[dflorez]

Apologies if this has already been asked, clarified, or debated.


I'm currently trying to clean up a hard drive/backup folders and weddings and whatnot. As I'm exporting my edited files from Lightroom to the hard drives, I export them as DNG. Since the application doesn't ask for size, bitrate, or any other constraints on exporting as DNG, I assume it's all just at the highest quality they can.

Which also got me thinking - how does that compare to the DNG file originally created in camera? Should I disregard my edits, and just save the original files (as my taste/skill improves, I may hate edits later on)?

Decisions decisions.

[stevebrot]

Which also got me thinking - how does that compare to the DNG file originally created in camera?

They are not the same in much the same way that a Pentax-generated DNG is not the same as a Leica-generated DNG. All three satisfy the specification, but there are many ways to cook a DNG. I would suggest that the only benefit to archiving files as DNG export (or LR write-metadata-to-file) would be if you intend to share the files to a different computer (say at a service bureau) for additional editing using an Adobe product. It is unlikely that opening an Adobe-generated DNG in other than an Adobe product will retain the embedded edits.*

As for archiving using Pentax-generated DNG while retaining your edits, the most common approach is to back up both the original files and your LR catalog at the same time (make sure LR is closed during the backup). Doing so will retain both your original files and edit histories. This is what I do and reflects the intended work flow for LR. I might add that it is good practice to always do your edits on virtual copies and make as many of those as you need to reflect different interpretations.** BTW, your edits and virtual copies use almost no space on your hard drive. Each is done using a few lines of text.


Steve

(...not a big fan of export or import to DNG...)

* I don't have PDCU installed on my computer to test this, but it is my understanding that the Pentax software cannot open Adobe-generated DNG.

** The principle of doing edits on virtual copies is probably the best advice I might give to new users. IMHO, I wish that the ability to mark the original as read-only would be a very useful setting. I also with that there was the ability to add descriptive metadata to a virtual copy.

[jatrax]

As I'm exporting my edited files from Lightroom to the hard drives, I export them as DNG. Since the application doesn't ask for size, bitrate, or any other constraints on exporting as DNG, I assume it's all just at the highest quality they can.

In general there are no 'settings' for DNG as it is a RAW format, providing you with all of the information available. Technically there are now some smaller 'lossy' versions of DNG files but I have not noticed that those have gained much popularity yet. Perhaps with 42mp or larger files that might change.

As I'm exporting my edited files from Lightroom to the hard drives, I export them as DNG.

I guess I would ask why you are doing that? I only export finished versions in general, not the DNG files as I consider those the 'negative'. TO get back to the original you can always make a virtual copy and delete all of your edits. I leave the files as DNG and just export or print to suit the purpose at the time. If you are trying to clean things up why not put the images you are cleaning (archiving?) into a new Lightroom catalog and archive the images and catalog entirely. That way you have all of your edits as well as metadata should you ever want to go back.

Exporting as a DNG is foreign to how I work, I never export anything but finished files and the DNGs always stay in the LIghtroom catalog. Curious what I am missing with what you are doing though.

I also with that there was the ability to add descriptive metadata to a virtual copy.

There is the Copy Name field, not sure if that would help. I don't use it all the time, but when I have several different virtual copies (and I remember) I name them there so I know what each is supposed to be for.

[stevebrot]

There is the Copy Name field, not sure if that would help. I don't use it all the time, but when I have several different virtual copies (and I remember) I name them there so I know what each is supposed to be for.

That is new to me. Thanks for the info.


Steve

[wissink]

I shoot DNG. Import into LR and also only export finished jpg's or direct to Facebook / my portfolio. For backups I use FreeFileSync.

[dflorez]

Seriously, thanks everyone. Nice to hear what's working for you guys.

To add some extra info to my process, which has changed a bit over the years. I have a tendency to write things weirdly, so let me know if it isn't making sense.

Using a wedding as an example.
1. Shoot the wedding (DNG files), import all files into lightroom.
2. Edit photos. Export as jpeg to "smugmug" - which lets the client view and download the shots. Also works as a backup of sorts (but in jpeg form)
3. Edited photos are exported as DNG to 2 backup drives. I've been exporting as DNG ideally so I can retain edits, but also still have flexibility in the editing as down the years I want to refine the image/change completely.

When I first started doing weddings 8'ish years ago, I'd always be short on resources, and media isn't as cheap as it is now. Also, at the time, I figured the files looked as good as they possibly could, so why change later, and I exported/archived as JPEG. Looking back on those shots, most are ok, but more often than not they're too sharp, too saturated, and sometimes there are just weird tonalities. (I edited on a calibrated laptop, but it was small, not hd, and not ips. Plus, you get better over the years)

But anyway, off topic.

It sounds like it may make sense to hold on to the original files, and learn this method.

As for archiving using Pentax-generated DNG while retaining your edits, the most common approach is to back up both the original files and your LR catalog at the same time (make sure LR is closed during the backup). Doing so will retain both your original files and edit histories.

[RGlasel]

Just to be clear, Lightroom only modifies the DNG file downloaded from the camera if you specifically export the file as a DNG file (in which case the file is exported after edits are applied). For backup or archiving of the DNG as it came out of the camera, do a simple file copy. If you edit a DNG file in Lightroom, it saves your edits as a Lua script in the Lightroom catalog/database, not in the DNG file. Other non-destructive editing software will make copies of the original DNG file as a snapshot or working copy in order to preserve the DNG file that came out of the camera. Depending on the software and your workflow, you may run into issues where you are archiving or backing up edited copies when you don't want to or vice-versa.

IF you only want to archive or backup edited images and have no need to preserve the original image saved by the camera, then you might want to export those images as DNG files to preserve all of the metadata as well as the final result of editing. The two key features of DNG files is that according to the standard, any metadata can be stored in the file in any format, although I think there are instances where editing software will overwrite pre-existing metadata. This makes exporting to DNG preferable to exporting to TIFF, because the editing program can more readily use metadata for applying lens and camera profiles. The only disadvantage of using DNG files with different editing software is the lack of standardization in metadata, which can result in a particular editing program not being able to utilize it. Then export as TIFF for maximum compatibility.

Most DNG files save RAW image data as an embedded TIFF file, although the DNG standard doesn't require it. The only time you wouldn't want to use DNG files for archiving or backup is if you only need to preserve an edited version of the image in a highly compressed version for say a website, or you only plan to ever edit the images in a program designed to work with a proprietary RAW format. Neither scenario makes sense to me, but the photographer is always right, so I won't presume to suggest that only DNG files be used for archiving or backing up. Anytime an image is exported to DNG, there should be an expectation that the file will not be exactly as saved by the camera, but if the camera can save to DNG, there is no reason the DNG file can't contain the same information as the camera's proprietary RAW format and DNG files that are downloaded from a camera will preserve all of that information if the files are copied.

Technically, DNG is a fully-disclosed standard developed by Adobe, so really the original question should be whether to save images in an edited or unedited form. Certain Adobe software products may not be able to utilize all of the metadata that Pentax cameras save in DNG files, but as long as you preserve the DNG that was downloaded from the camera, you will never lose that metadata. If you want to save edited images to be potentially opened in different editing software, then export them as DNG files instead of copying them. The ability of editing software to use DNG files is never going to get worse in the future, something that cannot be said for proprietary RAW formats.

I'm starting to go in circles, so I'll stop there.

[dflorez]

Just to be clear, Lightroom only modifies the DNG file downloaded from the camera if you specifically export the file as a DNG file (in which case the file is exported after edits are applied). For backup or archiving of the DNG as it came out of the camera, do a simple file copy. If you edit a DNG file in Lightroom, it saves your edits as a Lua script in the Lightroom catalog/database, not in the DNG file. Other non-destructive editing software will make copies of the original DNG file as a snapshot or working copy in order to preserve the DNG file that came out of the camera. Depending on the software and your workflow, you may run into issues where you are archiving or backing up edited copies when you don't want to or vice-versa.

IF you only want to archive or backup edited images and have no need to preserve the original image saved by the camera, then you might want to export those images as DNG files to preserve all of the metadata as well as the final result of editing. The two key features of DNG files is that according to the standard, any metadata can be stored in the file in any format, although I think there are instances where editing software will overwrite pre-existing metadata. This makes exporting to DNG preferable to exporting to TIFF, because the editing program can more readily use metadata for applying lens and camera profiles. The only disadvantage of using DNG files with different editing software is the lack of standardization in metadata, which can result in a particular editing program not being able to utilize it. Then export as TIFF for maximum compatibility.

Most DNG files save RAW image data as an embedded TIFF file, although the DNG standard doesn't require it. The only time you wouldn't want to use DNG files for archiving or backup is if you only need to preserve an edited version of the image in a highly compressed version for say a website, or you only plan to ever edit the images in a program designed to work with a proprietary RAW format. Neither scenario makes sense to me, but the photographer is always right, so I won't presume to suggest that only DNG files be used for archiving or backing up. Anytime an image is exported to DNG, there should be an expectation that the file will not be exactly as saved by the camera, but if the camera can save to DNG, there is no reason the DNG file can't contain the same information as the camera's proprietary RAW format and DNG files that are downloaded from a camera will preserve all of that information if the files are copied.

Technically, DNG is a fully-disclosed standard developed by Adobe, so really the original question should be whether to save images in an edited or unedited form. Certain Adobe software products may not be able to utilize all of the metadata that Pentax cameras save in DNG files, but as long as you preserve the DNG that was downloaded from the camera, you will never lose that metadata. If you want to save edited images to be potentially opened in different editing software, then export them as DNG files instead of copying them. The ability of editing software to use DNG files is never going to get worse in the future, something that cannot be said for proprietary RAW formats.

I'm starting to go in circles, so I'll stop there.

Haha... thank you. Basically what you just said kinda confirmed what I was thinking, but you're clearly more knowledgeable in this area.

I'd prefer to keep my edits (thus export dng after editing), so if a client asks for a photo (or I'm using one of those shots for another purpose) I don't have to re-edit to get it back to how it was. In (my untechnical) theory, DNG's should still have maximum editability vs JPEG, even if they won't necessarily revert back to the original original from the camera info. TIFF's are great files obviously, but they seem massively inflated vs DNG in filesize.



Buut again, a digression from the original question, which I think you guys answered well.

[Oakland Rob]

Note that Lr can do a couple of things with DNG exports: you can select the JPEG preview quality, and choose to embed the RAW (which seems to not apply here since we're starting with DNG). I haven't tried to see if the preview size choices makes much difference in size, since it must be marginal in any case. But you do that choice; perhaps if you needed a quick and dirty way to get the JPEG by extracting from the DNG (if, for example, you didn't have software that could apply Lr/Ps adjustments) it would be worth it.

I prefer to just keep the original DNGs and save all my edits in Lr's database. Occasionally I need to share edited DNGs, and in that case I'll export as edited though.

BTW, one of the few non-Adobe applications I know of that recognizes Lr adjustments and can read (and write) such adjustments to DNG is Mylio. It essentially watches some of my Lr folders and when I write metadata to the DNG Mylio passes those changes on to other folders with the same image or preview of that image on other devices, like my iPhone, Galaxy Tab, and a NAS. Works better than Lr Mobile.