pop Posted July 21, 2014 Share #21 Posted July 21, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) If Leica created a universally accepted RAW like Canon or Nikon, this would be a non issue, because adobe respects those formats. But Leica didn't, which introduces these issues. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought Adobe invented the DNG format? They no longer respect it? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 21, 2014 Posted July 21, 2014 Hi pop, Take a look here M 240 RAW Files. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
swamiji Posted July 21, 2014 Share #22 Posted July 21, 2014 (edited) Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I always thought Adobe invented the DNG format? They no longer respect it? Not from their point if view, they just repurposed it slightly. The details are in the white paper I keep talking about. But the final upshot is that Adobe does not consider Adobe DNG to be a RAW format, it can contain RAW data, but so can a TIFF. Luckily Adobe has left a loop hole, where Leica DNG (and others) are treated as RAW files, unless you convert them... Then good luck. One more small point, these special features like auto compression, etc. only apply to Adobe DNG, not to Leica DNG. Edited July 21, 2014 by swamiji Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted July 21, 2014 Share #23 Posted July 21, 2014 HI There Adobe updated the DNG standard to (I think) 1.3, this included the ability to include lens correction information (distortion correction, vignetting correction, CA correction). Apple does not support the latest standard (1.1 I think), either in the core DNG support (so you can see the thumbnails in finder) or in Aperture or iPhoto. So, if you convert your DNG files to the latest DNG version when importing to LR, you will lose the ability to read them in the core, or in applications like Aperture. However - when Yosemite comes in the autumn it's rumoured to have full DNG support, and also an update to Aperture (last update before Photos comes along next year). The M240 does not have any of these corrections, and the DNG files are, therefore recognised by Apple at core level. However, the XVario, and the Leica DNG DO have lens correction optcodes, are a more recent version of the DNG standard, and cannot be read by the core services of Apple, or by Aperture. So you're stuck with programs which do read them (LR, Iridient to name a few) All the best 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted July 21, 2014 Share #24 Posted July 21, 2014 Do I take all this to mean if one imports M240 DNG files as "Copy" then you have not massaged the original RAW file upon import? I most always create a virtual copy of my RAW before working on them just in case going "back" to the original might in fact change something in the original RAW file while working in LR. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 21, 2014 Share #25 Posted July 21, 2014 Aperture is not dead, it's just been merged with iPhoto and renamed. It’s probably just pining for the fjords … If Leica created a universally accepted RAW like Canon or Nikon, this would be a non issue, because adobe respects those formats. But Leica didn't, which introduces these issues. Nonsense. While Canon and Nikon created their own formats (all descendent from TIFF of course, but still proprietary), Leica adopted Adobe’s DNG format. Most Leica cameras write DNGs that any software supporting DNG 1.1 should be able to read (although the software still needs to support the specific model as well) while the T requires DNG 1.3 support. DNG is now at version 1.4 as far as Adobe is concerned. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted July 21, 2014 Share #26 Posted July 21, 2014 You mean Canon and Nikon RAW formats are not universally accepted as RAW formats? The lineage of the TIFF and DNG format is not relevant to this discussion, only the effects of migrating to the newer version DNG is. I am trying to keep it simple... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 21, 2014 Share #27 Posted July 21, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Do I take all this to mean if one imports M240 DNG files as "Copy" then you have not massaged the original RAW file upon import? You don’t need to have Lightroom make a copy. For example, when I import an M file in Lightroom, choose my preferred settings in the development module, and save, then Lightroom saves its development metadata in the DNG file itself rather than in a sidecar file. Still I can open the very same DNG file in Iridient Developer and develop it again in that app – Iridient Developer doesn’t care that Lightroom did add some data of its own. So while some apps may be a bit fussy and brittle and only support a virgin DNG file, that would their fault; it doesn’t have to be that way. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 21, 2014 Share #28 Posted July 21, 2014 You mean Canon and Nikon RAW formats are not universally accepted as RAW formats? Accepted? These formats do exist, there are millions of cameras out there writing files in these formats, and there is nothing Adobe could do about that – so of course they support these formats. On the other hand Adobe would rather prefer if everyone did embrace DNG, as Leica and a few other vendors did. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted July 21, 2014 Share #29 Posted July 21, 2014 So while some apps may be a bit fussy and brittle and only support a virgin DNG file, that would their fault; it doesn’t have to be that way. I have spoken with Phase One and Apple Support on this subject, and lets just say, they have a different work flow philosophy. And frankly I agree with them. But no matter what ones work flow is, one should know the consequences of their actions, both good and bad. I understand Adobe point of view, I don't agree, but thats my problem. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted July 21, 2014 Share #30 Posted July 21, 2014 You mean Canon and Nikon RAW formats are not universally accepted as RAW formats? The lineage of the TIFF and DNG format is not relevant to this discussion, only the effects of migrating to the newer version DNG is. I am trying to keep it simple... Nikon and Canon bring out a new RAW format structure with every camera. Because they're mass market products Adobe and Apple support them pretty quickly. It's easier for them, because they can tweak every camera separately to make the most of the files, but it's the easy way out. Pentax, Ricoh, Leica and some others support the DNG standard - this does not change with every camera, like the jpg standard (and the pdf standard) it's intended as a universal package. . . . Think of someone producing some new imaging software in 10 years - clearly they will support DNG and JPG (standard file structures covering lots of cameras) . . . but will they bother with every different and individual iteration of Canon and Nikon RAW files - I suspect not. Leica are doing the right thing with their RAW structure, both in the long term and the short term. A proprietary RAW standard that Nikon and Canon can get away with would certainly be generally ignored from a small company like Leica. Whatever one thinks of Adobe, it's better to be DNG than proprietary. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted July 22, 2014 Share #31 Posted July 22, 2014 To me this is not about right or wrong, better or worse. It's about understanding how things work, so one can take them into account in ones workflow. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyalf Posted July 22, 2014 Share #32 Posted July 22, 2014 Thanks for all information! So, can one ignorant *ss like me summarize that by using "copy as DNG" in Lioghtroom the raw files are converted to latest (Adobe) DNG version. The pros are latest version of DNG and improved Adobe (Lightroom) performance. The cons are increase in file size (how much?) and possible problems such as incompatibility with non-Adobe SW?. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 22, 2014 Share #33 Posted July 22, 2014 Still, I suspect that copying DNGs as DNG was not the first thing that Adobe had in mind. More likely they were thinking of copying other formats to DNG. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 22, 2014 Share #34 Posted July 22, 2014 Aperture is not dead, it's just been merged with iPhoto and renamed. Expect it to be more of a core application in the future. That's kind of the way Apple does stuff. That is Apple's public announcement, of course. Do you really think the same app will work great for both beginners and pros ? Basically, a RAW file is output of your camera, you never want to alter it, because every change you make either reduces it's quality or adds the potential for corruption. This is what does not compute in my brain: - I may want to alter raw data. As a matter of fact, Leica DNG "raws" are not what the sensor actually captured (e.g. lens vignetting correction), let alone the M8 and M9 compressed "raws". I also run files from my non-Leica wides through Cornerfix to fix color vignetting altering the data to improve quality. - Data can remain perfectly unaltered, if processed by the right algorithm. E.g. I run all my uncompressed M9 DNG files through Lightroom lossless compression, therefore saving more than 50% storage space. That said, I believe that telling users they "do not want to alter the original DNG file" is just an excuse for the inability to provide an up to date application. If Leica created a universally accepted RAW like Canon or Nikon, this would be a non issue, because adobe respects those formats. But Leica didn't, which introduces these issues. Leica decided to use a really open and well documented file format, unlike the plethora of proprietary Canon and Nikon formats that change with almost every camera model, requiring app updates to support them. The problem here is probably that DNG files are more flexible (and complex) to support than proprietary formats, therefore it is not trivial to write code that properly handles them. If you have to blame something, blame your apps. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted July 22, 2014 Share #35 Posted July 22, 2014 I am not blaming anybody, I just don't subscribe to the idea that one should modify their originals. A copy yes, but not the original file. Adobe disagrees, that's their choice. It's as simple as that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 22, 2014 Share #36 Posted July 22, 2014 This is what does not compute in my brain: - I may want to alter raw data. As a matter of fact, Leica DNG "raws" are not what the sensor actually captured (e.g. lens vignetting correction), let alone the M8 and M9 compressed "raws". I also run files from my non-Leica wides through Cornerfix to fix color vignetting altering the data to improve quality. I cannot think of one camera (brand) that uses an unaltered sensor dump as raw data. In fact, Leica is one of the brands that sets high store on manipulating the files as little as possible before writing the raw file. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted July 22, 2014 Share #37 Posted July 22, 2014 “What the sensor captured” is not a well-defined notion. Would that be its analog output (not with the M (Typ 240) of course since its sensor delivers digital data, but with the M9 for example)? Or the data fresh off the ADC, even if no camera I am aware of would bother to store these? In any case you cannot alter raw data, even if you wanted to, much like you cannot not lose your virginity for a second time. You can only turn raw data into something at least slightly less raw. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted July 22, 2014 Share #38 Posted July 22, 2014 In any case you cannot alter raw data, even if you wanted to, much like you cannot not lose your virginity for a second time. You can only turn raw data into something at least slightly less raw. You can however corrupt a file while writing to it. Loosing it completely. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted July 22, 2014 Share #39 Posted July 22, 2014 (edited) Does LR import process changes the dng or not? I always thought it ignores any change as the files were already dng. If there is a change, and when I export original in LR, will it bring it back to original dng? What's than the export dng option for? I have few files that were imported to LR, and now seem to be corrupted in C1. Let's say one in a hundret. Not sure if this is related. Edited July 22, 2014 by mirekti Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted July 22, 2014 Share #40 Posted July 22, 2014 Does LR import process changes the dng or not? LR will change the files whenever it is needed. E.g. save your development settings, update the DNG preview and metadata, etc. It is important to note that a DNG file does not only contain image data. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.