Even though we ARE Nikon lovers,we are NOT affiliated with Nikon Corp. in any way.

English German French

Sign up Login
Home Forums Articles Galleries Recent Photos Contest Help Search News Workshops Shop Upgrade Membership Recommended
members
All members Wiki Contests Vouchers Apps Newsletter THE NIKONIAN™ Magazines Podcasts Fundraising
karma1248

Los Alamos, US
80 posts

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this author
karma1248 Registered since 10th Sep 2012
Fri 12-Oct-12 12:50 PM | edited Fri 12-Oct-12 01:09 PM by karma1248

HI All,
I recently decided to get serious and learn Lightroom 4.2. I bought Scott Kelby's book. Early in the book he makes a strong case for standardizing on the DNG file format. This bothers me to a certain extent but I can also see a logic to Kelby's argument.

Much seems to have been written about DNG's value as an archiving tool. I definitely understand this argument. For an archivist, having a file format that spans all applications, is stable and can be used far into the future is very important. It makes the archivists life easier. But archiving and image processing are two different problems.

I apologize if this subject has been beaten to death here. I did a search and did not come up with much. So, I decided to ask you the following questions:

1. Do you use DNG?
2. Once your files are converted to DNG, do you ever have a need to return to a "normal" file type? Why?
3. Do you find advantages to using DNG? What?
4. Have you discovered disadvantages? What?
5. What are the pluses and minuses relative to your workflows?
6. Am I asking the right questions?

Once an image file is converted to DNG, I believe that Nikon software becomes useless. For example, Nikon view and Capture cannot handle DNG's if I'm not mistaken.

Up to now I always move image files into Photoshop for all further processing. I use Bridge for all archiving and browsing work. I plan to move to Lightroom once I learn a little. But, I also have been experimenting with View and Capture and like many of the features. But, again, it seems that I would be stuck with Photoshop (and Lightroom) once a file has been converted to DNG. Is this right?

So, in spite of Kelby's admonitions, I'm reluctant to move to DNG.

So, what say you? I'd very much like to hear your ideas.

Thanks Very Much,

Sparky

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Subject
ID
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
1
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
2
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
3
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
4
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
6
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
11
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
8
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
5
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
7
Reply message RE: DNG Implications
9
     Reply message RE: DNG Implications
10
     Reply message RE: DNG Implications
12
     Reply message RE: DNG Implications
14
          Reply message RE: DNG Implications
15
               Reply message RE: DNG Implications
16
                    Reply message RE: DNG Implications
17
     Reply message RE: DNG Implications
13

G