sliberia Loc: Curacao W I

Is there any quality loss when converting from RAW to DNG?

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

No.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

What do you think, it's converting, not reading.
But adobe, I'm sure, will tell you otherwise.
Good luck.
SS

lightchime Loc: Somewhere Over The Rainbow

Your question implies that raw and DNG are different. They are, but they are different raws.

As to loss of quality, I will let Adobe and SharpShooter deal with that one.

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

dng is just one of many raw formats. all are good. the camera maker decides which one his camera converts raw to.and supplies software to process it.

jecanes Loc: Taumarunui, New Zealand

DNG is Adobe's raw format. all others are camera manufacturer's formats. Two reasons the DNG format is considered to be better are 1) Older versions of Camera Raw and Lightroom cannot read the more recent manufacturer's formats and 2) DNG's store undated metadata internally and do not need a 'sidecar' file.

saichiez Loc: Beautiful Central Oregon

DNG is proposed to be a standard to replace all proprietary standards from manufacturers.... purported to replace RAW. In fact it is just another proprietary format from Adobe. Ie, non-standard in it's own format.

Is anything lost? That's the question. I know programming (writing code) is mysterious for many, and thought to be mystical by those who do it, or profess to understand it. I do not pretend to fully understand it.

But I do have my own simple view of programming. Supposedly DNG is "lossless". In my view, if you make a file smaller.... You must have lost something in the translation.

If my weight were reduced by 75 pounds, I surely would have lost something. And I realize that what is left might be healthier and more efficient. But that does not fall in the category of lossless weight change.

So if a file is 22 megabytes in Canon RAW, is converted it to a DNG which reduces it to 14 megabytes, can someone here please explain how that is a "lossless" conversion?Furthermore, how can such a conversion not affect image quality?

I ask to raise the question. I am not truly interested in the answer. I am not likely to use DNG, simply because Leica chose it for their proprietary format on their $9000 M9 or Monochrome.

Are there any other manufacturer's jumping on the bandwagon for an industry "standard" just because Adobe says it's so.