To DNG or not! That is the question
I’ve been seeing a lot of discussions on forums and in clubs regarding Digital Negatives.
So let’s put together some Pros and Cons of Adobe DNG:
Pros:
- You can embed the original RAW file inside of your DNG. Yes it makes it bigger, but in case you ever needed the original you still have it.
- If you convert your RAW to DNG (and not store a copy of the RAW). DNG will be smaller, most of the time, than the original RAW file.
- DNG is an open format, not a manufacturer specific format. You want to share you file between a Nikon, Canon, and Sony User? You can either export your RAW file to a DNG, or TIFF. Those are your only “real” options. There are other formats such as PNG, but you’re still chucking a lot of data right out of the window.
- You can convert from RAW to DNG inside Lightroom as you import, so you won’t even know it happened.
- This know separate Side XMP file that you have to carry around with a RAW file is no longer needed. DNG’s changes and history are kept within the file.
Cons:
- DNG is not a native format for any manufacturer
- DNG file conversion does take extra time (minimal for today’s computers, but there is still an initial hit, otherwise it is just as fast in opening and convert than the original RAW file).
- There is a risk — adobe might stop supporting DNG format. Yes, it’s a very small list and Adobe would be shooting themselves in the foot if they ever do, but it is a possibility.
- DNG files that include the original RAW file do take up more space than the original RAW file alone.
I personally have been using DNG for about 1.5 years now and have not had any issues. I really like the ability to export a DNG from lightroom and sending it to a customer without having to tell them how to open it or needing them to install Adobe RAW for Canon. All of my lightroom libraries have also been converted to DNG, even the original JPEGs.
