Pros/Cons of passing M8 DNGs through DNG Converter

[MarcRochkind]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This post is focused on those who use a DNG raw workflow and also use an M8. It's perhaps focused even more on those who use iView Media Pro (and maybe similar cataloging systems) and those contemplating using Lightroom.

 

If one uses a DNG workflow, since the M8 records raws in DNG, one might think one were in great shape, but, somewhat oddly, there are problems.

 

The most obvious one is that the M8 delivers a somewhat barren DNG, in that a DNG is really a container, and all the M8 seems to put in it are the raw bits, EXIF data, and a thumbnail. Two other useful items that can be there, IPTC and other metadata (e.g., iView Catalog Sets), and a full-size JPEG preview, aren't there.

 

With my own ImageIngesterPro, you can assign metadata such as copyright notice, photographers address, keywords, subject, and so on at ingestion time and have it automatically set for each ingested image. It does this by creating an XMP sidecar, and then when Adobe DNG Converter is run to convert the raw to a DNG, the data is bound in, and the sidecar is thrown away, since it's no longer needed.

 

But, when DNG Converter inputs a DNG, it does not look at the sidecar, so there's no way to use it to bind metadata to the M8's DNG. Also, of course, running a DNG through DNG Converter is a big waste of time--it takes much, much longer to do that than it does to ingest.

 

But, without running DNG Converter, you don't get the full-size JPEG previews, which are extremely valuable when one is using iView.

 

With Lightroom, if you're not using iView, everything works out OK. You don't run the M8 DNGs through DNG Converter, and Lightroom picks up all the metadata and--this is the best part--binds it to the DNG. Lightroom doesn't need any JPEG previews to show the image (and do lots more with it as well).

 

Lightroom doesn't update the JPEG preview when the image is edited, which means that an iView/Lightroom combination when you are using a DNG workflow just doesn't seem to me to be workable.

 

I might mention that there are a few other ways in which the M8's DNGs don't get you the full benefit of a DNG workflow: Mac OS X (meaning Preview and Aperture) can't yet read them, and iView doesn't seem to be able to find some of the EXIF metadata.

 

Hope some of you found the above useful...

 

--Marc

[robsteve]

Marc:

 

One note about running the Leica DNGs through the DNG converter is that it breaks the DNG for later use in Capture One, and in the case of the DMR, for Flexcolor as well.

 

Have you tried using Photomechanic to ingest and assign your IPTC info? I just tested a DMR DNG ingest and the IPTC data added by photoMechanic shows up in Lightroom.

 

I also checked the preferences in Photmechanic and for DNG files it can write the IPTC into the DNG, rather than having to use a sidecar file like other RAW formats need.

[MarcRochkind]

Robert--

 

Yes, since the original is a DNG, writing the IPTC metadata into the DNG directly (instead of using a sidecar) is indeed the answer. That's what ImageIngesterPro will do at some point.

 

--Marc

[35mmSummicron]

for what its worth, C1 Pro has a simple IPTC function where you can assign metadata to your captures. you can even create templates and quickly load them.

 

admittingly though, i have used this function sparingly (and only for canon CR2's)--i mostly rely on Adobe Bridge for metadata.....

 

/a

[stunsworth]

It it very annoying that C1 doesn't recognise the DNGs after they've been through the convertor. I too use iView and push the files through the convertor to get the large preview displayed in iView.

[cbretteville]

There is some chatter about the degree to which C1 supports DNGs on PhaseOne's user forums. You should head over there and as questions/voice your oppinion. It might simply be a bug or an oversight.

 

Phase One Official User to User Forum :: Index

 

- C

[Englander]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Marc and Rob,

There is also a difference in the DMR and M8 DNGs. Photomechanic doesn't even open the M8 DNGs. At least you could see small thumbnails with PM and the DMR. Lightroom does open both and you can put metadata in at that point and sort as you did with PM and you can then open the files--even if they are in the LR managed file folder--in C1. BUT C1 will not recognize any adjustments you make in LR.

 

It seems each raw converter is closed to the operations made by any other. You have to choose a developer and work with it. Unlike film, though, if you keep an untouched backup of the original file, at least you can try different developers on your original negative--never could do that with the same negative when I wanted to see how Rodinal looked instead of ID-11.

 

LR is quite convenient and because it handles DNGs from both Leica sources, I have been using it instead of PM and iView which don't. However, the color rendition and apparent sharpness are not as good as what you can get elsewhere. I hate the idea of abandoning PM because it was the fastest and most efficient ingester/evaluator I have ever used; I hate the idea of abandoning iView because I have thousands and thousands of images already catalogued. But they both seem to be unable to workout their DNG differences with Adobe/Leica and I can't wait months for a solution.

 

Joe

[robsteve]

Joe:

 

When I was in Yosemite in December, I emailed Bob, at Camerabits/Photomechanic a M8 DNG. They have the M8 file now and he said they will work on it. I expect it may show up in the next update to Photmechanic.

[robsteve]

There is some chatter about the degree to which C1 supports DNGs on PhaseOne's user forums. You should head over there and as questions/voice your oppinion. It might simply be a bug or an oversight.

 

Phase One Official User to User Forum :: Index

 

- C

 

The problem with most DNG discussions is it is about DNG files created from RAW files out of Canon or Nikon cameras, not from cameras that shoot DNG naitively.

 

What a lot of people forgot is most RAW converters will support DNG files if they support the camera that originally shot them. What it doesn't mean is that you can convert a RAW file to DNG and expect a DNG aware program to be able to convert it. This is where the problem with the Leicas come in. The programs say they support dnG, but don't support the DMR or M8.

 

In the case of programs like Capture One, they should still be able to deal with Leica DNG files run through the Adobe DNG converter, but are not handling the modified DNG correctly. It may be as silly of an error as when Capture one would support R9 DMR files, not R8 DMR files becuse they were not expecting the camera name R8 in the header.

[Englander]

Thanks for the info about PM, Rob. But the problem for me is timing. My clients are not going to wait for PM to get it together. They need their stuff NOW--never had a client that wanted any thing "later." So I need to be able to rate, label, sort, and process NOW.

 

PM has had two months, (at least! because they really weren't doing so well with the DMR DNGs) to work it out. They might see it as an OS problem; I don't know. But the choice for me basically comes down to use Leica or use PM -iView, but not both because for the time being they have no operational compatibility. Essentially, PM and iView have a deadline of mid-February when the beta-LR expires and I have to buy it or be unable to operate with Leica DNGs.

 

The idea of processing everything through C1 and then using PM-iView to sort is ridiculous. It is just too computer and time intensive. I process only what is going to be used.

 

C1 and iView already have a compatibility issue despite their marketing relationship. All these guys have worked to have cross-platform representation without having familial interoperability. It is possible to use LR to sort and then go to C1 for processing and then go to iView for final labeling and db-cataloguing. But it is looking like $200 for one-stop shopping at LR might be worth the large gain in efficiency and the small loss of of quality.

 

What was posted by Mark (I think) in the thread about MF backs applies to Leica,too: you have to look at the whole system including the entire software and workflow stream. You can have a great imaging system, but if any single part of any of the software is bad, the workflow breaks.

 

Joe

[robsteve]

Joe:

 

If you shoot DNG+Jpeg, PhotoMechanic will use the jpeg to view and sort the files. It keeps the DNG tied to the jpeg in the process. If you tag a bunch, you can set it to only copy the DNG or both.

[Englander]

Yes, Rob, that's true. I appreciate your suggestion. I had been using the low-rez jpgs from the M8 with PM. But that method ultimately created procedural problems since PM only presents very small thumbs from the DMR and, as you know, the DMR does not have the RAW+jpg. One of the main rules of a workflow is consistency and having special procedures for each camera's files blows that. Telling an assistant (or myself trying to remember) that with this card you do this but with this one (otherwise indistinguishable from the other), you do something else--well, that is asking for trouble. With LR--again, not necessarily my most favorite product--at least the procedure is the same for all Leicas and any other digital we are using. I would prefer to go back to using only PM in the field and only iView for data base with folder-monitoring and whichever RAW processor makes the best files; but I think that procedure is going to have to be re-evaluated come mid-February. Again, thanks for making the suggestion.

 

Joe

[Englander]

Steve,

When I said processing M8 DNGs through C1 in order to get previews was ridiculous, I meant it was ridiculous for me. It may work well for you. But I just have way too many images at any one time to wait for the processing through C1 in order to start sorting and labeling. No offense intended and I want apologize before you take any!

 

Joe

[robsteve]

Sorry, I thought we were talking about the M8.

 

For the DMR, I have just been using Lightroom, and having Lightroom create the previews upon import. It is a bit slow on a PC, but the shipping version should be quicker.

[dfdann]

Marc: Will your ingester program work with C1LE?

Thanks, Dan

[teehas53]

Clearly frustrating, especially the lack of C1 support for DNGs that have been viewed in any other conversion software.

 

The elephant in the room regarding C1 in particular is that DNG is supposed to be an open spec. EVERYBODY'S software should be able to read ANY DNG file (excuse me for shouting, but sometimes I wonder if anyone is listening to photographers!) Hopefully this will change in the near future. I hate being locked into making an either/or choice, with no going back.

 

I'm a long-time user of the Adobe workflow, and while I think C1 produces marginally better conversions in some cases, it's very clunky in comparison to Lightroom/ACR from a productivity standpoint. As a working pro, that's enough enough to tip me away from C1 as my main tool.

 

Tom

[carstenw]

Tom, DNG is a container format with some suggestions as to how to store the real data. Any old-ass program can read the container part, but the real data is still stored by almost all manyfacturers in their own way, meaning that the programs all have to understand it anyway. At least DNG is one step forward, but until the manufacturers all play ball, and until the data storage suggestions are good enough to encompass what all manufacturers want to do with their data, there is no sense in criticising C1 or any other program out there.

[teehas53]

No offense meant to any particular software company - C1 is fine product and has many loyal supporters.

 

That said, one of Adobe's stated intents in developing the DNG format was to eliminate the very thing we're experiencing here. In other words, by creating an open standard that is completely compatible in all applications, one can use C1, ACR, Super-RAW-orama or whatever, all effectively and interchangeably.

 

This is to the benefit of photographers, especially in the future, as proprietary standards have a tendency to "expire." As I said in my previous post, one can hope that C1 will correct this issue soon, and allow end-users (their customers BTW) to have the choices they deserve.

 

At the moment, if one wants to shoot M8 DNG files, one has to choose C1 -OR- other converters. This is effectively a closed standard, and may as well be another proprietary RAW format. I find it very ironic that the M8 records in DNG, but if one wants to use C1 to process files (and it seems the overwhelming choice of people on this forum) one is locked out of any other choices...

 

Tom

[MarcRochkind]

Daniel--

 

ImageIngesterPro always works with any program, because you can completely control whether it leaves the original raw alone, puts a sidecar next to it, or runs it through DNG Converter. Probably with C1 and C1LE you would leave the raw alone. I don't think the C1* programs do anything with sidecars; if they do, then it's a feature that's there to use.

 

(A design rule for IIP is that the original image is never altered, only copied. Even when converted to DNG, the original image is still ingested and kept in a folder that you name and control.)

 

--Marc

[DaveSee]

No offense meant to any particular software company - C1 is fine product and has many loyal supporters.

Agreed, for those who have made good use of it.

 

That said, one of Adobe's stated intents in developing the DNG format was to eliminate the very thing we're experiencing here. In other words, by creating an open standard that is completely compatible in all applications, one can use C1, ACR, Super-RAW-orama or whatever, all effectively and interchangeably.

Yes, but Adobe holds the "key", as with PostScript3. Adobe knows file formats, like the aged "PSD"(another TIFF derivative), tie users to product.

 

This is to the benefit of photographers, especially in the future, as proprietary standards have a tendency to "expire." As I said in my previous post, one can hope that C1 will correct this issue soon, and allow end-users (their customers BTW) to have the choices they deserve.

Yes, but the folks of PhaseOne know their bacon(sorry you folk of "spine to the sky" aversion) will be served then as Adobe would have it.

 

At the moment, if one wants to shoot M8 DNG files, one has to choose C1 -OR- other converters. This is effectively a closed standard, and may as well be another proprietary RAW format. I find it very ironic that the M8 records in DNG, but if one wants to use C1 to process files (and it seems the overwhelming choice of people on this forum) one is locked out of any other choices...

Tom

I cannot speak/write to this issue because I do not use C1. As I see it, Leica chose a MF "RAW" converter product to sate the "professional who has not used RAW/DNG, yet /expects/ results". Waiting for "LightRoom", or Adobe making good with loyal "RawShooter" users is a dice roll... so they(a year or two ago) chose PhaseOne, a known product. Hey folks, let's not forget that C1LE is a "Bundled"(botched?) product with this otherwise upstart in digital capture.

 

It's /data/ this rig spits to file. The "included" C1LE is just a teaser... As for tweaking EXIF/IPTC/XMP data into the original capture file: why? For perspective, I work with much less interesting digital data, but one consideration is shared: data is sacred, metadata is fashion. Please leave your DNG files "barren", use other means/software to contextualize its "meaning".

 

I rant because your M8 DNG files are so vulnerable, and so too your terrific captures: store the "first time", and replay the "memory"... your film negs know this.

 

rgds,

Dave

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear