whitehall Loc: Canada

I am sure there is a simple answer but I am mystified. When edit an image in Lightroom using GIGAPIXEL and then save it (indicating original file) the cropped image does not go back into Lightroom, but seems to migrate to my external hard-drive. When and if I find it I have to reimport the adjusted image. What am I missing? Thanks.

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

Do you mean that you are using Save As?
You know that you can differentiate the output from an external editor from the original by Edit => Preferences => Edit External File Naming (edit name)? You can easily add a suffix to the returned file so it can be recognized as an edit from an external editor.

Last time I used Save As, it did not return to LR. I usually add something like {filename}PSCC22 to show that I went through Photoshop.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

RAW or JPEG? Lightroom or Lightroom Classic? Are you starting from a collection or a folder?

newsguygeorge Loc: Victoria, Texas

I don't use lightroom. I stick with PS; but I always use Gigapixel alone because it's less confusing to me.

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

Just to let you know what I see. After cropping in LRc I go to Photo -> Edit In -> Topaz Gigapixel AI. The plug in happened automatically when I installed Gigapixel AI. A window pops up with 3 options. I choose "edit a copy with LR adjustments", which creates a tif copy of my image right in LRc and brings up Gigapixel. I do my edits (2x, 4x, ..., suppress noise or remove blur, ...) then click "apply changes". Gigapixel enlarges my image then exits and I continue editing on the larger tif file in LRc.

whitehall Loc: Canada

LR Classic, using a folder, RAW after Convert to DNG and DP Prime

fredpnm Loc: Corrales, NM

Strodav has the way to do it!

Why do you convert to DNG, no need for that.

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

For belt and suspenders image backup. I copy my camera mem cards containing the raw files to a separate "rawimagestorage" SSD on my PP computer. I import from rawimagestorage into LRc and have it make a dng of each image on a separate LRc working drive SSD as part of the process. So, a double backup. That's when I delete the images on my mem card and I will remove the worst of my dng images in LRc as part of the sorting process. Those images I chose to PP go to a directory on my C: drive. Everything is backed up regularly.

The reason I keep all my original raw files is because PP software gets better and better with every new release and some very good images with technical flaws can now be saved. If for some reason I lose an original, I have the dng backups. We've all been through it. What could have been a portfolio shot ends up being slightly out of focus, suffering from subject motion blur, or camera shake when we zoom in or is too small due to a large crop. I've gone back in my archives and resurrected a few of those that are now hanging on the walls of my home gallery.

fredpnm Loc: Corrales, NM

Sorry, Strodav my question on DNG was directed to Whitehall...but your workflow is of interest as well.

whitehall Loc: Canada

Glad Strodav. Appreciate your answer that provides a reasoned approach for converting into DNG. I have not had time to go back and test the recommendations, Christmas parties and all, but shall do tomorrow.

fredpnm Loc: Corrales, NM

I'm curious, why not use the "Make a Second Copy To:" in the LR import dialog? Since you can save that second copy to whatever location/drive you select, seems that method would save you some steps while maintaining the security you seek for having a fallback position to all the original RAW files.

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

I'm also curious. Why do you import the raw file and save a copy as dng?

About 5-6 years ago I was wondering if it was worth going to dng. I collected opinions online and tabulated them and wrote up the results at https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/user-page?upnum=1419. Since it was half a decade ago it might be somewhat outdated but I have not heard anything to date to convince me to reverse my original opinion that dng did not present any clear advantages for the long term. The only clear advantage it presents is that it bypasses the time delay between a new camera body and the updating of the most used software to read the raw file. But in the long term I don't see the necessity (assuming you DO update your software occasionally).

All the software I'm familiar with will use the native raw files.

I am always interested in the reason someone does something different from the way I do it, hence the question. (I don't think I'm always right, nor do I think my way is good for everyone, but I'm always open to learning something new).

To restate the question, what do you think the dng format does for you that the raw file doesn't?

PS: feel free to start a new thread rather than hijacking this one, but if you do, present us with a link to the new thread.

Canisdirus

https://www.adobe.com/creativecloud/file-types/image/comparison/dng-vs-raw.html

All of the reasons why DNG is a thing with Adobe software.

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

Some of the reasoning I don't understand.

DNG files also strip out select information to decrease the size and simplify storage and editing. This may include JPEG previews, GPS information, metadata, and certain camera models’ focal points, lighting, and picture controls........... Why loose info.


With DNGs, edits and changes are written directly into the file. This leads to fewer files for storage, but also strips out information that you can’t recover later.......... This sounds DESTRUCTIVE, original lost.

Maybe it's just me. But this doesn't sound good.

Canisdirus

You don't lose anything since LR still has the RAW original.
The human eye cannot tell the difference between the two either.