joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

Edit: I was not using NX Studio but the earlier version. Still curious about raw editors not using the full raw file.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

A recent study found that 68% of the statistics on 37% of the discussion boards are 84% made up.

gessman Loc: Colorado

You're just pissin' people off now, dude. LOL

CO

Camera makers don't share any coding information with third party manufacturers. Third party manufacturers have to reverse engineer everything whether it's for software or lenses.

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

Are you 100% sure of this?
...Cam

CamB Loc: Juneau, Alaska

I'm sure NX is a fine editor for Nikon files but it is not a full solution for keeping track of your files and your work. It doesn't 'talk' directly to Photoshop and it doesn't use keywords or other photo finding techniques. I would be lost without a quickly searchable and customizable data base. NX won't find files featuring "red themes taken in England in the last ten years." This is the type of information I need from my programs. Plus being able to edit them.
...Cam

JD750 Loc: SoCal

“Nikon software will automatically apply camera settings such as picture controls, dynamic lighting”

Since aftermarket programs do not do this they are not utilizing all the information in the raw file.

Raw files contain the images and other info. So the statement “aftermarket programs don’t use all the raw info” does not mean aftermarket programs don’t process all of the image.

However only the manuf knows the secret raw formula, the other companies have to reverse engineer it.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

I believe this...just like this one.

Bill_de Loc: US

I first heard it at an Adobe seminar with Jeff Schewe. I believe it was also pointed out in a book, "Camera Raw" by Jeff Schewe and Bruce Fraser

From Adobe website:

The Adobe DNG Converter enables you to easily convert camera-specific raw files from supported cameras to a more universal DNG raw file. Another benefit of using the DNG Converter is backward compatibility.

I can't remember the source (it was from Adobe somewhere) but it was said that when you process an NEF file, for example, through an Adobe product it uses the same data as if you first converted it to a DNG file. It doesn't delete data, so it is still there if you decided to use the camera manufacturer's software.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Just out of curiosity have you tested this? I would expect that converting to DNG changes the raw file and the manuf software won’t read it after that.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I have tested it. The 'conversion' of the camera RAW to a DNG strips the camera- / brand-specific EXIF that is proprietary to the camera. Adobe retains most of the original data (the EXIF standard values), and then also adds their own EXIF along with this stripping. The most obvious loss is autofocus information, data that would allow the photographer or others to analyze camera set-up issues within the image.

Both the software from Nikon and Canon will retain this info into the output JPEG from their converted RAW formats. Adobe strips this info from the export / save-as results of a converted RAW, as well as when converting the RAW to DNG.

In 2021, there's no valid reason to just 'default' to DNG. The Adobe products operate on native RAW formats after failing to displace RAW, in the marketplace, with their DNG. All the competition software titles also operate on the native RAW formats. The only 'space' saving a DNG could initially obtain is via this replacement of the EXIF, data that is nothing more than text values in the 'header' of the image file. The image data 'payload' under that header is read-only and not changed in size nor structure via the DNG. Also, as you begin to edit the DNG and Adobe writes their own edit-instructions into the header area, the overall file size of the DNG increased beyond the original RAW size on disk.

Bill_de Loc: US

Sorry. Converting to DNG creates a new file, but does not alter the NEF (Nikon) file. If I convert to DNG I also save the NEF. I have read that the NEF can be saved within the DNG, but I have never tried it.

The Digital Negative specification allows for not only all of the pixel information stored in current raw formats, but also for all of the additional, proprietary metadata that many manufacturers include. The Adobe DNG Converter may, in some cases, ignore some of this proprietary metadata, and only include the basic information necessary for creating a high-quality image file. The original raw file, however, can also be embedded in the new DNG format to ensure that proprietary metadata from the manufacturer is not lost.

https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/using/adobe-dng-converter.html

--

JD750 Loc: SoCal

That is good info thank you for providing that.

JD750 Loc: SoCal

Ok I assumed you converted to DNG then deleted the NEF. So what is the purpose of creating the DNG if you are also saving the NEF?

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

It is possible to embed the original file into the DNG file but I don’t see any point to that. That will increase the file size. Why convert to a larger size when the original file will work fine.

The only reason to use DNG in my opinion is when you have a new camera and your editing software hasn’t caught up with the new camera format. That is normally a temporary condition so you should keep the original raw file for future use.