Luminous Landscape Forum

Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Capture One Q&A => Topic started by: Gerry Walden on December 18, 2012, 06:55:57 am

Title: DNG Settings
Post by: Gerry Walden on December 18, 2012, 06:55:57 am
PLEASE can somebody tell me which settings from Adobe DNG converter or ACR I can use on my .raf files to enable C1 to read them. I have tried everything I can think of.

Thanks!
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: john beardsworth on December 18, 2012, 08:53:37 am
Use an older format of DNG - certainly not 1.4 with stuff like fast load data. But be prepared to find that C1's support of DNG is a bit of a joke.

John
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Ronald NZ Tan on December 18, 2012, 01:00:29 pm
I agree with you John.

I like DNGs as a format, simply because the file size is smaller in comparison to the native CR2 (30D, 7D) and NEF (D40X). Smaller file size means backing up to an external drive is faster. Since 2011, I went and converted all my native CR2s and NEFs to DNG. I "sort of" regretted now, because some of the RAW functionality in C1PRO no longer works on these DNGs. The ability to lens correct distortion or to fix chromatic aberrations.

The DNGs I am referring to are created *using* the Adobe DNG Converter and not some 3rd party software. Canon 7D, 30D, and Nikon D40X are fully supported camera models from C1PRO since version 5.


Use an older format of DNG - certainly not 1.4 with stuff like fast load data. But be prepared to find that C1's support of DNG is a bit of a joke.

John
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: john beardsworth on December 18, 2012, 01:22:46 pm
The phrase I've heard from PhaseOne is "two doors". If it's a raw file, it goes through the door where it'll get the full benefits of C1 treatment, but if it's a DNG it'll go through the other door and be given a generic DNG treatment - which is pretty lame. Contrast that with Aperture which treats DNGs from supported cameras just like the corresponding proprietary raw file. And that's Aperture from Apple, the very home of "not invented here"....

John
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Alan Smallbone on December 18, 2012, 01:35:32 pm
Basically it won't work the way you want it to... see the 5th post in this thread...

http://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=13605

Alan
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Ronald NZ Tan on December 18, 2012, 04:35:25 pm
This the following what you're referring to, Alan? When I convert my CR2s and NEFs from my aforementioned cameras, the mosaic raw data are transferred to the DNG. I am not using any "lossy" or "linear" options in the conversion via Adobe DNG Converter software. I would like PhaseONE to fully support DNG like it is a RAW format. When I upgrade to C1PRO 7, I have DSLR lens that C1PRO7 support and shows up in the Lens tab. Because I converted the CR2 into the DNG, I no longer could use the version 7 specific lens support to optically correct the distortion and chromatic aberration.


Quote
We are working on this and will have a compatible version out very soon.
The DNG files which you convert for this camera is becomes linear DNGs which we do not support, we only support true RAW DNGs

Basically it won't work the way you want it to... see the 5th post in this thread...

http://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=13605

Alan
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Gerry Walden on December 18, 2012, 04:58:45 pm
Thanks everyone. You have all confirmed what I suspected. I guess I will just have to stick to LR/PS until C1 gets its head around the Fuji files.

Gerry
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: David Grover / Capture One on December 19, 2012, 03:43:20 am
This the following what you're referring to, Alan? When I convert my CR2s and NEFs from my aforementioned cameras, the mosaic raw data are transferred to the DNG. I am not using any "lossy" or "linear" options in the conversion via Adobe DNG Converter software. I would like PhaseONE to fully support DNG like it is a RAW format. When I upgrade to C1PRO 7, I have DSLR lens that C1PRO7 support and shows up in the Lens tab. Because I converted the CR2 into the DNG, I no longer could use the version 7 specific lens support to optically correct the distortion and chromatic aberration.



Ronald,

Its a true fact that if you want to squeeze the best out of your files in Capture One, then converting to DNG is not the way to go currently.

If your only motivation of converting to DNG is to save a bit of disk space, then I would argue the benefits of staying with the native RAW far outweigh that.

Especially as storage is so cheap.

David
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: john beardsworth on December 19, 2012, 05:05:36 am
Ronald, I would agree with David that saving cheap space is not a major reason to switch to DNG - it's more a nice side effect. There are far better reasons to switch to DNG for your main workflow, and you might just keep proprietary raw files as an extra backup and for programs like CaptureOne that fail to handle DNGs sensibly*.

John

* One might argue that doing so would broaden C1's appeal....
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Ronald NZ Tan on December 19, 2012, 10:47:28 pm
Hi David,

It is fact that less data translates to faster backup times. My entire appeal for PhaseONE to fully support RAW DNG (containing mosaiced data) is that even a RAW DNG will be treated like native RAW file.

Because all my files are RAW DNGs converted via the official Adobe DNG Converter, I can't use most of the tools in the Lens Tab.

If I think carefully, I "sort of" regretted converting my native RAWs into DNGs. When I read that C1PRO supported DNG, I had assumed that my DNGs will have full access to the RAW processing of C1PRO. I only found out that once the DNGs were converted successfully AND I extirpated my native RAWs, it wasn't so.

Re-summarizing, I feel PhaseONE could win more souls from the Adobe crowd, if the RAW DNGs will be equally treated like the native RAWs.

Right now, I am not at all enthusiastic about upgrading to C1PRO7 because I could not take advantage of the automatic DSLR lens that are supported for native RAW files. I use EF 50mm f/1.8 II a lot and this lens has a profile in C1PRO7. I converted my CR2 into RAW DNG and I cannot do any lens fixes in C1PRO7.

???

I do hope the request is seriously considered, because the DNG format is here to stay. DNG has been around for a while too and not invented six months ago. From what I have read, the DNG is fully open and supported by Adobe.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Ronald NZ Tan on December 19, 2012, 10:54:51 pm
PS . . .

I would like to piggy back that C1PRO7 should utilize the "Embed Fast Load" previews of the DNG. When I convert my RAWs into RAW DNG (with mosaiced data), I use full JPEG preview and "Embed Fast Load Data."

With the help of OpenCL, I think that by tapping into the Embed Fast Load in RAW DNG, C1PRO7 should be flying.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: john beardsworth on December 20, 2012, 02:51:12 am
Re-summarizing, I feel PhaseONE could win more souls from the Adobe crowd, if the RAW DNGs will be equally treated like the native RAWs..
+1
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: David Grover / Capture One on December 20, 2012, 06:51:42 am
Hi David,

It is fact that less data translates to faster backup times. My entire appeal for PhaseONE to fully support RAW DNG (containing mosaiced data) is that even a RAW DNG will be treated like native RAW file.

Because all my files are RAW DNGs converted via the official Adobe DNG Converter, I can't use most of the tools in the Lens Tab.

If I think carefully, I "sort of" regretted converting my native RAWs into DNGs. When I read that C1PRO supported DNG, I had assumed that my DNGs will have full access to the RAW processing of C1PRO. I only found out that once the DNGs were converted successfully AND I extirpated my native RAWs, it wasn't so.

Re-summarizing, I feel PhaseONE could win more souls from the Adobe crowd, if the RAW DNGs will be equally treated like the native RAWs.

Right now, I am not at all enthusiastic about upgrading to C1PRO7 because I could not take advantage of the automatic DSLR lens that are supported for native RAW files. I use EF 50mm f/1.8 II a lot and this lens has a profile in C1PRO7. I converted my CR2 into RAW DNG and I cannot do any lens fixes in C1PRO7.

???

I do hope the request is seriously considered, because the DNG format is here to stay. DNG has been around for a while too and not invented six months ago. From what I have read, the DNG is fully open and supported by Adobe.

Hi Ronald,

Right now I would still argue that it is a poor choice to convert to DNG when you lose so much in the possibilities for image quality.

If you had to decide on where to spend our resources would it be to squeeze more and more quality out of supported raw files, or go on a path to improve DNG compatibility?

I can add that we receive very very few requests concerning DNG support.

What is the difference (typically) in file size from your CR2's to DNG?  How many images per week do you capture?

D

Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on December 20, 2012, 12:23:18 pm
Right now I would still argue that it is a poor choice to convert to DNG when you lose so much in the possibilities for image quality.

Lose exactly what? I'm not talking about lossy DNG.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: photo570 on December 20, 2012, 09:28:07 pm
Consider this a request then David.  ;)

I am a Leaf user, and a Canon user (and a GX680 user, couldn't resist) and would like to add a camera to my studio that shoots DNG (Leica S) one of the things putting me off is the SUCKY DNG support. I can cope with hot folder tethered shooting, although that is crippled at the moment, I have submitted a support case suggesting a workable fix, but I won't hold my breath. The only place using DNG is a poor choice it seems is in C1.  :'(

Kind regards,
Jason Berge.

Hi Ronald,

Right now I would still argue that it is a poor choice to convert to DNG when you lose so much in the possibilities for image quality.

If you had to decide on where to spend our resources would it be to squeeze more and more quality out of supported raw files, or go on a path to improve DNG compatibility?

I can add that we receive very very few requests concerning DNG support.

What is the difference (typically) in file size from your CR2's to DNG?  How many images per week do you capture?

D


Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: EsbenHR on December 21, 2012, 02:48:10 am
Consider this a request then David.  ;)

I am a Leaf user, and a Canon user (and a GX680 user, couldn't resist) and would like to add a camera to my studio that shoots DNG (Leica S) one of the things putting me off is the SUCKY DNG support. I can cope with hot folder tethered shooting, although that is crippled at the moment, I have submitted a support case suggesting a workable fix, but I won't hold my breath. The only place using DNG is a poor choice it seems is in C1.  :'(

The DNG support in C1 only SUCK if you converted a native RAW to an alien DNG file. C1 also SUCK if you converted the file to a TIFF. Cameras that produces native DNGs are supported as well as any other camera.

Contrary to what most people seems to think, DNG is a moving target tied to Adobes processing chain. The converted files have an unspecified relationship to the original file and camera settings.

We don't want to implement support for a camera multiple times, which would be needed to have "nice" support for a RAW file converted to DNG by a random version of a tool. DNG is a least common denominator that makes it easy to use (admittedly nice) tools and libraries from Adobe. When you want to squeeze the best out of a given camera, using a non-native representation of a file is, in my opinion, not a smart move.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: john beardsworth on December 21, 2012, 04:05:28 am
Contrary to what most people seems to think, DNG is a moving target tied to Adobes processing chain. The converted files have an unspecified relationship to the original file and camera settings.

We don't want to implement support for a camera multiple times, which would be needed to have "nice" support for a RAW file converted to DNG by a random version of a tool.
To be honest, it doesn't change that frequently, is accompanied by copious documentation, and the spec version is publicly displayed in each image's metadata. We're talking about DNG, not FUD....
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on December 21, 2012, 09:34:41 am
To be honest, it doesn't change that frequently, is accompanied by copious documentation, and the spec version is publicly displayed in each image's metadata. We're talking about DNG, not FUD....

Exactly! I was as well under the impression that DNG has a spec that fully describes how to read or write that format. Same with TIFF. Or PSD etc.

Quote
The DNG support in C1 only SUCK if you converted a native RAW to an alien DNG file.

What is an alien DNG?

Quote
Contrary to what most people seems to think, DNG is a moving target tied to Adobes processing chain

How so? How is it tied solely to Adobe processing chain?
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: tho_mas on December 21, 2012, 10:56:01 am
What is an alien DNG?
A native DNG is a DNG created in camera. So it's the original RAW file the respective camera writes to the card.
An alien DNG is a DNG created for instance through the DNG converter or exported from Lightroom or other softwares.

Here is a native Leica-M9 DNG file from imaging-resource.

I've converted it with the latest DNG Converter (version 7.3.0.71).
I've tried several DNG versions (version 2 all the way to version 7.1 … basically they all look the same and have the same file size. So below I only refer to the V7.1 conversion):

Attachment 1 shows the prefs used for the conversion and below a screenshot from the finder showing that the native DNG size from the camera is 18.3MB while the converted version is only 10.2MB (with full size JPEG embedded it would be around 12MB). I don't think the reduced file size comes only from compression. I assume some proprietary data has been skipped.

Attachment 2 shows the Metadata C1 is reading from the files. At least the lens info has been altered.

Attachment 3 shows the native camera DNG file (on the left) compared to the converted DNG file opened in Capture One.
The colors are very different. For the native DNG file C1 applies a Leica M9 input profile while for the converted version it applies a "generic DNG" input profile. If I would assign the Leica M9 input profile to the converted DNG file colors would look totally weird.

Attachment 4 shows that the converted version also looks a bit harsh compared to the native camera DNG (at least when the same sharpening settings are applied)

In Adobe Softwares you won't notice any difference between the files, of course.

So…
1.) quite obviously Capture One handles DNG really well - as long as they are native (camera-) DNGs, so unaltered RAW files.
2.) Capture One handles converted DNGs ("alien DNGs") pretty weak - even converted DNGs that originally come from a camera that utilizes DNG as its native RAW format

So either Capture One can't read certain proprietary data from converted DNGs … or the respective data is simply not contained anymore in the converted DNG.

Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: john beardsworth on December 21, 2012, 11:00:22 am
So either Capture One can't read certain proprietary data from converted DNGs … or the respective data is simply not contained anymore in the converted DNG.
Or "won't"....
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on December 21, 2012, 11:03:04 am
A native DNG is a DNG created in camera. So it's the original RAW file the respective camera writes to the card.
An alien DNG is a DNG created for instance through the DNG converter or exported form Lightroom or other softwares.

How is it alien if it follows the proper specifications? Is a TIFF opened in Photoshop then saved as a PSD make the PSD alien? I'm unclear on what you are trying to explain.

Quote
1.) quite obviously Capture One handles DNG really well - as long as they are native (camera-) DNGs, so unaltered RAW files.

I still don't understand how this is a DNG issue if whatever product or host converts into the DNG to the spec properly. We still have raw data in the DNG. We may have lost some proprietary metadata the original manufacturer's raw converter might use (but no one else). If I decide I don't want to use that converter, what's the problem?

Quote
So either Capture One can't read certain proprietary data from converted DNGs … or the respective data is simply not contained anymore in the converted DNG.

IOW, it's fully the fault of Capture One, not the DNG? ACR/LR can't read the proprietary metadata from my CR2's nor does that information do it any good anyway. What am I missing?
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: tho_mas on December 21, 2012, 11:03:44 am
Or "won't"....
but it does read the respective prorietary data from "original" DNGs ... how so?
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: tho_mas on December 21, 2012, 11:08:21 am
ACR/LR can't read the proprietary metadata from my CR2's nor does that information do it any good anyway.
well, when the proprietary metadata from your CR2's is not useful ... why does Canon writes it to the file? Apparently it's a pure waste of card space ...
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Tony Jay on December 21, 2012, 11:11:55 am
well, when the proprietary metadata from your CR2's is not useful ... why does Canon writes it to the file? Apparently it's a pure waste of card space ...

Not if you use Canon's proprietary RAW conversion software!
(I use Lightroom BTW.)

Tony Jay
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: tho_mas on December 21, 2012, 11:16:28 am
Not if you use Canon's proprietary RAW conversion software!
I know!
So: at least Canon (who designed and built the respective camera and mixed the "secret sauce" contained in the RAW files) regards these data as something useful. Just as Phase One does (and others, too).
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: john beardsworth on December 21, 2012, 11:27:43 am
Or "won't"....
but it does read the respective prorietary data from "original" DNGs ... how so?
See my "two doors (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=73387.msg583112#msg583112)" post above.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on December 21, 2012, 11:40:35 am
well, when the proprietary metadata from your CR2's is not useful ... why does Canon writes it to the file? Apparently it's a pure waste of card space ...

Correct, the proprietary data is not useful and not understood outside the manufacturer's converter (and the usefulness is up to debate). Having a proprietary metadata picture style that the manufacturer's converter can use as an initial rendering in their converter is useless to me for several reasons. 1. I don't use this converter. 2. I have no desire to mimic a camera JPEG (I'd just shoot JPEG). But the DNG has all the raw data I need otherwise. There's metadata for white balance that is not proprietary and again, for raw, not real useful as it has no effect on the raw data. It is a suggestion one can use in a converter. Or not use. And each converter will decipher that data and produce differing rendering all from identical data.

If I send you my address in a language or format you can't understand, what good is it? It isn't.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on December 21, 2012, 11:43:50 am
So: at least Canon (who designed and built the respective camera and mixed the "secret sauce" contained in the RAW files) regards these data as something useful. Just as Phase One does (and others, too).

Of course they do. That doesn't necessarily make it a bit useful to their customers. If you spend some time working with various converters, all of which can't understand this proprietary data, you can then say if this is useful data or not. But what Canon and PhaseOne tell us is spin and marketing.

IF they really want to prove the superiority of this data, let us have a switch on the camera to pick proprietary raw or DNG and if this data is so special, we the end user can decide.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: tho_mas on December 21, 2012, 12:00:01 pm
the proprietary data is not useful and not understood outside the manufacturer's converter
that's obviously how Adobe sees things. That's okay. They have never made a camera, it's a software company.
Look: C1 can read DNGs as long as these DNGs are native camera DNGs. Obviously Phase One utilzes some data that gets lost in a converted DNG (and Phase One is not the manufacturer of Leica cameras as we all know).
The question is: why does the DNG Converter throws away data? Who defines which data is useful and which data is not? Adobe?
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: john beardsworth on December 21, 2012, 12:09:20 pm
Last time I looked, it didn't throw away anything. Stuff like the maker notes is left in the file, for anyone who wants to read it.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on December 21, 2012, 12:09:49 pm
that's obviously how Adobe sees things. That's okay. They have never made a camera, it's a software company.
Look: C1 can read DNGs as long as these DNGs are native camera DNGs. Obviously Phase One utilzes some data that gets lost in a converted DNG (and Phase One is not the manufacturer of Leica cameras as we all know).
The question is: why does the DNG Converter throws away data? Who defines which data is useful and which data is not? Adobe?

IF I take ANY proprietary raw file (NOT a DNG) and use ANY raw converter except the manufacturer's, the proprietary data is not used. So how is this an Adobe issue? Or a DNG issue?

Whatever data is 'thrown away' is data no one expect the manufacturer can use. Do you understand that key fact?
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Vladimirovich on December 21, 2012, 05:35:44 pm
IF I take ANY proprietary raw file (NOT a DNG) and use ANY raw converter except the manufacturer's, the proprietary data is not used.

how do you know that ? take SilkyPix (non OEM version, but what ISL sells) - how do you know that SilkyPix which is OEM for Fuji for example is not using Fuji's data... please do not generalize Adobe on others.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Vladimirovich on December 21, 2012, 05:39:12 pm
Last time I looked, it didn't throw away anything.

example - once upon a time Adobe was removing black, masked to light part of the data read of sensor during raw -> "non raw" DNG conversion (for example for Pentax cameras, that is when Pentax itself was writing it both in .PEF and .DNG raw files)... then without any notice they stopped doing this... so unless you checked (or probably looked through DNG SDK code) you did not know... and there are a lot of things that you, average Joe, do not know... was/is it important data ? for some applications it was.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on December 21, 2012, 05:59:04 pm
how do you know that ? take SilkyPix (non OEM version, but what ISL sells) - how do you know that SilkyPix which is OEM for Fuji for example is not using Fuji's data... please do not generalize Adobe on others.

What part of proprietary metadata isn't clear? Even if the data isn't proprietary, doesn't mean it is useful or can be used. I can save out the metadata instructions of edits which Lightroom and ACR can share and use. It's in English, I can see Vibrance +12. But no other raw processor uses the Adobe engine so Vibrance +12 is useless. Even if that application had a setting called Vibrance, and even if it set itself to +12, the engines are proprietary and different.

DNG doesn't remove anything that stops any processor that correctly reads that data to render the raw data using it's engine.

Quote
so unless you checked (or probably looked through DNG SDK code) you did not know...

My personal comment is, so what, it's not the least bit important to me. And if it were, then yes, I'd be looking at the SDK (assuming I could do anything with out, something an engineer of a raw module should be able to do).
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: tho_mas on December 21, 2012, 06:52:08 pm
Whatever data is 'thrown away' is data no one expect the manufacturer can use. Do you understand that key fact?
do you understand the key fact that Capture One IS using some of the proprietary data camera manufacturers write into RAW files?
see for instance here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=73387.0;attach=71725;image
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on December 21, 2012, 06:58:08 pm
do you understand the key fact that Capture One IS using some of the proprietary data camera manufacturers write into RAW files?
see for instance here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=73387.0;attach=71725;image

So what?
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: corwin on July 02, 2014, 02:25:02 pm
The primary, at least for me, reason to convert to DNG is that the DNG format is documented.  Many of the RAW files are not.  I do not intend to loose my images to hostage or abandon ware.

Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Vladimirovich on July 02, 2014, 02:52:27 pm
The primary, at least for me, reason to convert to DNG is that the DNG format is documented.  Many of the RAW files are not.  I do not intend to loose my images to hostage or abandon ware.
good logic - Adobe converts only what they know about, so no extra knowledge or safety are added.

PS: what do you think about Adobe CC - are you feel good about being hostage to your ability to pay in the future ?
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Vladimirovich on July 02, 2014, 02:55:47 pm
DNG doesn't remove anything that stops any processor that correctly reads that data to render the raw data using it's engine.
going to the old piece - if my software was using that data (for example to fight banding) that old versions of Adobe DNG converter were discarding then convertingto DNG is stopping me.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on July 02, 2014, 02:56:14 pm
good logic - Adobe converts only what they know about, so no extra knowledge or safety are added.
What it doesn't know, we can't use and that data could be stored for something that does. The bottom line is, the conversion provides us the raw data necessary to render it. All the other bits are capable of being stored and of questionable usefulness.
Quote
PS: what do you think about Adobe CC - are you feel good about being hostage to your ability to pay in the future ?
No one is being held hostage. No one has a gun to their heads. Going down that path is pointless and been done far too many times in far too many threads here and around the internet.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: ErikKaffehr on July 03, 2014, 12:23:34 am
Well, DNG is a published standard, nothing to do with Adobe CC. So I don't feel you have a point.

Personally, I feel a well documented standard is a good thing.

Best regards
Erik

good logic - Adobe converts only what they know about, so no extra knowledge or safety are added.

PS: what do you think about Adobe CC - are you feel good about being hostage to your ability to pay in the future ?

Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on July 03, 2014, 09:50:44 am
Well, DNG is a published standard, nothing to do with Adobe CC. So I don't feel you have a point.
Apparently we havn't had enough Adobe blood letting around here so the comment implies we need to 'go there' again. We don't. It's the new "Mac vs. Windows", "Nikon vs. Canon" trolling questions that just clog up the forums. 
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Vladimirovich on July 03, 2014, 11:19:36 am
Well, DNG is a published standard, nothing to do with Adobe CC. So I don't feel you have a point.

the point was about being able to access something and not about documented standard... being a published standard didn't prevent Adobe from not saving something (just because somebody there was thinking that the data was not useful - then they changed their mind w/o much fanfare) or from using documented fields to save undocumented BLOBs

Personally, I feel a well documented standard is a good thing.

very true... and so is the preservation of the data which Adobe didn't do (previously) - so backup of the original raws the way they were created by camera's firmware is the right thing to do - it is a different question from using DNG in your workflow (after you save the originals) or from manufacturers documenting their data in whatever format of raw they choose to use.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: Vladimirovich on July 03, 2014, 11:26:59 am
What it doesn't know, we can't use and that data could be stored for something that does. The bottom line is, the conversion provides us the raw data necessary to render it.

1) today, 2) by Adobe software... you always forget to add that fine print  ;)

because there are software solutions that can use that data... using masked to light data to fix banding was demonstrated for example for Pentax cameras... now of course Adobe preserve that... but they used to delete it before... so that's the point.

All the other bits are capable of being stored

there is a difference between "capable of being stored" and actually storing as Adobe perfectly demonstrated

and of questionable usefulness.

 ;D
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on July 03, 2014, 11:29:30 am
very true... and so is the preservation of the data which Adobe didn't do (previously) - so backup of the original raws the way they were created by camera's firmware is the right thing to do - it is a different question from using DNG in your workflow (after you save the originals) or from manufacturers documenting their data in whatever format of raw they choose to use.
Sure they did. Embed the raw in the DNG if you're so concerned with proprietary data that's basically useless outside any product that doesn't understand that data. Save off the raw as a separate archive. And again, there are provisions in DNG via private tags to put all this basically useless proprietary metadata into the package.
Bottom line: I don't, and many, many users do not have any need or desire to use the camera manufacturer's raw converter. And as such we have no use for proprietary data only it could use. I've been an ACR and LR user from prior to their release. I have at least two other raw converters that support DNG just like the Adobe products, just in case Adobe goes belly up and I can't use their raw converter. All I care about is accessing the DNG raw data in the raw processor(s) of my choice and there's nothing standing in the way of doing that simply by converting to DNG.
Title: Re: DNG Settings
Post by: digitaldog on July 03, 2014, 11:32:09 am
1) today, 2) by Adobe software... you always forget to add that fine print  ;)
No, as I stated while you were incorrectly typing that above, I have at least two other raw converters that will accept the DNG's I've been using for years without any issues whatsoever.
Quote
because there are software solutions that can use that data... using masked to light data to fix banding was demonstrated for example for Pentax cameras... now of course Adobe preserve that... but they used to delete it before... so that's the point.
I don't use Pentex, I don't care about light data banding fixes, they don't apply. The converters I use don't support that either. Do you shoot with Pentext?