PhotoCruiser Posted April 1 Share #21 Posted April 1 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) My 2021 M+ MBP did the same, there was never a delay, but mine hat 1TB SSD disk and had enough space. Am 29.3.2025 um 00:45 schrieb Mikep996: MacBook has 500GB memory, 84GB of available memory As i wrote in the beginning, this is most likely the problem, SSD almost full. A slow SD card must be extremely slow to import 2 DNG files in one minute and OP wrote that with the Apple Store LRC version it was instantly that makes the SD card as the problem unlikely. Also if the SD card would be so dead slow then the Q3 would have problems to write the photos. Your MBA does not have a SD Card slot, OP's MBP has one, as mine do. If you read all my treads then you realize that i suggested first to clean up his MBP and free space on the SSD to see if that helps and monitor system activity what probably indicate the problem. I do the same as you, from when i have digital cameras: i pull the card or connect the usb cable and save all new photos on a external disk and after i import them in Lightroom with the option to leave them where they are, not copy them to MBP's local SSD. Chris Edited April 1 by PhotoCruiser Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 1 Posted April 1 Hi PhotoCruiser, Take a look here Tried Lightroom Trial.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Chris W Posted April 1 Share #22 Posted April 1 There are 200MB/S speed cards and 300MB/S. I have a couple of 300 but mostly 200. I never notice if the card is 'slow' in camera as I tend to shoot single shots, not bursts of consecutive shots. I do notice some of my cards are slower to copy the folder to my external SSD than others. Not as slow as the OP states. I try to keep my actual computer free of content, only apps and programmes. All of my music, video and photography is worked on via external drive, and stored on external SSD too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted April 1 Share #23 Posted April 1 20 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said: But do you know yet which app you are using: Lightroom CC or Lightroom Classic? They dropped the CC designation awhile ago, so it’s just Lightroom or Lightroom Classic. This probably has added more confusion, as referring to Lightroom technically means the cloud based version with mobile. Cloud storage has always been optional with Classic, formerly called Lightroom CC, which was confusing for many. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhotoCruiser Posted April 1 Share #24 Posted April 1 (edited) vor einer Stunde schrieb Jeff S: They dropped the CC designation awhile ago, so it’s just Lightroom or Lightroom Classic. This probably has added more confusion, as referring to Lightroom technically means the cloud based version with mobile. Cloud storage has always been optional with Classic, formerly called Lightroom CC, which was confusing for many. Yes, you are right, i have overseen that as i don't even have Lightroom (ex CC) installed and yes, that creates even more confusion, one example is here.However, Lightroom is for Adobe still part of the CC or Creative Cloud Family what leads to even more confusion. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Zitat Cloud storage has always been optional with Classic, formerly called Lightroom CC, which was confusing for many. Cloud storage has always been optional with Classic, actual Lightroom formerly called Lightroom CC has cloud storage included. Chris Edited April 1 by PhotoCruiser Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Cloud storage has always been optional with Classic, actual Lightroom formerly called Lightroom CC has cloud storage included. Chris ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/420114-tried-lightroom-trial/?do=findComment&comment=5780094'>More sharing options...
LocalHero1953 Posted April 1 Share #25 Posted April 1 Adobe needs to get a grip on its namings 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikep996 Posted April 5 Author Share #26 Posted April 5 After using LR for several days I found that there was no real benefit to me with the processing I do. In fact, a couple of the things I liked about LR initially turned out to also be available in Apple Photos - BUT I had not realized it! So I'll stick with Photos. Again, with my background of primarily slide film shooting for color images, I'm pretty much a "if I don't get it right in the camera, toss it" kind of person. I realize most people have a different view and do a lot of work in post and I can see that LR is a better choice for that!! 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris W Posted April 5 Share #27 Posted April 5 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well....raw from a digital camera is different to chemical processed slide film. Raw is meant to look flat and needs processing to look finished. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SrMi Posted April 5 Share #28 Posted April 5 7 hours ago, Mikep996 said: After using LR for several days I found that there was no real benefit to me with the processing I do. In fact, a couple of the things I liked about LR initially turned out to also be available in Apple Photos - BUT I had not realized it! So I'll stick with Photos. Again, with my background of primarily slide film shooting for color images, I'm pretty much a "if I don't get it right in the camera, toss it" kind of person. I realize most people have a different view and do a lot of work in post and I can see that LR is a better choice for that!! Getting it right in camer for DNG and JPEG are two different things. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephan54 Posted April 5 Share #29 Posted April 5 Perhaps you should give Nitro Photo a try. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted April 6 Share #30 Posted April 6 On 4/5/2025 at 4:27 AM, Mikep996 said: After using LR for several days I found that there was no real benefit to me with the processing I do. In fact, a couple of the things I liked about LR initially turned out to also be available in Apple Photos - BUT I had not realized it! So I'll stick with Photos. Again, with my background of primarily slide film shooting for color images, I'm pretty much a "if I don't get it right in the camera, toss it" kind of person. I realize most people have a different view and do a lot of work in post and I can see that LR is a better choice for that!! As explained above, DNG typically requires user adjustment in post, while JPEG already uses adjustments determined by someone else. But initial DNG adjustments can be fast and easy in LR Classic, if you learn a few basic steps, like setting a different import profile (set and forget), using preset adjustments, determining best use of certain sliders, synching image adjustments, etc. Video tutorials and books abound. You write that you still do B&W darkroom work. I assume this includes time spent doing some basic steps like exposure/contrast testing, dodging/burning, etc. The equivalent digital PP steps, once learned, are vastly quicker, and far more flexible. One just needs a bit of patience early on to learn and establish an effective process. I’m sure you did this for your darkroom work. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhotoCruiser Posted April 6 Share #31 Posted April 6 Am 5.4.2025 um 10:27 schrieb Mikep996: After using LR for several days I found that there was no real benefit to me with the processing I do. The biggest benefit of Lightroom classic is that it it was always a cataloging software to bring order in big photo collections and find them later. In the beginning Lightroom had only a few editing options and now has a vast and very handy additional tools who cover most of photographer needs. If you feel more comfortable with Apple Fotos then thats fine, every one need to use the software he likes, fit his needs and know to use. Just a warning, do regularly a backup by exporting the photos to a external medium as i know people who messed up their Apple photo library and lost all photos. Chris 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikep996 Posted April 6 Author Share #32 Posted April 6 "Getting it right in camer for DNG and JPEG are two different things." Agreed but oddly I find the DNGs from the Q3 look really good whereas the Jpegs look a bit flat. I shot some pics today, imported them in Apple Photos and the only thing I felt was needed was, in some cases, bringing up some shadow detail. The DNGs looked much better to me than the Jpegs. Should be the opposite based on my previous experience with Raw vs Jpeg...is a Leica DNG really "raw?" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhotoCruiser Posted April 7 Share #33 Posted April 7 The JPG's looking different as they are processed by camera settings while a RAW files is interpreted in editing software to display and edit them them while OS for example show the embedded jpg preview with filters effects if any. This is how RAW works, it may be that Adobe changed some details to make it more compatible what i am not aware of, but an changes should not lead to image degradation. Lightroom give you included import filters who change the interpreted photo what probably leads that you find them "look really good" and there are many free and to pay filters to modify the out of the camera DNG's automatically. You can change the JPG settings in your Q3 and the JPG's should look different as well No, a raw photo correctly interpreted and processed will look better than a jpg but for a photographer who likes the photos straight out of the camera JPG is probably the better solution as RAW/DNG only advantage is to edit the raw sensor data what gives a much broader and better looking spectrum of editing than on a already processed photo like tiff of jpg. Zitat A DNG file always contains data for one main image, plus metadata, and optionally contains at least one JPEG preview. It normally has the extension "dng" or "DNG". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Negative Chris 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 7 Share #34 Posted April 7 Incomplete definition ( like we often see in Wikipedia). There are .XMP sidecar files for data not included in the .DNG, like proprietary raw formats. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 7 Share #35 Posted April 7 2 hours ago, PhotoCruiser said: like tiff of jpg TIFF is a lossless image format which contains all data. In fact, DNG and TIFF cane be interchangeable in some circumstances. Data recovery software often renders .DNG files with the extension .TIF. The only thing one needs to do in that case is correct the extension to .DNG in order to open the file. The only difference is the file header. The reason: Adobe based their .DNG format on .TIFF (Adobe owns the .TIFF format.) TIFF again is related to the venerable .BMP format. JPG is a format based on a lossy compression algorithm agreed on in 1992. Its main purpose is to standardise lossy compression of image files in various levels of quality loss. .PNG is a lossless compressed file, so it will be larger than a .JPG file. It is a graphics file meant to replace .GIF Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhotoCruiser Posted April 8 Share #36 Posted April 8 vor 21 Stunden schrieb jaapv: Incomplete definition ( like we often see in Wikipedia). There are .XMP sidecar files for data not included in the .DNG, like proprietary raw formats. So where is the .xmp file then other than inside the .DNG file? vor 20 Stunden schrieb jaapv: The reason: Adobe based their .DNG format on .TIFF (Adobe owns the .TIFF format.) TIFF again is related to the venerable .BMP format. So you write that DNG files are not raw files or contain raw data? TIFF files can be uncompressed or compressed depending on the export settings and some compression is lossy, same for DNG files after Adobes 2023 DNG specs. https://helpx.adobe.com/content/dam/help/en/photoshop/pdf/DNG_Spec_1_7_1_0.pdf#page=20 Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronski Posted April 8 Share #37 Posted April 8 vor 7 Minuten schrieb PhotoCruiser: So where is the .xmp file then other than inside the .DNG file? I only get XMP-files for NEF, ARW or other RAW-file formats that are not DNG. I guess Adobe can't change those formats to include the changes that have been made. Since my edits are preserved even through exporting and reimporting DNGs, that must mean the changes that are saved to XMP for other RAW-formats are written into DNG-files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 8 Share #38 Posted April 8 1 hour ago, PhotoCruiser said: So where is the .xmp file then other than inside the .DNG file? So you write that DNG files are not raw files or contain raw data? TIFF files can be uncompressed or compressed depending on the export settings and some compression is lossy, same for DNG files after Adobes 2023 DNG specs. https://helpx.adobe.com/content/dam/help/en/photoshop/pdf/DNG_Spec_1_7_1_0.pdf#page=20 Chris That is correct They are an universal storage file that contains (amongst other things) raw data It can store raw data from all digital cameras, as opposed to proprietary files like .NEF or .CRW which are brand- specific. .For that purpose Adobe offers their DNG converter. https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/file-types/image/raw/dng-file.html .XMP files are metadata files that are meant to preserve non-raw data throughout the postprocessing process, be it destructive or non-destructive. The are not image files and thus only separated from raw files as the are presented by the camera. If a cameras produces .DNG files natively these data are written into the .DNG file so there is no need for a .XMP (Extended Metadata Platform) https://helpx.adobe.com/bridge/using/metadata-adobe-bridge.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted April 8 Share #39 Posted April 8 On 4/6/2025 at 6:05 PM, PhotoCruiser said: The biggest benefit of Lightroom classic is that it it was always a cataloging software to bring order in big photo collections and find them later. In the beginning Lightroom had only a few editing options and now has a vast and very handy additional tools who cover most of photographer needs. If you feel more comfortable with Apple Fotos then thats fine, every one need to use the software he likes, fit his needs and know to use. Just a warning, do regularly a backup by exporting the photos to a external medium as i know people who messed up their Apple photo library and lost all photos. Chris The powerful library module is the main reason why I use LR Classic. You can sort, search and organize images in all sorts of ways. And you can expand further with additional plug-ins. For me, there's no real alternative. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 8 Share #40 Posted April 8 From the beginning DNG offered lossless compression based on JPEG 1992 Lossless In 2023 they added lossy compression as TinyDNG. . https://thndl.com/how-dng-compresses-raw-data-with-lossless-jpeg92.html And yes, TIFF has compressed variants. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now