For those who don't know, RAW is a file format where your camera takes all the information that the sensor captures and writes it to the flash card without turning it into an image. This allows you to have much more control over turning that data into an pretty picture, in your computer when you get home, instead of having you're camera just turn it into a jpeg. I shoot RAW almost exclusively. As my 'look' is largely created in post processing, having the extra information that a raw file contains (12 or 14 bits per channel instead of 8) gives me much more headroom for manipulation. It's also saved my ass more than a few times due to mistakes in exposure and white balance.Canon and Nikon cameras save raw files in their proprietary .CR2 and .NEF formats, respectfully. While Lightroom and Photoshop and Aperture and all the rest of the aftermarket raw converters can currently open these formats perfectly well (sometimes you've got to wait a month or so for them to add support for new cameras). Will that be true in 10 years? If Canon goes and changes their format, is Adobe going to continue to support RAW files from the original Digital Rebel from 2004? And wouldn't it be better to have them in some publically documented format that a number of different companies support?
Well, DNG is an open raw file format that Adobe has come up with. DNG, as in Digital NeGative. A handful of cameras use it as their default RAW format, such as the sexy Leica M8.
Some people think Adobe's DNG format is the answer. There are free converters available that will turn your .CR2 or .NEF files into .DNG files. With a few practical upshots that I've found. For one, Lightroom no longer has to keep metadata in additional .xmp 'sidecar' files. So my hard drive has less crap all over the place. One file per image instead of two. And secondly, Adobe has included lossless compression of the raw data so it takes up less space on your hard drive without losing any data.
Anyway, I took the plunge this week and had Lightroom convert all 26,000 or so CR2 files in to the DNG format. In the process I gained back 100GB of drive space, I assume, due to the lossless compression.
Some people claim that upon conversion, you're losing additional undocumented metadata that the camera added to the images. I'd really like to know what kind of data they're talking about because I haven't noticed anything missing. As long as it keeps the date, iso, exposure settings, and copyright, I'm not sure what else I could really need. Either way it's too late for me, I've jumped in with both feet.
So, if you've got any thoughts, comment, questions, or rants on the subject, we're all ears.
Feel free to tell me that I'm crazy and a fool if you like. I'm used to it. ;-)
Thanks for this great post, Bill. Answered two of my recent questions without having to ask - how much of your "look" is done in post, and if/why I should consider making the switch to RAW in my own shooting. Cheers.
I've recently started saving my edited RAW files as DNG. Since I try to do most of my post work in ACR, it makes sense for me to save an 8MB DNG file instead of a 40MB+ PST. I also like not having to worry about keeping track of the xmp sidecar files for RAW format. With just one file, the DNG makes it easy to have a lossless backup of any edits I've made in ACR.
I still keep the cr2 files though.
Great post Bill ... I'd be interested to hear in two weeks how you feel about this. I've thought about taking the plunge but haven't yet fooled around with it. So what can you tell us about your "look" and the post processing ... I'd love to hear as it is beautiful.
JI
Hi, I too made the leap to DNG a few months back. First thing I do is copy my Canon RAW files from the card to my HD and then a second HD. Then I convert them using Adobe's software to DNG's and back those up. I see about a 5-10% space savings. I delete the CR2's.
Anyway, one thing that is missing is the ability to see which focus point was used in the photograph. Some of Canon's software (long-since deleted from my computer) allowed you to see which focus point/s were used via an overlay on the image. I did use that on occasion.
So now, I'm suffering in that I need to exercise my critical eye more frequently to judge the focus/DOF visually at 100% view. Not a loss that I'm losing any sleep over, but it's something that's gone missing. I have yet to regret deleting any of the Canon files (I've deleted about 30,000 of them from a G1, D60, 10D, and 1D MkII).
First time I've read through your blog (found via Chase Jarvis' site) - nice job!!
Welcome aboard Larry, spread the word.
Justin- I may talk a bit about post processing, but I can't give too much of my secrets away. ;-P
If you use LightRoom for RAW conversion you will not notice but Canon's DPP can use the Dustmap information in the CR2 file of the latest body's and remove it from your pictures. Once it is DNG it will probably be lost.
Thanks Rolograaf-
I don't think I've ever used the Canon software, but for those who do, that's a good piece of metadata they might loose. Good tip.
The main thing you lose is the ability to use the proprietary software. I like Nikon Capture sometimes, so I don't convert my Nikon files, but I convert Canon files whenever they're around.