CR2 vs DNG

jopapeca

I use lightroom and import the files as .CR2, and process also without converting the files to DNG. So i guess if i want to 'transport' the files as RAW i should export also the sidecar file to go along with the CR2 file.

I had search here and also in google, and after read a lot about using DNG or using CR2+XMP i'm not sure what is best way to go.

For one way the DNG makes easier 'not to lost the edits and metadata', but in other way i seem that CR2+XMP is the most used, or am I wrong?:dunno

What is your prefered workflow in importing process?

Thunder Rabbit

Howdy.

DNG is a great idea, but, as you have found in your research, the advantages it offers deal mostly with the future. File compatibility is the primary advantage it offers. But this advantage will not be fully realized until DNG has been more widely accepted. At present, most major camera manufacturers resist DNG, preferring their own proprietary formats. Adobe makes the argument that just because you know how to make cameras doesn't mean you can develop the optimum image file format. They've got a point, but it doesn't change the present reality.

So, if you convert your raw images to DNG, it is supposed that in 20 years all image software programs will read DNG, and all cameras will be capable of writing DNG. And you will never have to worry about support for an obsolete proprietary format. (And there will be ice cream & cake for everyone.) Great idea. We'll see how it pans out.

But so far as the here and now, on my computer, it takes noticably longer to import as DNG. Makes sense. It's doing a lot more work.

Also, Windows Vista Explorer and picture viewer will not read DNG files. They will read .NEF, the Nikon RAW format. I'd expect they will read .CR2 also. I view my images in Explorer of a variety of reasons, and if the file is DNG, I don't see a thumbnail. Just the DNG file icon. Bummer. (There's probably a plug-in for this. I just haven't tracked it down.)

So for now, I import in the camera's native RAW format and write the metadata to XMP sidecar files.

If I see Nikon getting ready to fold, I'll go ahead and convert to DNG.

To see Adobe's spiel on DNG, click here.

jopapeca

Thanks Lee,

I guess, I'll keep using CR2 + XMP files, look like the better solution for now.

arodney

I import and convert to DNG on the fly into Lightroom.
http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200709_adobedng.pdf

jopapeca

arodney wrote:

I import and convert to DNG on the fly into Lightroom.
http://www.ppmag.com/reviews/200709_adobedng.pdf

Yeah, at the import from CF one could convert right away to DNG, in that way the number of steps is the same. But in other way if one wants to keep the original files, then we need to save all the CR2 files to dvd, or whatever.

I think the big question like Lee said is about compability and performance, as far as i could understand for the many articles i found here and in other sites, at least for now isn't the better option.

I found that most of the people are using the sidecar file approac, either CR2+XMP or NEF+XMP.

arodney

jopapeca wrote:

But in other way if one wants to keep the original files, then we need to save all the CR2 files to dvd, or whatever.

That's an option for import in LR2. You point to a drive, the original Raws are untouched, just copied to the location you specify. Once DNG's are built, you're in a better shape to format the card since this does some integrity checking on conversion.

Anthony

Keeping an original, untouched RAW file as an archive copy, together with a working copy (DNG?) would seem logical and fundamental to me. Secondly, Windows Vista shows the DNG files fine on my machine, so no problem there.

As a workflow object in an ACR or LR setting, a DNG file with the XMP data inside the envelope seems to me to be pretty efficient way of proceeding. Effectively it becomes the 'Master' version from which appropriate derivatives are produced, depending on current or future requirements.

In summary, there seems to be nothing particularly wrong with the DNG route and some things to commend it.

Anthony.

encosion

Getting into the topic a tad late... But, it makes a lot more sense to me to use DNG... I wish I had researched it sooner as I recently dumped all the Lightroom meta data for the files I had archived onto external drive... I'm guessing that if I had chosen DNG conversion on import, I would have stored those meta data changes in the DNG files, and I wouldn't have lost all those Lightroom tweaks, crops and manipulations... (Or am I not understanding things here? Lightroom didn't create any sidecar files)

The more people who start using DNG, the more likely it'll be adopted. Mentioning it as a feature request to your camera manufacturer won't hurt either!