Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Cameras, lenses and system accessories > Software

Software Discuss Olympus Master, Studio and Viewer software applications as well as third party programs like Adobe Photoshop, Lightroom, Apple Aperture, and others.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 7th December 2010
andym's Avatar
andym andym is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Epping Forest
Posts: 4,355
Thanks: 37
Thanked 346 Times in 258 Posts
Likes: 39
Liked 1,010 Times in 300 Posts
DNG's

What are peoples feeling about dng files,does anyone use them?I've been playing about with the 6.3 release which supports the conversion of orfs to dng from the E5 and going through my normal Raw developement process from there.
The colours look slightly different but with a bit of work I can get then to look virtually the same.
I feel this may be the solution for me to more or less keep my workflow the same without upgrading/changing my software.
I've been using Viewer 2 and although it gives nice O/P it's very clunky.

Any thoughts?
__________________
All the best

Being left handed my brain sometimes works sdrawkcab

Andy

Lots of cameras and lenses.


My Flickr
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 7th December 2010
emirpprime
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: DNG's

I jumped into bed with DNGs in my E1 days shortly after starting to use Lightroom and have never looked back. My rational is that DNGs are no worse than ORFs, and offer some benefits, and I am then freed from the horrendous Oly software.

As a file format I see them as fairly future-proof - certainly more than most manufacturer specific ones - and they are quite compact too. Support has also spread so an Adobe app isn't needed if you want to try other converters / share your RAWs. However, while there are still some benefits, I don't think I would have thought to move over if I wasn't a big fan of the Lightroom and PS workflow.

To keep the Oly feel I just made a tone curve for the E1 that I applied on import to give me a (roughly) "Oly colours" file to start with. However with the E3 I didn't even bother.



You could always keep duplicates for a while to see how you go on. Certainly in Lightroom, if you import the ORFs without converting and then convert afterwards, you get an option to keep both types (in my ancient Lightroom v1 at least!). Try your full workflow inc printing for a while and see what you think.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 7th December 2010
snaarman's Avatar
snaarman snaarman is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Baaarkshire UK
Posts: 6,838
Thanks: 494
Thanked 417 Times in 325 Posts
Likes: 492
Liked 1,291 Times in 498 Posts
Re: DNG's

I use ORF -> DNG -> ACR -> Photoshop. This works with my E510/E600/E620 files seamlessly.

I did a quick compare with E510 -> Jpeg -> Photoshop and the colours seemed identical to me, so I guess I am a DNG convert.

Pete
__________________
Look, I'm an old man. I shouldn't be expected to put up with this.


Pete's photoblog Misleading the public since 2010.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 8th December 2010
StephenL's Avatar
StephenL StephenL is offline
Senior Pixelmonger
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 9,863
Thanks: 984
Thanked 1,126 Times in 921 Posts
Likes: 658
Liked 755 Times in 499 Posts
Re: DNG's

I went through a phase of converting everything to DNG, mainly on the grounds of being able to do away with sidecar files. However, I've gone back to retaining just the ORFs so I can pp them in Viewer if I want an Art Filter effect.
__________________
Stephen

A camera takes a picture. A photographer makes a picture

Fuji X system, + Leica and Bronica film

My Flickr site
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 8th December 2010
OlyPaul's Avatar
OlyPaul OlyPaul is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: West Midlands
Posts: 5,470
Thanks: 140
Thanked 715 Times in 577 Posts
Likes: 177
Liked 875 Times in 355 Posts
Re: DNG's

I used to convert to DNG but as I now like to use other raw converters other than LR I no longer do it.
__________________
Regards Paul.
One day I hope to be the person my dogs think I am.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/paul_silk/
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 8th December 2010
Ian's Avatar
Ian Ian is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, UK
Posts: 11,593
Thanks: 425
Thanked 2,533 Times in 1,274 Posts
Likes: 870
Liked 1,713 Times in 774 Posts
Re: DNG's

It's worth mentioning that it may be a false economy not to upgrade your RAW converter over time. I know some people are still using Photoshop CS2 for RAW work, but the RAW converter in that is pretty poor compared to ACR 6 in the latest versions of Photoshop and PS Elements (and of course Lightroom). The same applies to Adobe's competitors; there have been some big advances in RAW processing algorithms over the years. So DNG can save you some dosh by allowing you to hang on to existing software, but in doing so you may be restricting the image quality you deserve!

Ian
__________________
Founder and editor of:
Olympus UK E-System User Group (http://e-group.uk.net)
Four Thirds User (http://fourthirds-user.com)
Digital Photography Now (http://dpnow.com)
Olympus camera, lens, and accessory hire (http://e-group.uk.net/hire)

Twitter: www.twitter.com/ian_burley
Flickr: www.flickr.com/photos/dpnow/
Pinterest: www.pinterest.com/ianburley/
NEW: My personal BLOG ianburley.com
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 8th December 2010
Makonde
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: DNG's

Like others I flirted with DNG then went back to just proprietary RAW files for pure convenience (and to avoid having too many hefty file versions).

My question would be: what exactly is lost when you convert from proprietary to DNG? (Not just things like the art filters).

I've noted elsewhere that (after only a day intensive trail!) I'm finding the Truepic processing in the E-5 to be really hard to equal let alone beat in ACR6.3-PhotoshopCS5. So I'm wondering what might be lost in converting from proprietary format & processor?

If most manufacturers adopted the DNG format that would be great. However, they don't.

I don't often go back to old RAW files, in practice. If a pic is a keeper I'll save the final version as a tiff. If I really value a pic I might save a DNG as well as the RAW and the processed tiff.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10th December 2010
Gazza_DJ's Avatar
Gazza_DJ Gazza_DJ is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Colchester
Posts: 156
Thanks: 0
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times in 5 Posts
Re: DNG's

Why don't people just use ORFs with ACR? I dont see the benefit of converting to DNG?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10th December 2010
Dick Bowman Dick Bowman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: N/a
Posts: 124
Thanks: 0
Thanked 7 Times in 6 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Re: DNG's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazza_DJ View Post
Why don't people just use ORFs with ACR? I dont see the benefit of converting to DNG?
Insurance against the possibility that ORF could become an obsolete format? Or (relatedly) to be able to use software that can't read ORFs?

To have the same file format whichever camera brand they're using?

I went through a phase of converting to ORF - I think it was when I mostly used the E-1. An advantage (I think I remember) was that DNGs were compressed, so the actual file size was significantly smaller. But I stopped bothering.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10th December 2010
andym's Avatar
andym andym is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Epping Forest
Posts: 4,355
Thanks: 37
Thanked 346 Times in 258 Posts
Likes: 39
Liked 1,010 Times in 300 Posts
Re: DNG's

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazza_DJ View Post
Why don't people just use ORFs with ACR? I dont see the benefit of converting to DNG?
Cause I don't use ACR.I know a lot of people don't like this but I am very happy with Silkypix and I know we have one or two other users.
The problem is I have Silkypix DS3 which is old and does not support the E5.I can upgrade to DS4 for a price which will support the E5 and probably will at some stage but with Christmas coming and the fact that I've forked out for an E5 it will have to wait.
The solution of ORF/DNG which DS3 will process seems to work ok and I will stick with it for the moment.
I have been using the trial version of DS4 and will also try the trial of the Pro version.

I'm also hearing good things about Raw Therapee3 but that is still in the alpha stage.If this is good it will be free(donation)and I'll try that.
__________________
All the best

Being left handed my brain sometimes works sdrawkcab

Andy

Lots of cameras and lenses.


My Flickr
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10th December 2010
ndl0071
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: DNG's

As I'm now shooting with Leica and Pentax as well as Oly I find it convienient to transfer all RAW files into DNGs (I'd done this for a while with the E30 anyway) However it's interesting that the K5 has the option to directly shoot in DNG instead of the Pentax RAW (PEF) Files, I've chosen this option as there is often talk of DNG becoming the industry standard.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10th December 2010
StephenL's Avatar
StephenL StephenL is offline
Senior Pixelmonger
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 9,863
Thanks: 984
Thanked 1,126 Times in 921 Posts
Likes: 658
Liked 755 Times in 499 Posts
Re: DNG's

My reason for converting to DNG, before I stopped, was that I wanted rid of the hassle of misplaced sidecar (XMP) files if I moved a ORF file outwith of Lightroom. But I've now disciplined myself to be careful!
__________________
Stephen

A camera takes a picture. A photographer makes a picture

Fuji X system, + Leica and Bronica film

My Flickr site
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10th December 2010
emirpprime
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: DNG's

Nice to hear support is slowly growing for DNGs. Leica, Hasselblad, Casio, Samsung and Ricoh are also supporters. AFAIK there is no real reason for manufacturer specific files. As long as DNG has a formal way of allowing manufacturers to embed enough info for shading compensation etc etc (where relevant), then it is only good for the consumer.

The wiki page on it is quite an interesting read. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital...e_(file_format)
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10th December 2010
shenstone's Avatar
shenstone shenstone is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 3,377
Thanks: 166
Thanked 318 Times in 242 Posts
Likes: 411
Liked 507 Times in 281 Posts
Re: DNG's

I don't see any reason to use them

the comments re misplaced sidecar files is possibly one, but that aside I see no reason to use them.

Should software suppliers ever stop supporting ORF then there may be an argument to do so at that time, but in the mean time they buy you little/nothing in terms of quality and just lock you into Adobe based processes (if not software)

Regards
Andy
__________________
My Kit (OK I'm a hoarder...)
4/3 E500, E510, E30 + 35macro, 50macro, 7-14, 11-22, 14-45 (x2), 14-54, 40-150 (both types), 50-200, 70-300, 50-500,
m 4/3 EM1MkII + 60 macro, 12-100 Pro
FL20, FL36 x2 , FL50, cactus slaves etc.
The Boss (Mrs Shenstone) E620, EM10-II, 14-41Ez, 40-150R, 9 cap and whatever she can nick from me when she wants it

My places
http://www.shenstone.me.uk
http://landroverkaty.blogspot.com/
https://vimeo.com/shenstone
http://cardiffnaturalists.org.uk/
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10th December 2010
Makonde
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: DNG's

I'm still wondering what exactly may be lost when you convert from an ORF to a DNG.

I am assuming that you will lose info concerning art filters, distortion and other corrections peculiar to Olympus. Is that correct? But what else will you lose, or end up with in a form that may be inferior to the ORF tuned for Olympus' output? Are there also compression losses?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:08 AM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger