                      Sinar's financials have to do with their lack of resources or will to develop software that can read DNG files that were touched by Adobe software according to the DNG standard.  It is not Adobe's job to warn you what Sinar has chosen not to do.  It is your job as a professional to experiment with ONE DNG to see what happens before you update all the previews and panic and accuse.

                                       

                                      You brought up that you charged $50,000 for a photoshoot and say you are a great photographer--no doubt, but how does that make your claims of damage any less baseless?  We want to see evidence to support your claim of damage and details about your process to guess what might have happened to lead to an apparently incorrect idea of damage.

                                      • 16. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                        Noel Carboni Level 7

                                        Simon, or whatever your name is, I respectfully invite you to take a deep breath, leave your ego at the door, and give some more detail about what you did to see this problem, because on the chance that there really IS a bug, it would sure be nice to get it fixed in the next version, don't you think?

                                         

                                        -Noel

                                        • 17. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                          Ad Agency Level 1

                                           

                                           

                                          try to re-open the sinar DNG-file in Capture 6 from sinar....they wont open anymore......for CS5 has decided to compress the initial sinar-DNG-file after updating the previews

                                           

                                          MR Ochsner , the lead researcher at SINAR in switzerland, has figured out that the the DNG was compressed by the raw CS5 interface during the preview update process...and that with a LOSS factor.... !..it is utterly irrelevant that sinar capture shop version 6 is not capable anymore to open it again.

                                          the discovery of the hidden compression is the key discovery here...nothing else...

                                           

                                          its kind of funny how many amateurs are here....wow...and especially one guy here....Jeff Schewe

                                           

                                          he even goes as far as claiming to have shot for my caliber of clientele in his past...damn that guy lives in a dream-Land of his own...what a wedding photographer ...wow...

                                           

                                          Sinar's financials have nothing to do with this issue here,...although its easy to use this argument as a cheap scape goat here....like FOX5 news likes to do ....cheap arguments..witch hunters.... all a waste of time....

                                           

                                          FYI...... The company that does the software for Sinar is a subdivision of german's army, a digital laser research company, with billions in its background.

                                          its NOT sinar employees that make their sinar software... most people know this...

                                           

                                          i am not here to delegate a class in teaching what i discovered.....everyone has to try it out for themselves....

                                           

                                          i guess for that wedding photographer Jeff, it is more important to get an 80MB camera now...since his 60MB camera is not enough for him....like his mentioned dick size...thats the way he argued in his response last here...first he says size doesn't matter , then he claims it does for his mb size in his camera....

                                           

                                          My 20 years experience has taught me that many many more factor have started being important many years back already.....true BIT depth of sensors, the algorithm used to calculate colors, the percentage of sensor pixels still being healthy and not damaged in the manufacturing process....and many many more factors ...factors that make a great digital file look like a Heidelberg drum-scan from an 4x5 inch ektachrome 64 asa slide...

                                           

                                          it certainly is not the difference between a 60mb or a 80mb camera that will make your picture glow like magic..

                                           

                                           

                                           

                                           

                                           

                                           

                                           

                                          • 18. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                            Jeff Schewe Level 5

                                            Ad Agency wrote:

                                             

                                             

                                            MR Ochsner , the lead researcher at SINAR in switzerland, has figured out that the the DNG was compressed by the raw CS5 interface during the preview update process...and that with a LOSS factor.... !..it is utterly irrelevant that sinar capture shop version 6 is not capable anymore to open it again.

                                            the discovery of the hidden compression is the key discovery here...nothing else...

                                             

                                             

                                            Then Mr. Ochsner (and/or the German army) needs to read the DNG spec...there are two options when converting to DNG, with or without lossless compression of the raw data. When choosing the lossless compression, it is indeed lossless (care to argue the matter, take it up with Thomas Knoll, the coauthor of Photoshop, you know, the application that hosts Camera Raw–which he was the founding engineer for).

                                             

                                            If Sinar CaptureShop (love the InterCap BTW) can't read a losslessly compressed DNG then it's a failure of CaptureShop's support for the DNG format.

                                             

                                            Fact is, CaptureShop is at fault here...an app that supports the DNG spec should be able to support any DNG file that is within spec (if you want to read the DNG spec you can find it HERE along with the SDK). The problem is CaptureShop doesn't completely support the DNG spec, only a part of it–so, is this a failure of the German army? Should NATO be concerned?

                                             

                                            Ad Agency wrote:

                                             

                                            its kind of funny how many amateurs are here....wow...and especially one guy here....Jeff Schewe

                                             

                                            he even goes as far as claiming to have shot for my caliber of clientele in his past...damn that guy lives in a dream-Land of his own...what a wedding photographer ...wow...

                                             

                                            Well, it's really not worth responding since I'm sure YOUR head is so large that it wouldn't fit in my world...I never claimed to have been a fashion shooter (if that's what you call yourself) but I have shot for large budget clients. Fortunately, I kinda had the tendency to actually test my workflow and have absolute control over my process. Something that seems to have escaped you...

                                             

                                            BTW, to be precise, I've shot exactly one wedding in my life, my own (on a self timer). Truth be told, I know a few wedding photographers who seem to shoot the wedding and have control over their own process (unlike your misconceptions of a pro workflow). Not sure that what you do is any more high anxiety that trying to please a bride (and the family) on what is their most important day. So, what makes you think calling somebody a "wedding photographer" is a dig?

                                             

                                            Tell your Sinar friends to contact Thomas if they want any help completely supporting the DNG format–clearly they ain't there yet.

                                             

                                            Seriously, if you have a PHD, maybe you can read the DNG spec and explain it to Sinar...let us know what Sinar has to say.

                                            • 19. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                              deejjjaaaa Level 2

                                              > there are two options when converting to DNG, with or without lossless  compression of the raw data. When choosing the lossless compression, it  is indeed lossless (care to argue the matter, take it up with Thomas  Knoll, the coauthor of Photoshop, you know, the application that hosts  Camera Raw–which he was the founding engineer for).

                                               

                                               

                                              Jeff, Adobe discards some data that was read off the sensor - it is the fact for at least for some Pentax and Nikon cameras... may be it is so for Sinar as well - did you see the actual Adobe's software code ? w/ all due respect I do not think so even if you are alfa/beta/whatever tester - Eric Chan for sure can answer the question if it is the case w/ Sinar files being updated by ACR...

                                               

                                              again you can argue that it is not a part of the image, but it is something that OEM raw converter might actually want to have and it is raw data - it is read off the sensor.

                                               

                                              that is what that person in Switzerland was talking about - "....and that with a LOSS factor...."

                                              • 20. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                If the Sinar employee is sure about Adobe damaging RAW data when updating the DNG preview, then he or she are welcome in this forum to defend that assertion, and failing to do that, petition the outsourced developers to add capability to properly handle compressed DNGs in their software or explain why they don't want to and let Sinar explain this to you and allow you to choose whether to continue your relationship with them and their cameras.

                                                 

                                                You could even submit a feature request to Adobe, or have Sinar do so on behalf of their various customers, to have Adobe support the writing of the DNG Preview w/o compressing the DNG RAW data, but leave out the part about them damaging the files since that is not demonstrated to be true, and leave out the parts about how much you deserve special treatment for this or that reason.  Adobe would be aware of what sort of photographers use Sinar cameras.

                                                 

                                                Jeff already suggested, amidst his colorful response to the melodrama, that there was an option to do compression or not, so perhaps what you want is already there and has not been discovered, or perhaps Jeff was wrong and it isn't possible to not produce a compressed DNG.

                                                • 21. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                  Jeff Schewe Level 5

                                                  deejjjaaaa wrote:

                                                   

                                                  Jeff, Adobe discards some data that was read off the sensor - it is the fact for at least for some Pentax and Nikon cameras... may be it is so for Sinar as well - did you see the actual Adobe's software code ? w/ all due respect I do not think so even if you are alfa/beta/whatever tester - Eric Chan for sure can answer the question if it is the case w/ Sinar files being updated by ACR...

                                                   

                                                  Well, Eric can answer one way or the other (although I doubt he want's to get down into the mud with "what's his name").

                                                   

                                                  I know there have been a few cases where cameras (or software) have had problems reading DNG files that were created via either ACR or DNG Converter. As far as I know, the problems have been with the "other software's" ability to deal with the modified .xmp metadata (which would NOT be an issue if the 3rd party software completely supported the DNG spec–as far as I know).

                                                   

                                                  If a camera or 3rd party software fully "supports" DNG, then running the raw file through a current DNG conversion (via DNG Converter or ACR) should NOT modify the file to the extent that makes that file unsupported by the 3rd party software.

                                                   

                                                  If it does, then that software is deficient in it's support for DNG...the DNG spec is pretty clear. If the 3rd party software barfs on a processed DNG, then the odds are REAL GOOD that it's the failure of the 3rd part software not ACR nor DNG Converter.

                                                   

                                                  If it IS the fault of the DNG spec, it would be critical that the ACR/DNG team knows about that so the issue could be addressed. As for the OP, I really doubt he's found anything interesting and useful (and is more likely baying at the moon–but who's to tell given his, uh, less than useful attitude).

                                                  • 22. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                    deejjjaaaa Level 2

                                                    > although I doubt he want's to get down into the mud with "what's his name"

                                                     

                                                    Akos, stated that somebody in Sinar told him about "lossy compression", keeping in mind that English is not his native language and he is a little agitated, we might assume that somebody in Sinar was actually talking about losing some data before lossless compression of what was left... unless Akos is totally misstated what Sinar told him and I 'd assume Akos was asking Sinar what happened w/ his DNG files after ACR updated the embedded JPG

                                                    • 23. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                      deejjjaaaa Level 2

                                                      > If the 3rd party software barfs on a processed DNG, then the odds are  REAL GOOD that it's the failure of the 3rd part software not ACR nor DNG  Converter.

                                                       

                                                      Pentax firmware (K20D for example) writes DNG files w/ masked to light data read from the sensor... those DNG files are within DNG specifications... so removing masked to light data is not mandated by DNG specification, right ? but Adobe removes... at least that could be preserved in some special tag...

                                                      • 24. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                        sandy_mc Level 3

                                                        There are two separate issues here:

                                                         

                                                        1. The extent to which DNG preserves data on conversion, and the simple answer is that that Adobe's DNG converter preserves all data that it understands. But "you don't know what you don't know". Is that important? Practically, probably not - the only software that anyone's ever likely to use with a converted DNG is Adobe's, and if Adobe's software doesn't understand that data, it can't use it.
                                                        2. Modifications to DNG files making them unreadable to other software. Jeff is of course completely right here - this is entirely due to the other software not fully implemeting the DNG spec, and pretty clearly that's what happened to the original poster. However, let's also be practical about this. We've known about this problem for years now, e.g., M9 DNG files in C1, and we also know that the only products that actually implement the full DNG spec are Adobe's own. But LR and ACR still default to modifying in-camera DNG files without warning. This is dangerous behaviour, as shown by this post, and Adobe should change it. Blaming the other software is theoretically correct, but Adobe's responsibility is towards its customers, 99% of whom don't know the inner workings of DNG, and shouldn't need to.

                                                         

                                                        In the mean time, if you have camera generated DNG files, always keep backups of the unmodified originals. And be aware that as soon as LR or ACR import a DNG file, there is a risk that it will be modified.

                                                         

                                                        Sandy

                                                        • 25. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                          ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                          AKOS or Sinar Researcher:  Try uncompressing one of the DNGs with issues, by running it through the DNG Converter and see if the Sinar software can read it, again.  You'll need to choose Custom in the DNG Compatibilty area of Change Preferences, and also try both 1.1 and 1.3 in the Backward Version selection:

                                                          2011-04-30_022812.jpg

                                                           

                                                          The DNG Converter 6.4 is available via the dropdown list at the top of the Adobe Updates page:

                                                          http://www.adobe.com/downloads/updates/

                                                           

                                                          Assuming you're on a Mac, the direct link is:

                                                          http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5023

                                                          • 26. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                            deejjjaaaa Level 2

                                                            >

                                                            1. The extent to which DNG preserves data on conversion,  and the simple answer is that that Adobe's DNG converter preserves all  data that it understands. But "you don't know what you don't know". Is  that important? Practically, probably not - the only software that  anyone's ever likely to use with a converted DNG is Adobe's, and if  Adobe's software doesn't understand that data, it can't use it.

                                                             

                                                             

                                                            the issue is that DNG conversion/update code written by Adobe, which is I 'd assume identical in Adobe DNG converter and ACR, is not indended to convert/update only for the resulting files to be used w/ ACR or LR, right... Adove DNG converter preserves proprietory camera maker metadata, even Adobe (at least formally) does not understand it - there is even a tag in DNG ... so where is the logic ?

                                                             

                                                            http://www.digitalmediadesigner.com/articles/viewarticle.jsp?id=28283

                                                             

                                                            that is 2004 ! Kevin Connor, senior director of product management at Adobe Systems :

                                                             

                                                            KC: "....DNG provides the following benefits to its users:

                                                            • All the information needed for accurate conversion is publicly documented
                                                            • "Private" metadata fields are supported, so manufacturers can still add extra metadata that only they can use
                                                            • Gives users complete choice about what software to use
                                                            • The format works with all cameras, thus it will never become obsolete
                                                            • Eliminates waiting for compatibility fixes for users' favorite software
                                                            • Easily adaptable to future technologies
                                                            • Includes versioning scheme that allows the format to evolve as new features are developed..."
                                                            • 27. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                              sandy_mc Level 3

                                                              deejjjaaaa wrote:

                                                               

                                                              Adove DNG converter preserves proprietory camera maker metadata, even Adobe (at least formally) does not understand it - there is even a tag in DNG ... so where is the logic ?

                                                              The Adobe converter preserves the metadata it knows about. Not the same as preserving all metadata. Which as good you can get, and as I said, practically probably good enough. But let's not fool ourselves - if only the camera manufacturer knows some data is in a raw file, then it's not going to be preserved.

                                                               

                                                              Sandy

                                                              • 28. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                Andrew_Hart Level 2

                                                                In support of what you say Sandy, here is a direct quote from the DNG Converter 6.4 Readme file:

                                                                 

                                                                "The Digital Negative specification allows for not only all of the pixel information stored in current raw formats, but also for all of the additional, proprietary metadata that many manufacturers include. The Adobe DNG Converter may in some cases ignore some of this proprietary metadata, and only include the basic information necessary for creating a high-quality image file." These two sentences contradict each other.

                                                                 

                                                                So, one is prompted to ask, in just what "cases" will the converter "ignore some of this proprietary metadata", and just what "metadata" will be ignored? Are we given any warning that this is happening ? IMO we certainly should be. And how do we know that at some time in the future that ignored metadata may not prove to be useful or even crucial to the further processing of the file? I'm not saying that it will, but OTOH, I don't think that you can rule this out.

                                                                 

                                                                The very next sentence of the readme file say this:

                                                                 

                                                                "The original raw file, however, can also be embedded in the new DNG format to ensure proprietary metadata from the manufacturer is not lost."

                                                                 

                                                                IMO, that is not a satisfactory solution, by any stretch of the imagination. No matter how cheap HD space may be nowadays, no one that I know wants to have to clutter up their disk space with, effectively, 2 copies of the raw file. Actually, it is at least 4 copies, if you take into account just a single backup.

                                                                • 29. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                  Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                                  Maybe even more copies than that.  Even after converting a proprietary raw file to DNG I sure wouldn't consder throwing away the proprietary file, whether or not I embedded a copy.

                                                                   

                                                                  The original poster here seems to be beyond help.  That's too bad; it would have been nice to get to the bottom of what really went wrong.

                                                                   

                                                                  -Noel

                                                                  • 30. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                    JimHess-ra2Osl

                                                                    And so the "Great DNG Debate" continues. I think anyone who wants to find merits in converting to DNG will do so. In that same sense, those who want to find faults with the DNG format will be able to do so as well. The only reason I have ever used DNG is when my ACR or Lightroom could not convert the raw files from my camera. Those who like DNG are concerned about disk space, and don't want the extra XMP file. Personally, I see no real value in converting to DNG. I have done comparisons between the two formats and I cannot see any difference in the image. Okay, okay, I'm nearly 68 years old, I'm not a professional photographer. Maybe my eyes aren't as good as yours. If there is a difference it doesn't really matter to me.

                                                                    • 31. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                      Hudechrome Level 2

                                                                      Andrew_Hart wrote:

                                                                       


                                                                      IMO, that is not a satisfactory solution, by any stretch of the imagination. No matter how cheap HD space may be nowadays, no one that I know wants to have to clutter up their disk space with, effectively, 2 copies of the raw file. Actually, it is at least 4 copies, if you take into account just a single backup.

                                                                      Exactly right, which is what I face when working with DXO for corrections to the lens and sensor data. So I no longer correct the entire file, but selective after initial editing. In any case, the fact that DXO provides output as dng protects the original, which is nice.

                                                                       

                                                                      I've also made dupes of the nef's so I can play around without worry!

                                                                       

                                                                      I suppose that if I were paid $50K, I would be paranoid about now as well! Hell, even at $10K I became paranoid! That job is on two separate computers on at least 3 HD's AND on DVD! Finished and RAW. Some even with layers intact.

                                                                      • 32. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                        Hudechrome Level 2

                                                                        One test is to make the dng, open both the raw and dng in ACR don't tweak a thing then open in PS and layer one over the other, using Differential Mode. Can you see any residuals? Or is it completely black?

                                                                         

                                                                        I had occasion to do just that to compare lens correction in DXO vs ACR. It's an informative method, at least to the extent that it highlights any differences, signifying the file has changed.

                                                                        • 33. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                          Jeff Schewe Level 5

                                                                          Hudechrome wrote:

                                                                           

                                                                          One test is to make the dng, open both the raw and dng in ACR don't tweak a thing then open in PS and layer one over the other, using Differential Mode. Can you see any residuals? Or is it completely black?

                                                                           

                                                                          Well, that's fool's gold...

                                                                           

                                                                          The fact is, the first thing Camera Raw does when opening a proprietary raw file is to internally convert it to DNG. So, opening a raw and a DNG is the same. The only time you may see a difference is if the DNG file is a linear DNG that has been demosiaced by a non-Camera Raw process. But if you make a DNG from a raw file while maintaining the raw data and then open the original raw there will be no difference.

                                                                          • 34. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                            Hudechrome Level 2

                                                                            That IS interesting! Thanks Jeff. Other than the afore mentioned test of the Nikon 18 to 105, I have never run the A/B comparison. I'm going to grab a new nef, run it through DXO with no adjustments and do the A/B and see what I can see. I am a big believer in nulling techniques for insights.

                                                                            • 35. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                              Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                                              Jeff Schewe wrote:

                                                                               

                                                                              Well, that's fool's gold...


                                                                              Except that in the particular case of this thread, if one were to open the original DNG and then the allegedly lossy-recompressed DNG, and was able to show a difference (that the OP claims to have seen) - or not see one - the OP would have proof one way or another.  I think the fact that he wasn't willing to provide such files nor pursue proving his point makes it seem very likely he was just blowing smoke and was here to rant.

                                                                               

                                                                              I just did exactly what Lawrence suggested, on two files:

                                                                               

                                                                              1.  My original .cr2 file

                                                                              2.  The .cr2 file after having converted to DNG, then having run the "Update DNG Previews" function.

                                                                               

                                                                              One additional caveat:  I put two Curves layers over the top to highly accentuate the results.

                                                                               

                                                                              Want to guess what I found?

                                                                               

                                                                              -Noel

                                                                              • 36. DNG with CS5 is NOT always compressed with loss!!
                                                                                Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                                                I guess I've held you in suspense long enough. 

                                                                                 

                                                                                Note that the Navigator preview actually seems to show differences, but the image itself (most of the left monitor) when displayed at 100% reveals that the two images are identical.  Thus THERE IS NO LOSS as a result of saving new previews.

                                                                                 

                                                                                AllBlack.jpg

                                                                                 

                                                                                Note:  The Navigator preview quirk can be explained in that Photoshop uses degraded data (8 bit) for its downsized displays.  I have verified this with Chris Cox.  There's a workaround that can be invoked by reducing the Cache Levels to 1, but other things can go wrong when you do that.

                                                                                 

                                                                                -Noel

                                                                                • 37. Re: DNG with CS5 is NOT always compressed with loss!!
                                                                                  Hudechrome Level 2

                                                                                  I don't believe in Navigator!

                                                                                   

                                                                                  Been out shooting since my last post. Nice couple of days and really a needed break from winter type weather. The snow levels have actually increased in the mountains since April 1, even the desert mountains which are rather dry most of the year. The third wettest April on record. But no snow down at sea level.

                                                                                   

                                                                                  And no, I will not make an attempt to prove or disprove any weather inclinations for the planet based on these findings.

                                                                                  • 38. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                                    Level 4

                                                                                    Hudechrome wrote:

                                                                                     

                                                                                    One test is to make the dng, open both the raw and dng in ACR don't tweak a thing then open in PS and layer one over the other, using Differential Mode. Can you see any residuals? Or is it completely black?…

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Larry,

                                                                                     

                                                                                    We went over this comparison method before.  It has severe limitations, starting with your monitor's limitations in displaying extreme blacks, which robs you of the ability to discern small differences in a given pixel between the two layers being compared.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    The search function is hopelessly broken in these forums, so I can't find the last discussion of this that took place here.  I remember Noel Carboni—in one of his less inspired and least felicitous but most histrionic and derisive posts—objected to the added complication but could not offer a better alternative that would be nearly as accurate.  I just mention this incident in case it jogs your memory.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    I did find one older exchange between you and me in the Photography forum back in early 2009:

                                                                                    http://forums.adobe.com/message/1089440#1089440

                                                                                     

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Comparing allegedly identical images in Photoshop

                                                                                     

                                                                                    The time-honored Photoshop "Difference" Test should be reviewed.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    If there should be a very small difference in a given pixel, the otherwise 0,0,0 pixel would then appear as 0,1,0 or 1,0,0, or something similar, which you would still see as black on your monitor, regardless of magnification.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Two better, more definitive testing methods would be (a) one suggested by Bruce Fraser himself (at bottom), and (b) a new (to me) method suggested by someone in the Color Managament and Photoshop Windows forums, which follows:

                                                                                     

                                                                                    (NOTE: only the methodology is of interest and pertinent, not the questionable context in which it has brought up and used.)  *

                                                                                     

                                                                                    1) Open the two images to be compared in Photoshop  *

                                                                                    2) Move one image as a layer over the other one  *

                                                                                    3) select "Difference" as blending mode in the layers palette  *

                                                                                    4) now the whole image should appear seemingly black on the monitor  [So far this is the traditional, "time honored" method.]  *

                                                                                    5) select the magic wand tool with these settings: Tolerance: 0/ Anti-alias: no/ Contiguous: no/ Sample All Layers: yes  *

                                                                                    6) click somewhere into the formerly gray area  [This refers to an image of a Color-Checker type of card that had wide gray border around it. The test, therefore, requires a pure gray image in the image, something highly unlikely to change, in order for the magic wand to select all pure-black images (0,0,0). Such a border can easily be created around an image by increasing the canvas size and filling the newly created space with pure gray (128,128,128). ]    

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Explanation: you just selected all completely black pixels (0,0,0) i.e. all pixels that are identical in both layers. *

                                                                                     

                                                                                     

                                                                                    7) you should see "marching ants" forming rectangular patterns  * 8_) invert the selection (Shift Command I)    

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Explanation: the selection now covers all the other pixels, i.e. all pixels which are different between both layers. *

                                                                                     

                                                                                     

                                                                                    9) create a new empty layer and select it in the layers palette  *

                                                                                    10) set the foreground color to white  *

                                                                                    11) fill the selection with white (Alt+backspace on Windows, accordingly on Mac)  *

                                                                                    12) set the blending modes of all layers back to normal    

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Explanation: you now see all identical pixels in their respective color and all different pixels in white.

                                                                                     

                                                                                     

                                                                                    This method is a lot more sensitive than the traditional one which stops at step #4 above.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    ======================================== [more below]

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Another method, suggested by Bruce Fraser:

                                                                                     

                                                                                    A better way of comparing images with identical pixel dimensions is to use Apply Image > Subtract with an offset of 128.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Difference only shows pixels that are lighter in the source than in the target (or maybe it's the other way aroundI forget) where Subtract with Offset 128 shows differences in both directions.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Pixels that are identical in both images come in as RGB 128 gray, those that are different come in at a value that exactly reflects how different they are.  It also makes it much easier to spot subtle differences

                                                                                     

                                                                                     

                                                                                     

                                                                                    ____________

                                                                                    Wo Tai Lao Le

                                                                                    我太老了

                                                                                    • 39. Re: DNG with CS5 is always compressed with loss !
                                                                                      ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                                                      What I do is flatten the 16-bit Difference (or maybe even Exclusion) and then stretch it with Levels down to a range of black=0, white=1 or just to an Auto Levels or Auto Contrast to see if there is anything that is not black.  Leaving it in 16-bit mode, you can stretch with levels more than once, just to make sure.

                                                                                      1 2 3 4 Previous Next