11-23-2012, 12:43 PM
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1353673751' post='21058']
That then means that you have no RAW left... it is already developed.
So either it is converted into bayer, or already converted into RGB pixels... Both are not ideal at all?
[/quote]
DNG is a standardized raw or intermediate format which does not throw out any information from the original RAW files. All it does is demosaicing, that's it. Whether it is deal or not, that's up to the beholder - it was introduced as a standard format by Adobe to allow for processing of any RAW file, whatever its format, in any image processing tool, in th ehope of standardizing the format. A few cameramakers use this as the standard RAW output, actually.
The advantage is that because it is just a demasoicing tool, it is easy to implement new camera RAW formats to a RAW format that can be handled by any image processing tool. In principle it is lossless, but I don't really know whether that is a proper fact.
I've tried it in the past, and compared to converting to 16-bit lossless tiffs, which is in a way a similar thing, there do not seem to be any differences, other than filesize (tiffs are much bigger). Since then I have decided that it is not worth the effort; I have gone back to converting RAWs straight away, but then, my Canon RAWs can be processed by any image processing tool anyway.
HTH, kind regards,Wim
That then means that you have no RAW left... it is already developed.
So either it is converted into bayer, or already converted into RGB pixels... Both are not ideal at all?
[/quote]
DNG is a standardized raw or intermediate format which does not throw out any information from the original RAW files. All it does is demosaicing, that's it. Whether it is deal or not, that's up to the beholder - it was introduced as a standard format by Adobe to allow for processing of any RAW file, whatever its format, in any image processing tool, in th ehope of standardizing the format. A few cameramakers use this as the standard RAW output, actually.
The advantage is that because it is just a demasoicing tool, it is easy to implement new camera RAW formats to a RAW format that can be handled by any image processing tool. In principle it is lossless, but I don't really know whether that is a proper fact.
I've tried it in the past, and compared to converting to 16-bit lossless tiffs, which is in a way a similar thing, there do not seem to be any differences, other than filesize (tiffs are much bigger). Since then I have decided that it is not worth the effort; I have gone back to converting RAWs straight away, but then, my Canon RAWs can be processed by any image processing tool anyway.
HTH, kind regards,Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....