Adobe DNG (Digital Negative Converter) Problems

[duboisst]

I noticed some negative results with Adobe DNG. I recommend comparing the images after converting them. I experienced some digital loss and had to convert them in ViewNX - Tiff before bringing into CS6 for post-production.

Here were my preferences:

Compatibility: Camera Raw 7.1 and later
JPEG Preview: Med Size
Don't embed fast data load
Don't use Lossy compression
Preserve Pixel Count
Embed original

[john beardsworth]

There's a difference between Adobe's processing and Nikon's. That's all you've seen.

[duboisst]

Ah.. Thanks John

[Doug Peterson]

Now that you know this you can also start to play around with other raw convertors. Each gives a unique interpretation to the raw file. Capture One, for instance, is widely regarded for its excellent color engine and in-house made color profiles.

[buckshot]

Now that you know this you can also start to play around with other raw convertors. Each gives a unique interpretation to the raw file. Capture One, for instance, is widely regarded for its excellent color engine and in-house made color profiles.

How does it do with files from the much lauded Pentax 645Z ?

[Johnny_Johnson]

Now that you know this you can also start to play around with other raw convertors. Each gives a unique interpretation to the raw file. Capture One, for instance, is widely regarded for its excellent color engine and in-house made color profiles.

Too bad that it has (to me) that God awful interface. I guess that I could learn it but at this stage life is just too short.

Later,
Johnny

[eliedinur]

Too bad that it has (to me) that God awful interface. I guess that I could learn it but at this stage life is just too short.

Later,
Johnny

The only time I equate different with awful is when my daughter brings home a new boyfriend.

[Louis Viljoen]

Hi Guys, I am new to this forum, pardon me if I do something(s) wrong. I have a question. I have  just started to try out Adobe DNG. I started out with an ordinary landscape on Nikon's Nef, convert with ADNG, and then with the same file on Jpeg for comparison ,worked on them with Adobe Elements and the results looked promising with the DNG conversion visually slightly better. I tried the same on an early evening shot of the full moon and the DNG conversion was horrible with the nice dark blue sky now a washed out light blue full of noise. I stopped there. Is the DNG conversion a "neutral" change from one file type to another file tipe or can the conversion be manipulated? Thanks. Louis Viljoen

[digitaldog]

Is the DNG conversion a "neutral" change from one file type to another file tipe or can the conversion be manipulated?

Yes. Think if it just like a raw but a different packaging or container. It's raw. If it looks ugly, it's due to the current settings in a raw converter and how it is interpreting that data. If in another converter it looks better, that's the converter not the data itself changing. Raw is raw. DNG is raw (if you set it so you do not produce lossy DNG).

[Louis Viljoen]

Hi there, thanks Andrew. Just a remark from my side. I am not a photo processing boffin, so I  am far from being able to get the best out of my digital negatives. But I did some experimenting, mostly with landscapes, with different file types and different programs and my conclusion was that for ordinary use for mainly personal photo albums or even coffee table albums, Jpegs from my D7000 with straightforward enhancing using Adobe Elements, yields the same results. In the end you are also in the hands of your commercial printer that compresses your files before printing. Enjoy you day. Louis

[AlterEgo]

Is the DNG conversion a "neutral" change from one file type to another file tipe or can the conversion be manipulated?

if you are using Adobe raw converters then there is no difference (except possible bugs) between the end result obtained from 1) NEF and from 2) DNG converted from NEF provided that ACR/LR and Adobe DNG converter are of the same generation.... however that might not be true if you are using non Adobe raw converters or DNG was obtained by, for example, some old version of Adobe DNG converter (or old versions of LR/ACR - as they can do conversion to DNG).... Adobe's original "raw to DNG" conversion had quite some changes over the years, including things that Adobe quietly stopped doing (like stripping some data that was read off masked to light parts of the sensor)... for people living solely in Adobe's realm it does not matter (mostly, at least so far) - for some people outside it might matter though... in any case do keep the original raws archived exactly as they were produced by camera's firmware.