[vonBaloney]

+1 to the above. I have the full cs5 suite (thank goodness it was free) and rarely ever go beyond Bridge. The only time I actually open a photo in photoshop is if I have a digital negative I need to invert. I wish Adobe would offer Bridge with with a small selection of tools from Photoshop as a standalone.

That's basically what Lightroom is...

[indy]

That's basically what Lightroom is...

Basically yes, but there are aspects that I do not care for. I believe it could also be said That's basically what Elements is...but here too there are differences in the implementation.

[Murfy]

I am late to this, but wanted to mention I have been a long time photoshop user (since the 90s), lightroom for the past few years and I am making the switch to Capture One. The difference is amazing. I don't find it as easy to pick up and run with though.

[stevebrot]

DNG was written by Adobe, but is far from proprietary.

The specification is published, but the actual data format within the DNG can be whatever the camera manufacturer wants it to be. This is an intrinsic feature of the TIFF/IF spec on which DNG is based. My understanding dating back to the K10D is that Pentax DNG merely wraps the PEF data in the same manner as DNG conversion from TIFF and various RAW formats.

So, for PEF vs. DNG...Same contents, different containers. My understanding is that the key to processing is the metadata packaged within the file and the reading software's ability to properly interpret and act on the metadata. When the K10D was released, there were compatibility issues with the Pentax flavor of DNG and support by many products (e.g. Aperture, DXO Optics Pro, Bibble*) was simply not there despite working with DNG from other makers.

Steve

(Former K10D early adapter)

* Bibble, for example, could only process DNG files if it could also process the proprietary RAW from the same manufacturer. That was the common behavior for many vendors.

P.S. I would not blame you if you have doubts. If so, I suggest that you Google "Pentax K10D DNG" and dive through a few pages until you start picking up programmer notes from 2007 related to supporting K10D DNG.

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 03-17-2015 at 05:33 PM.

[vonBaloney]

The specification is published, but the actual data format within the DNG can be whatever the camera manufacturer wants it to be. This is an intrinsic feature of the TIFF/IF spec on which DNG is based. My understanding dating back to the K10D is that Pentax DNG merely wraps the PEF data in the same manner as DNG conversion from TIFF and various RAW formats.

So, for PEF vs. DNG...Same contents, different containers. My understanding is that the key to processing is the metadata packaged within the file and the reading software's ability to properly interpret and act on the metadata. When the K10D was released, there were compatibility issues with the Pentax flavor of DNG and support by many products (e.g. Aperture, DXO Optics Pro, Bibble*) was simply not there despite working with DNG from other makers. Those issues have long been resolved and were traceable to weaknesses in the Apple and DXO products.

Steve

(Former K10D early adapter)

* Bibble could only process DNG files if it could also process the proprietary RAW from the same manufacturer.

P.S. I would not blame you if you have doubts. If so, I suggest that you Google "Pentax K10D DNG" and dive through a few pages until you start picking up programmer notes from 2007 related to supporting K10D DNG.

I actually convert my files "to DNG" on LR import even though they start out as DNG from the camera. Or you can use the Adobe DNG converter -- this will get all your files into an even more standard standard format. But if you don't, as long as the RAW file is representing Bayer data, there are only a limited number of configurations it can take, it just a matter of determining byte order and stuff like that. I don't think anything in DNG format is in danger of being truly lost anytime soon, or even anytime in the future. There is too much of it out there now, so someone will always want to access it. There is no reason to think that suddenly everyone will forget the specs and no one will be able to recover these files. If it ever is a problem, it will be long after we are dead...

[stevebrot]

I actually convert my files "to DNG" on LR import even though they start out as DNG from the camera.

That indeed will result in a base conversion using ACR into an Adobe-encoded DNG. I don't know that it is any more standard, but it will definitely be different than the original capture DNG. Both are completely correct according to the DNG specification, but only the Pentax DNG was produced by the camera. Any proprietary features are stripped by the conversion. That being said, there is still an option to embed the original Pentax DNG in the new file along with the new Adobe version. This allows broader compatibility with non-Adobe tools.

Although targeted at Adobe products the DNG files created by Lightroom contain the required metadata to interpret and decode the image data. This is done in the same manner as with the Pentax DNG and both should be equally future-proof and fully equivalent as long as software is available to support interpretation of the various DNG versions (five as of 2012) and the range of values for supported metadata and as long as the Adobe conversion is accurate.

The advantages of "import to DNG" is pretty obvious for NEF (Nikon RAW) or CR2 (Canon RAW), or Pentax PEF, but not as clear for Pentax DNG files.


Steve

(BTW...DNG is a published specification, but that specification is currently controlled by Adobe, is not "open" in the sense of community process, and definitely is not a standard outside of Adobe. Fortunately it has been submitted to ISO as a new standard but has not yet been approved.)

[Steve.Ledger]

In the meantime, I get good results with both in camera raw processing and Faststone so I have that to fall back on.

Hi Jack,
I find FASTSTONE quite poor for RAW, so I just use it to quickly extract the JPG file (which is what it loads when you double-click a .DNG) and edit for posting on FB and so on.
Pressing 'A' to load the actual RAW data for FASTSTONE to render a bitmap from is often quite horrible and the editing tools provided can't really do much with it.

Important RAW I process with LR.

[stevebrot]

Hi Jack,
I find FASTSTONE quite poor for RAW, so I just use it to quickly extract the JPG file (which is what it loads when you double-click a .DNG) and edit for posting on FB and so on.
Pressing 'A' to load the actual RAW data for FASTSTONE to render a bitmap from is often quite horrible and the editing tools provided can't really do much with it.

Important RAW I process with LR.

Steve...Thank you for adding this comment. I know that FASTSTONE is quite popular with users on this site, but it has been the source of many troubleshooting requests due to the user not understanding where it gets its preview image from and the limitations of that image.


Steve

[Setter Dog]

Hi Jack,
I find FASTSTONE quite poor for RAW, so I just use it to quickly extract the JPG file (which is what it loads when you double-click a .DNG) and edit for posting on FB and so on.
Pressing 'A' to load the actual RAW data for FASTSTONE to render a bitmap from is often quite horrible and the editing tools provided can't really do much with it.

Important RAW I process with LR.

Thanks, Steve. I think I get it. Probably explains why my results are just as good if I process a jpeg with Faststone as they are if I process a raw file,......I guess I'll try LR pretty soon, though I really don't need anything that takes a lot of time. LR seems to be the name of the game for RAW processing, if you're going to bother with it at all.

Thanks to all who contributed to this thread!

Jack

[karro]

LR is nice, if it wasn't for its @$@97(@$&( willingness to catalog everything.. there's only one other software that drives me similarly nuts, and it's Apple's iTunes. DxO OP for me, although I'm not always happy with the results

[stevebrot]

LR is nice, if it wasn't for its @$@97(@$&( willingness to catalog everything.. there's only one other software that drives me similarly nuts, and it's Apple's iTunes. DxO OP for me, although I'm not always happy with the results

I agree in regards to iTunes, but as for LR, the catalog is central to how it works, particularly in regards to the non-destructive edits. In LR you import into the catalog, with all edits, metadata, and preview images being stored there. The original file is never touched unless you write the metadata out to file.


Steve

[Volker76]

I use darktable. I am an imbecile when it comes to 'graphics' and it works well for me. Lightroom? Maybe. If Adobe ever releases a linux version.

---------- Post added 01-04-15 at 23:23 ----------

The specification is published, but the actual data format within the DNG can be whatever the camera manufacturer wants it to be. This is an intrinsic feature of the TIFF/IF spec on which DNG is based. My understanding dating back to the K10D is that Pentax DNG merely wraps the PEF data in the same manner as DNG conversion from TIFF and various RAW formats.

AFAIR that is not correct.

Manufacturers are free to ignore certain fields and/or abuse some others. But if I remember correctly the format in the dng is pretty much set in stone.

[stevebrot]

But if I remember correctly the format in the dng is pretty much set in stone.

AFAIR, that is correct, but misleading. DNG is an extension of the TIFF 6.0 specification. Back in the early days TIFF was jokingly referred to as standing for Thousands of Incompatible File Formats because the standard allows for significant deviation from the base by means of embedded metadata detailing the deviation. DNG is much the same.

It is my understanding that Pentax PEF is essentially TIFF compliant* and that the internal image data structures between PEF and Pentax-DNG are the same. It is this TIFF compliance that allows for an easy integration of Pentax output to DNG. When I first bought my K10D in early 2007, there were compatibility issues (would not read) with Adobe products and DNG from Pentax cameras. Those issues were resolved by patches to Adobe Camera Raw that enabled processing of the DNG features that Pentax leveraged. The Pentax-generated DNG were quite legal, but the Adobe software was too limited to interpret the Pentax deviations from the base Adobe implementation.**

The food analogy for PEF vs. Pentax-generated DNG might be the difference between a cheeseburger and a patty melt sandwich. With the exception of the top and bottom bread, the two are essentially the same.

This leads to an interesting exercise in DNG portability. In Lightroom, you can import a DNG from a Pentax camera with creation of a new DNG. That DNG is the Adobe version of the Pentax original. Now view that same Adobe DNG from the camera or from PDCU or Silkypix, or any number of other DNG-capable RAW converters. Hint: The camera is unable to read the Adobe version. I don't have the other products, though I would expect there might be a few surprises.

wwwimages.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/dng_spec_1.4.0.0.pdf

Tagged Image File Format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Steve

* Treading on thin ice here since the statement is based on my memory of Internet communications dating back to when Pentax first started DNG support and comparison to PEF was a hotbed of discussion. I did manage, however, to find a link to a developer's wiki that says as much. Pentax PEF - Just Solve the File Format Problem

[Dlanor Sekao]

I'm a lifetime photographer of over 60 years, but apparently have always been lazy. Never wanted to do my own developing and never had much interest in RAW processing,.....until now.

I really, really like my Pentax K50 and K3. They are the most fun cameras I've ever used. If the video was decent, I'd sell everything else I own. But, to the point, based on recommendations of forum members, I began shooting RAW when I found that was the only way I could get a really good sunrise shot. I got great results processing in camera and good results with Faststone, not only on sunrises but almost everything. . Faststone, however, won't allow changing AWB, at least as far as I can tell.

I'd like to find another RAW processor. It certainly doesn't have to be free, but it has to be fast and allow batch processing. Anything complicated will not hold my interest very long. Suggestions?

Thanks for the helpful input that I know I'll get.

Jack

If you would like to try Lightroom free for 3 months I have a Promotional code for you to use.
PM me and I will send the detials....FREE !


***PM SENT with Promo card Image and Info....Enjoy !***

[Nitrogliserin]

I can't use LR at all but I am very useful in Photoshop CC 2014. Raw editor is less confusing than LR user interface. I simply open a RAW and edit very basic steps on Raw Editor (lightning + lens correction etc), then Nik Software Sharpening Tool and Color Effects and finally Topaz Noise Reduction. One RAW files takes 2-3 minutes to process within these steps.