RAW vs DNG

This video is about using Adobe DNG file format instead of your camera's RAW.
My name is Matti Sulanto, I'm a photographer and a Lumix ambassador based in Helsinki Finland. I'll publish a new video twice a week.
This video was filmed on the Lumix GH5s and the Leica 10-25mm F1.7 lens.
The audio was recorded with Saramonic Blink500 wireless system.
I make my content using Panasonic Lumix cameras and lenses. Some of the equipment I use is my own and some is on loan from Panasonic.

[SamirHSX]

Good video, I hope see you on the Lumix Ambassador page soon cause you clearly deserves it. You don't just make a show like other youtubers, but you really provide practical information and teaching for the every day use we make us Lumix noobies :)


I am glad to find your channel a few weeks after purchasing my first Lumix GX80 and having your videos helping me enjoying it. You work is worth every other adds panasonic could make. With people like you the brand gets fidelity from their customers and you can be sur my next camera will be another Lumix just because how i leant how to use it from your videos !


Could you make some day a video about monitor color calibration ?


Greetings from France :D

[MrFirstdance]

Already using DNG...to save space and to keep as much info as possible for editing and future editing. As my skill level improves I have gone back to the original DNG file and edited the picture for a much better outcome than was offered originally. Thanks for clarifying some additional areas...You are extremely helpful as always!

[wlfyovi]

I have been converting Panasonic and Olympus RAW files for 10 years now. For 2 main reasons: 1) All the changes from editing made to the .DNG are preserved inside the .DNG so I don't have to deal with a second .XMP 2) An Open Source file can be more readily converted and stored then a proprietary file. But all files will go the way of the Dodo at some point so it's always good to keep up to date on any relevant changes of image file formats (like the new talk about the death of JPEG and the birth of HEIF).


I use Adobe DNG Converter because I have more options in there, I can add automated changes to the naming of the files after conversations (I use my name on the first line then a - with a space, at the second line I put the date, the third line another - and a space and the name of the camera and another - and a space and the fourth line a sequential number of xxxx) and in the end, my files would be named something like these: W0lfy - 07012020 - Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark I - 0001 (and it's very easy to just change the name of the camera when you convert a different camera model or brand). I also use Adobe DNG Converter so the whole workflow process is isolated if there is a fault at the conversion level (hasn't happened yet) I can backtrack the source of the problem.


For converting DNG the more cores on your processors you have the faster it will convert them because it converts one file with each core (NOT THREAD, it doesn't support multithreading, only physical cores). if you have a 4-Core it converts at decent speed, 6-Core it converts one-quarter time faster, 8-Core it converts half the time it needed on 4-Cores and 16-Core (like the new AMD Ryzen 9 3950X) will chew through thousands of pictures in minutes.

[AnandaSim]

Hi Matti, a long discussed topic this one. I don't prefer DNG. And diskspace for me is not a deciding factor - I will be buying another external hard disk soon because my current second one is full - I copy the first one to the second one periodically so that I have the same files in two places. Panasonic I think does not have an own raw editing program, so if you convert to DNG, Adobe programs are not upset. But for other brands which do have a raw editing program, their own program cannot read DNG so if you want to use their own program for some special feature, you can't.

[voksu]

Interesting, might try this one. Any plans on making a video about the upcoming G9 firmware update?

[kungula]

I' ve been using DNG since I shoot Raw and I have no complaints

[stevemcgowan]

some photos blacked out some ok and shot at same time ?

[adrianwhareham]

Hi Matti I use DNG conveter to convert my images from the SD card to my computer .
Thanks for all videos you do look forward to the next one

[lichtloper]

My (corrupted) Photoshop-version [CS6] doesn't recognize ORFs, so I convert those files in Adobe's (free) DNGconverter - immedeately after uploading them from my OMD5mkII to my PC. I regularly check Adobe's site to see if the Converterprogram was updated. Naturally after conversion I delete the ORFs. I have been doing this since I heard about DNG.
My Photoshop does work well to 'develop' those DNG's; I get excellent results.
[I think the DNGformatting should be a standard option in every camera's savingprocedures.]
PeterK

[peterjordan]

Mea Culpa! I just realized that the GX80 was set to 3:2 so I repeated the exercise and got 5 RW2 images at 94.6 MB, reduced to 80.1MB converted to DNG a saving of about 15%. I believe the Olympus RAW files are the same size for 4:3 and 3:2 as the final crop is done in PP. . .

[thebattiful]

I‘m using always DNG. Also for older Photos shot with Nikon Fullframe. So I haven’t to worry about conversion or compatibility in the future.

[davedee]

Not all utilities support DNG. For example, I was experimenting recently with some upscaling programs and ran into severe difficulties: the DNG exports from most of these were incompatible with other software and could not be loaded into even something as basic as the Windows photo viewer without massive corruption.
Adobe has a habit of fleecing it's users once it has you all hooked, so there is that to bear in mind, but other than that DNG only saves space of you elect NOT to store the original raw file inside the DNG. If you do save the original raw file (for the sake of safety) then the DNG files are almost twice the size. No space saving there!
Some people have reported less than satisfactory results PP'ing DNG files (mainly IQ issues, such as color rendering). Personally, I trust the manufacturers' software far more than I trust Adobe and, even if you use 3rd party PP software you can ultimately always fall back on the manufactuer's own raw converter.

[MarkoKoskenoja]

Good video MS. So, no loss of IQ going from RW2 to DNG and 30% less disc space? That sounds great as my G9 RW2 files are up to 24MB. I use a Google Pixelbook (Chrome O/S) and the Android PS Express and LR apps along with the Polarr photo app for editing the RW2 files to jpg or png files. I need to standardize on one app for processing photos and one file format so I'll take your word on DNG. There is a free RAW2 to DNG android app I just tried and it seems fine.

[ianyorke]

The problem with dng is that if it is not used natively by your camera. Very few camera manufacturers use it and those that do are, shall we say, niche players Leica?
So in reality you are just introducing another raw format which means that as the "standard" keeps changing for dng then other raw processing software manufacturers have to do extra work to keep up with the changing standard just to stand still. This development time is taken away from developing their core functionality to the detriment of their users.
Now obviously this is to Adobe's advantage as they created dng and they are the ones who keep changing the standard. Just look at the options you currently have when you convert to dng.



Which version of LR do you want it to be compatible with?
Do you want to embed fast load data (only useable by LR)
Do you want to use lossy compression?


All of these options change the file and what about future changes?



If you live in an Adobe world and will never leave it then Adobe software will always work with dng. That is quite a restriction, although very good for Adobe. As people have already commented a lot of software doesn't support dng, or only the basic vanilla version which you may not create by choosing certain options during conversion.


The saving in file size must be very important to make the choice to dng because that is the only real advantage. With hard disk space available for £156 for 8Tb file size is generally not that critical


It is an individual choice to convert to dng there is no right or wrong but the only thing you lose by sticking with the camera manufacturers raw format is a little file size, which delays but does not prevent the need to increase storage. You gain compatibility with up to date raw processors. If you don't have a old software that doesn't supports your new camera then dng makes sense. I wouldn't delete my raws however, as eventually you are likely to upgrade your software and then the files will be supported.

[左美雲]

I have problem when using DNG converter. when I select folder from the memory card, it shows "'no items match your search". Could you help me with that? Thanks a lot.

[stevemcgowan]

hi I shot photos on my dpi magic air in raw and can't unlock them its dng .im on an iMac 2011 mid.

[tordandreasson]

What about the performance in Lightroom (reading/writing) DNG files vs. RAW, have you assessed it?

[aramb]

Is the camera/lens profile info preserved in the DNG file?

[borderlands]

Windows 10 won't show Lumix RW2 files. It shows Canon and Fuji Raw, but not Panasonic. I have to shoot Raw and jpeg to get a viewable image without opening editing software.

[peterjordan]

I have converted all my RAW files to DNG ever since 2009 when I went from Olympus 4/3 to m4/3. I do it for compatibility but never thought about saving disc space. I just did an experiment with my OMD-EM1 and my GX80, both 16MP. With each camera I shot 5 RAW images, with same subject matter. 5 ORF files took 78.4MB converting them to DNG made them 81.4 MB. 5 RW2 files were 84.4MB and when converted to DNG were 80.3. Converting to DNG saved about 4% for the Panasonic, but needed about 4% more space for the Olympus. . .