DNG's and other stuff

[andalus]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've had my M9 a year now and it's my first digital camera. MP before the M9. So I've shot a couple thousand pics over the last year, discarded some, but have adopted a posture of keeping my keepers my "archived" as DNG files. It seems I can always go in to CS5 and make whatever changes I desire, and deploy the shots anyway I need to. For example, if someone wants a pic for the web, I can create a JPEG, or for something else, a TIFF.

 

I am wondering if this makes sense and if any other Leica shooters manage things this way? To me, it makes sense, but if there's a better way, I'd sure like to know what it is?

 

Also, with some trepidation, I just bought from B&H an Eizo 22 inch display screen. 1400 bucks, and I MAY send it back for something cheaper, but I like the 5 year warranty on Eizo. Up to now I've just been using my Mac Book Pro, 13 inches, for photography processing. I am rather excited to see photos on a very nice screen, and process them better that way. I am therefore curious what other Leica shooters are using in the way of displays?

 

Thanks for any comments, advice.

[Guido]

Yes, I'd absolutely, positively keep the DNGs, because they contain the maximum available amount of information and the software to interpret and process that data keeps getting better and better as years go by.

 

Years ago, with my first Canon DSLR of 2003, I made the mistake to store most shots as JPEGs because the raw files used up so much hard disk space. Today, I could kick myself for that. There are a couple of shots from that era with blown highlights which I could turn into something nice with later Photoshop versions, but regarding the JPGs with similar flaws, the chance to improve them has been forfeited forever. Who knows what kind of tricks future software will be able to perform on today's raw files!

[george +]

Yes. I have been keeping DNG-s for years.

They are my source. Everything else is re-doable.

(And often needs to be re-done too.)

[andalus]

Abnother question comes to mind:

 

anyway gone from DNG's to JPEG2000 files. I did this with a bunch of shots. Apparently this is the coming format for archival purposes. Just wondering what anybody knows about this format. ??

[hoppyman]

Can't fault your logic!

I recommend that you continue to archive your DNGs as your masters (including extra copies on separate media).

Calibrate your Eizo monitor well and you have a superior tool that can only aid your photography too.

[Guido]

anyway gone from DNG's to JPEG2000 files. I did this with a bunch of shots. Apparently this is the coming format for archival purposes. Just wondering what anybody knows about this format. ??

It's been hailed as the coming format for 10 years now.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Regarding your monitor question, Eizo is clearly top of the line, albeit expensive. I doubt you'll have issues beyond the price factor.

 

There are, however, alternatives at various price points, discussed frequently in the DPP forum (easy search). In particular, I use an NEC 24" monitor with built-in MultiSync calibration. It was reviewed positively by Sean Reid a few years back. NEC is less expensive than Eizo, but still very capable. The Eizo is technically better, but only you can determine if your needs require the best. I'm perfectly satisfied with the NEC, now a couple of years old.

 

Jeff

[robert blu]

I just enter the digital word with an X1 and use LR3 for archival purpose. DNG files are the way to keep the good ones (I cancel the jpgs after a preliminary vision) and LR3 (I guess aperture or other make similar work) offer me the opportunity to export the postprocessed files as I need (small jpgs for web or higher size resolution if I need a print). I edit very tight my shots and files sizes is not a problem.

robert