NEF vs DNG

[Brian]

All the DNG lovers like to claim that in the future the native raw formats can sometime in the future be no longer supported. Seriously?

You mean if Nikon closed it's doors today, my copies of Capture and View will suddenly fail? Overnight, all my NEF files will be nothing more than a bunch of useless 1s and 0s on my hard drives?

To that, they respond that if Nikon closes shop, then no other software will be available that can 'read' NEF files. Really? How did Adobe do it then? And Raw Therapee? And Picasa? And Picturenaut? And IrfanView? Will my copies of all these other softwares suddenly quit working? If decoding NEF files is such a well-kept corporate secret, then Nikon utterly failed with internal security!!!

When I ask, "Well, who's to say DNG will last forever?" Their response, "'Cuz it's Adobe!" So? Ever hear of a company called Kodak?

Fact of the matter is, no one can predict what file formats will still be viable, readable and usable in the future. NO ONE.


As for me, I'll stick to NEF. If, on the outside chance that in my lifetime, Nikon goes belly-up, THEN I will worry about converting them. Yes, my computer will still turn on, boot up, and clicking on the NX2 icon will still launch Capture or View.

As long as you can keep the computer and OS running that the software is on now, you'll be fine. When those computers die, and the OS no longer runs older software- then you have a problem.

I keep a Pentium Pro running Win95b around for just this reason.

DNG is documented. I have the Spec downloaded, can read it, and write code to display images. It was a little harder with Kodak files because the file-format was not documented. anybody need ".KC2" files converted to ".BMP"? BMP was the easiest to output to. Compressed Raw files are usually the most difficult to figure out. If the format is documented, then it is not hard. Anybody have a link to the documentation for .NEF?

 

[480sparky]

As long as you can keep the computer and OS running that the software is on now, you'll be fine. When those computers die, and the OS no longer runs older software- then you have a problem.

I keep a Pentium Pro running Win95b around for just this reason.

DNG is documented. I have the Spec downloaded, can read it, and write code to display images. It was a little harder with Kodak files because the file-format was not documented. anybody need ".KC2" files converted to ".BMP"? BMP was the easiest to output to. Compressed Raw files are usually the most difficult to figure out. If the format is documented, then it is not hard. Anybody have a link to the documentation for .NEF?

Exactly the Sky Is Falling response that's typical.

This all isn't going to happen overnight. No one is going to wake up tomorrow and find their computers crashing, and all the software currently on the market has been sucked up into a UFO and taken to the Ketimar System in Orion.

IF. If. If Nikon goes south, my computer will still operate. And if. If.... IF for some unworldly reason my computer just happens to die the same day Nikon shutters it's offices, I'm fairly certain there will still be other computers on the market, as well as other software on the market, that can deal with my archive of NEFs.

Personally, I think I'll take my chances on the 99.999999% odds that I'll have the hardware, software and TIME to convert my NEFs fo DNG (or whatever format is the Flavor of the Month at the time), instead of worrying about the 0.000001% chance I'll lose my images.

As for the Kodak reference, I'm not speaking to the Kodak raw file. I'm speaking about the fact that just because a company is big doesn't mean it will be around forever. Adobe is a company, not an immortal god. They can fail just like Nikon and Canon and all the other companies out there can.... and Kodak was just an example I put forth.

If NEF files cannot (or are so blessed difficult) to decode, there wouldn't be all that 3rd-party software out there.... software that even the likes of Adobe produces. We have no guarantees that DNG is the future-proof file format it's claiming to be.

 

[Brian]

No falling skies, I've used digital cameras long enough to see support dropped for the older ones. And with an "open-source" file format, i can use files from a new camera with software written 10 years ago. I can use CS2 to process linear DNG files. As long as there is software available to do what you want, and it runs on new OS and hardware platforms- You will be Okay. I will be Okay because I am very good at going through Hex dumps of image files and writing my own decoders.

 

[ditonics]

RAW or DNG

What work flow are you using?
I'm thinking of converting all my RAW to DNG straight of the camera. Is this now common practise?

Thanks

 

[sonicbuffalo_RIP]

Re: RAW or DNG

@ditonics - I shoot both....but lately have been converting to dng. There isn't much difference in quality, but you should consider the following article. In it, Nasim describes both and he is a well respected reviewer.

Look here.

 

[RockyNH_RIP]

Re: RAW or DNG

Interesting Chris... I am still all RAW and really did not (and still likely do not) understand DNG but the article was good.. I will watch this thread with interest!


Pat in GA

 

[J-see]

Re: RAW or DNG

I don't use DNG if possible since something is lost in translation. My DNG results are always smaller in file-size than my NEF even when both shots were identical.

 

[Woodyg3]

Re: RAW or DNG

DNG is lossless, nothing is lost in translation. Since it is proprietary, I stick with RAW, though.

 

[J-see]

Re: RAW or DNG

DNG is lossless, nothing is lost in translation. Since it is proprietary, I stick with RAW, though.

Give it a try. Use one NEF, convert one to DNG and then convert both to TiFF in another editor.

 

[BackdoorArts]

Re: RAW or DNG

I stick with RAW. Why? DNG conversion is considered a "conversion" while the RAW file is considered original. I was converting to DNG after hearing a recommendation from Scott Kelby on the convenience of it early on in my photography. As I progressed, I found some contest sites that required submission of the original RAW file as authentication. DNG's were specifically disallowed unless they were of the type that embedded the original RAW (which gives you an even bigger file). This rendered 90% of my back catalog inadmissible to these sites.

The only time I will convert is when software does not support a new camera type. It took Adobe almost 4 months to support the D750 in Camera RAW and Lightroom. They released a DNG converter 2 months earlier using a Beta version of ACR, so I could convert and then do my lightroom edits. I saved my NEF files anyway and when LR updated I spend a week applying my DNG edits to my NEF files (only on finished images). It's an issue for early adopters only.

Strong advice, if you want to convert, back up your RAW files anyway if you think you'll ever want to use the images in contests.

 

[BackdoorArts]

Re: RAW or DNG

Oh, and for what it's worth, I saw little difference in the images. What I might have gained in space (not much) I lost in import times. Just not worth it to me.

 

[ditonics]

Re: RAW or DNG

I was asking due to the software I currently have.
My lightroom will do RAW from my D810 but I have an older copy of Photoshop that I have to use DNG in.

So currently converting to DNG straight off the memory cards.

 

[RocketCowboy]

Re: RAW or DNG

I was asking due to the software I currently have.
My lightroom will do RAW from my D810 but I have an older copy of Photoshop that I have to use DNG in.

So currently converting to DNG straight off the memory cards.

When that's what you have to do to get the software to work, it makes sense.

I still with my native NEFs though, and will consider converting to DNG only if something changes with Nikon's RAW in the future that makes backwards compatibility questionable.

 

[T-Man]

Re: RAW or DNG

This is a topic that confuses the everloving crap out of me!

First, every author who has commented on this topic that I've read insists that converting from NEF to DNG involves no quality/image data loss whatsoever, yet is somehow 20% smaller file size. I don't understand how that can be the case, unless the original NEF RAW format somehow contains a bunch of superfluous data unrelated to image pixels. How is it possible to reduce the file size without data loss? The advocates for DNG conversion also insist that a DNG file will also be more future-proof in the event you need to create another edit from a RAW file decades into the future. Since DNG is an open source RAW file, the argument goes, it will not be affected by potential changes in proprietary RAW formats that may render previous versions of the native RAW files inaccessible for edit in the future.

I can understand the contest requirement and import time reasons for not converting to DNG, but if the arguments for doing it are all true and if file size is a concern, is there any other disadvantage to conversion? On the import time issue, my import time doesn't seem to be that excessive, but I have the "Embed Fast Load Data" checkbox selected in the "File Handling" menu. I don't know that I completely understand that option or if there are any disadvantages to having it selected. I also don't remember ever voluntarily selecting that option or if it was selected as default, but I have it selected. On the processing speed issue, here's an article that argues converting to DNG actually makes LR work faster: Make Lightroom Faster by Using DNG - Digital Photography School Is this not the case?

Right now, I am doing the conversion to DNG when importing into Lightroom and always have since I started using LR... and I don't know how to turn that function off. I looked through all the menu options, and I see the "convert to DNG" selections under the "Lightroom>Preferences>File Handling" and "Library" menus, but I see no way to deselect the DNG conversion option and import the NEF files. I see the "Embed Original Raw File" checkbox, but I want one or the other, not both. If I do decide to retain NEF file formats on import, how do I do it?

Finally, in the "Lightroom>Preferences>File Handling" menu, under the "File Extension" drop down menu, I get a choice between selecting "dng" or "DNG" file extensions. What is the difference between all undercase and all caps and why would I select one vs another?

Using and mastering post-processing software, deciphering the meaning of all the menu options, and understanding the pros and cons of the myriad of choices I have to make to get the most out of my photos is THE one aspect of digital photography that frustrates me more than all other aspects of photography combined!

Thanks in advance for all input on these questions.

HELP!

 

[ryan20fun]

Re: RAW or DNG

How is it possible to reduce the file size without data loss?

Via LOSSLESS compression system, DNG also has an option for a more aggressive LOSSY compresion algorithem.

Finally, in the "Lightroom>Preferences>File Handling" menu, under the "File Extension" drop down menu, I get a choice between selecting "dng" or "DNG" file extensions. What is the difference between all undercase and all caps and why would I select one vs another?

Absolutly noting
It is just there for user conveniance, Some people prefere all caps extensions.
But the old FAT file system has every extension as uppercase, So option may be fore extra FAT support.

HTH

 

[Horoscope Fish]

Re: RAW or DNG

I understand all the typical reasons batted around for converting to DNG but none of them seem particularly compelling to me and from what I can tell the option to convert to DNG isn't going away any time soon so I'm really under no pressure to do so. Once converted, though, there's no getting my RAW file back.

So yeah, without a compelling reason I won't be switching to DNG; and hard drive space is not eeeeven reason enough for me... Not with 4TB hard drives selling for $125.
.....

 

[Don Kuykendall_RIP]

Re: RAW or DNG

I understand all the typical reasons batted around for converting to DNG but none of them seem particularly compelling to me and, from what I can tell the option to convert a RAW file to DNG isn't going away so I'm really under no pressure to do. Once converted, though, there's no getting my RAW file back.

So yeah, without a compelling reason, I won't be switching to DNG; and hard drive space for me, is not eeeeven compelling... Not with 4TB hard drives selling for $125.
.....

I am with you on this one. I just can't find a compelling reason to change. NEF/RAW it where I will stay.

 

[Felisek]

Re: RAW or DNG

All software I use, both for processing and viewing, accept NEF files without a hiccup. I don't see any reason to convert my images to the DNG format. The only potential reason I can understand is that in some distant future software will stop understanding the NEF format. I'm pretty sure there will be plenty of warnings before it happens and I can do the conversion later if I have to.

DNG might use lossless compression, but this is no guarantee that nothing is being lost in the process of conversion. Has anyone of you ever tried converting MS Word document into one of the open source counterparts, e.g. LibreOffice? It kind of works, but inevitably, there will be something screwed up - missing fonts, wrongly formatted tables and so on. This is why I'm deeply suspicious about NEF to DNG conversion. Something might be missing.

NEF files are my raw, unadulterated data. I want to keep it this way.

 

[J-see]

Re: RAW or DNG

Here's someone that dived into the DNG compression part.

How DNG compresses raw data with lossless JPEG92 - ThNdl

It's fairly good but not 100% accurate and it again shows that everyone of them juggles with lossless but at the same time has their own interpretation of it. Nikon too has a reputation of lossless that in reality has always been visually lossless.

Still, it's not the compression part that bothers me as much as the conversion. This ridiculous concept of guarding NEFs as if they're state secrets and thus forcing everyone else to find out what to and how the data applies inevitable leads to variations and loss between formats.

 

[T-Man]

Re: RAW or DNG

So...if I elect to turn off the DNG conversion during Lightroom import and go back to NEF, how do I do it? I've looked online for help and haven't found a definitive answer. Unless I'm missing something, I don't see any other option in the LR preferences menu. Please advise. Thanks!