Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: To DNG or not to DNG?  (Read 13325 times)

Hoggy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 207
  • Never take life, or anything in it, too seriously.
Re: To DNG or not to DNG?
« Reply #40 on: February 05, 2016, 03:37:49 pm »

Just a comment on the subject "To DNG or not to DNG" ????. This is subject that has been in contention and ongoing for over 10 years since Adobe has been lobbying for the format to be adopted as a universal standard, without success.

Yeah..  I've been wondering about this for a long time now.  What the hell is taking so damn long?

Is it being held up at the intake of the ISO, or is it currently being discussed by the ISO, or what?

It's taking so fricken long I just gotta say WTF!  WTF!!

Either way, I'm still going to be using it, but still...  This is ri-fricken-diculous.
Logged
Cams: Pentax K-3, K-30 & Canon G7X, S100
Firm supporter of DNG, throwing away originals.
It's the hash, man..  That good hash!

Denis de Gannes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
Re: To DNG or not to DNG?
« Reply #41 on: February 05, 2016, 03:47:04 pm »

Yeah..  I've been wondering about this for a long time now.  What the hell is taking so damn long?

Is it being held up at the intake of the ISO, or is it currently being discussed by the ISO, or what?

It's taking so fricken long I just gotta say WTF!  WTF!!

Either way, I'm still going to be using it, but still...  This is ri-fricken-diculous.

In my opinion it being hampered because the Camera Manufacturers are not on board.
Logged
Equip: iMac (Ret. 5K,27"Mid 2015),macOS 10.15.6

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4755
    • My photography site
Re: To DNG or not to DNG?
« Reply #42 on: February 05, 2016, 03:57:46 pm »

I started with LR4, and I somewhat recall something about that..  So it might have been around LR3.  Possibly 4, but I just can't remember.

No. There has never been any time when Lightroom wrote to DNGs without warning. It has always been by the user enabling the auto preference or by manually invoking one of the two metadata settings. No bugs, no change of default behaviour.
Logged

Denis de Gannes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 319
Re: To DNG or not to DNG?
« Reply #43 on: February 05, 2016, 04:58:26 pm »

Agreed it was Adobe CameraRaw that wrote to the file or sidecar when working with the raw files.
The ACR process was referred to as "the info is in the file" and the Lightroom process "the info is in the Catalog".
Logged
Equip: iMac (Ret. 5K,27"Mid 2015),macOS 10.15.6

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20648
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: To DNG or not to DNG?
« Reply #44 on: February 05, 2016, 06:48:50 pm »

Is it being held up at the intake of the ISO, or is it currently being discussed by the ISO, or what?
Yes and yes is my understanding. That process can take place at glacial speeds. Best hear back from Schewe about the particulars.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20648
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: To DNG or not to DNG?
« Reply #45 on: February 05, 2016, 06:49:31 pm »

No. There has never been any time when Lightroom wrote to DNGs without warning. It has always been by the user enabling the auto preference or by manually invoking one of the two metadata settings. No bugs, no change of default behaviour.
Thanks! That kind of was my memory of how it worked too. Doesn't make any sense that Adobe would force this upon users for obvious reasons.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up