Compression of DNG

Similar Questions

• The "Compression" in DNG Converter does compress the JPEG preview or the DNG file?

  In the dialog box Prederence DNG Converter, is a "Compression" option, it does not compress the JPEG preview or the DNG file?

  According to the definition in the DNG specification compression compresses the image (JPEG Lossless algorithm) RAW data

  It makes no sense to compress a JPG preview because this image is still compressed and smal.

• Lossless compression of native DNG in camera during the import

  Hello. I have XP with LR2.5 and Ps CS4 and ACR 5.5. My camera (Leica M8) produces DNG files as native format.

  I'm confused about methods to apply compression without loss for the DNG files. I've used this successfully before but am currently unable to reproduce this function with LR2.

  I have a compression without loss for DNG defined in preferences. I import the files from the card and application of a change to the file, for example, WB, then click Update metadata and preview as a workaround. However the file sizes do not seem to change.

  Since I open DNG in another converter in ACR too I am confused where the lossless compression has been applied previously.

  I have successfully implemented this compression with ACR in the past, but try to learn the workflow of LR.

  I'm also not sure if I can get the compression lossless applied during import.

  Indications as to what I am now missing would be greatly appreciated.

  I don't think that in the workflow that you describe is there a possibility for data must be compressed by Lightroom. Update of metadata in dng file does not have the RAW data, so it is normal that the file size does not change.

  I'm also not sure if I can get the compression lossless applied during import.

  Indications as to what I am now missing would be greatly appreciated.

  You can set the component import up to "copy photos in dng. I think this re-compress the dng, but I've never owned a camera that uses dng as a native format, so I'm not sure about this. Otherwise, you can after importation "convert photo to DNG" from the Edit menu. This should also convert files that already are dng.

• DNG vs. RAW owner files sizes

  I was told that the dng files are compressed lossless files and would be physically smaller than files gross owners and started to use them in my workflow.  And this seems to be true with most Canon CR2 raw files.  However, I discovered a camera when this is not true and I am looking for a confirmation and an answer as to why.  I have both a Canon 5 d Mark III and a Canon 5 d camera.  On the Canon 5 d Mark III dng files are all smaller than the corresponding raw CR2 file.  About 17% smaller.  However on the 5 d dng files are as much as 50% more according to the raw settings.  The 5 d is a 50mp camera.  Fixed at the maximum 50 mp the dng file is smaller.  On the smallest setting, 12 mp, the file sizes are much the same.  On the medium setting 28mp file sizes can be 50% larger.  Someone knows why?  28 mp is the setting I use most of the time.

  Sparky

  This happens because the raw files not full resolution are not of the actual raw files. They are already demosaiced. The unit also uses a different compression algorithm for those who is not completely without loss if I remember correctly, like the color rendition is cooked in raw/sraw. It is a very bad idea. So the advantage of size compression lossless dng only works for normal files, full resolution, raw. In general, if you shoot in raw, you really do not want to use lower resolution settings, some of these cameras offer as you get all the benefits of the raw files of this way.

• Import photos previously edited in LR to LR on 2nd computer

  I thought that if I edited the photos using Lightroom 2.5 on my laptop while traveling, that when I got home and imported these photos (on external hard drive) to my office catalog, Lightroom 2.6, the changes that I had previously done would show cigarette... but they did not.  Shouldn't the LR editing changes in the XMP sidecar and travel with the import into LR on another computer?  How can I work in Lightroom on two computers and without having to duplicate my workflow?

  If you have set LR to save meta-data to the file, after you import the files to a new catalog (as you already have) select read the metadata of the file to read in the new catalogue. You can also be just to use a catalog located on the hard drive itself. Or two catalogues, one desktop and one on the laptop, as well with the images on the external hard drive, to separate and then use synchronize folders to update catalogs after working on another. I use the method later. There are other methods such as creating a new catalog on the laptop and then import this as a catalog in the main catalog to your desktop. As always with LR several ways to achieve this, select the one that suits you the best. The important is to make sure that you don't forget to set LR or automatically write file data or that you do manually after each adjustment. Propitiatory file to DNG conversion is also very useful here in what the metadata and then figure in the file itself, rather than as xmp file separate. It also has the other benift usually create smaller files compression lossless DNG work better than more propitiatory RAW files.

• Black Magic pocket camera / cinema DNG (compressed)

  Is there a method to get the pocket camera CinemaDNG files to work first? (or Speedgrade?) They function as individual images in Photoshop.

  Apparently, they are "compressed" CinemaDNG.

  To answer this thread to loop the loop.

  Only the Blackmagic film camera cinema DNG files are currently supported in first Pro CC and CC SpeedGrade.

  AfterEffects and PhotoShop use one other importer that Premiere Pro and SpeedGrade. So if you make a request for a (Premiere Pro), by default it will count for SpeedGrade as well.

  Thank you

  Peter Garaway

  Adobe

  Premiere Pro

• DNG preview embeded average size versus Lightroom generate minimum preview.

  HI -.

  I have converted my raw files to DNG with preview set to medium instead of the whole set.

  In contrast in Lightroom, there are several preview option (minimum, 1:1, etc.); I always use a minimum because Lightroom will build a larger preview on the fly when necessary and retains in the cache for 30 days.

  I wonder if I really have no need to convert raw with the complete preview files because Lightroom will build a larger preview in Lightroom. This would save 10 to 15% smaller size of the DNG file.

  I saw the photographers convert to DNG compressed with size super small file and it does not make a real difference in large visible overview to develop.

  Thoughts? I appreciate your comments. Thank you.

  Frank

  Regardless of the size of the preview that you choose to have Lightroom generates, these previews are used only in the library module. Lightroom always generates an overview of raw image data when you use the develop module. I can't comment on the creation of small previews during the conversion to DNG. I always left just the medium setting. You will need to decide what is best for you. If this savings of 10-15% is critical for you then go and generate smaller previews. These glimpses into the DNG file are used by some programs that do not recognize or allow you to work with the raw image data. These programs will automatically display the embedded JPEG preview.

• Export batch, a .dng exports in much larger size than the others?

  Hello!

  I'm on Lightroom, Camera Raw version 5.6, Yosemite 10.10.5 5.6. I just did an export batch of 34 images with a size limit of 200K image file. Images resized to 1500px on the short side, 72 dpi.

  One of the images - ironically, one I had not manipulated at all - threw an error - ' Could not create a JPEG that reached your limit of 200K bytes. " All others - light, dark, who were DNG or images that have been the PSD files, color and b & W - were very good. But this one image wouldn't do it.

  When I turned the file off the power limit, it has exported to ~3.5 MB. 1500 x 2250 JPG.

  The DNG file size is 11.6 MB, which is actually on the lower end of the size of typical file of all the DNG in the group. It has very few keywords.

  This is an uncropped image, but so are the others.

  I even tried to open it in PS and PSD compact version, and then export that. same thing.

  Let me repeat that it is a lot, so the export parameters are the same in all areas. Looks like it is something specific to this image.

  Thoughts?

  I would ignore the file size of JPG photos, this is a totally meaningless number.

  Lightroom offers you correct photos when you export, I've never seen a case where Lightroom gave bad exports.

  Yes, the specific image made a difference, specifically some content image can be compressed more than any other image content. Again, the size of the file is totally meaningless.

• Raw to DNG FYI

  Just wanted to share some information with the group, if you are sensitive to the size of files and storage space, you do not want to import files as DNG files raw in Lightroom.  I have a Canon 70 d and me shooting in raw and convert to DNG on import.  I discovered that the DNG files were almost two times bigger than the original raw files and a couple of MB larger than uncompressed RAW file.  However, RAW conversion to DNG turns out to be smaller than the raw file.  I don't experience sRAW so I have no idea what he will do.

  Canon sRaw and raw formats are stupid complex and not really thought longer. What do we Canon is "chroma subsampling", which basically means that the data are transformed to luma and chroma, and then some in proportion to the chrominance information is thrown. AKA, you have information luma for each pixel in the image, but information from chroma that for each pixel of second or third - the ratio varies according to whether it is raw or sRaw. (I'm simplifying a lot, btw. Google chroma subsampling if you want real details). If you now have a much smaller file, without much loss of apparent detail, because the human eye is much more sensitive to luma detail details of chroma.

  The problem for the conversion of the DNG format is that the DNG specification includes no any way to encode the cannon-style chroma subsampling, so to convert to DNG, the information must be converted to a 'normal' image, which is much larger. That can make the DNG is other forms of compression, notably without loss. If the final size is the result of the expansion due to the reversal of her chroma subsampling and compression by some DNG compression options you have defined. End result is that the file can be anywhere from a lot bigger for a little smaller than the original, depending on the options and the nature of the image.

• Degradation of the image by converting to DNG files?

  My camera generates NEF files. I usually copy as DNG when I import them into Lightroom. This process does change my image somehow?

  I love that DNG is an open format, but I don't want to degrade my images.

  Thank you

  Daniel

  If you choose lossless compression when you convert to DNG format, not a single pixel has changed in your image.

  Of course, if you choose lossy compression, then the image has changed, although in almost all cases, you'll have a hard time, except if you look really hard seeing her.

• DNG from lightroom to photoshop are different

  Hello, I have a problem when I export my Raw (convert in lightroom in dng) file as a smart object in photoshop, it make it differently and I don't really know why...

  I have the export of lightroom as a 16 bit ProPhoto Tiff without compression as a smart object.

  In photoshop, my file will apear to be rinsed but if I double click on my smart object, I got the same rendering in lightroom.

  Now, if I open my dng directly in camera raw, make some adjustments and open as smart object, the rendering apear to be carried away by the
  Please help me

  From lightroom after editing it:

  

  Imported as a smart object in photoshop

  

  Rough version of the camera (aflter double click on my smart object or if I opened my dng in camera raw.) Please note tha if I open this version as a smart object directly from the line of the camera, I have had the same image as above)
  

  The stars in the version of photoshop are completely different, or is it my eyes?

  I'm under LR5, photoshop CS6, Camera Raw 8.3 on windows 7 64 bit

  Help, please

  It is probably due to the difference of the scaling algorithms in Lightroom and Photoshop when you zoom out. To display an image on your screen to zoom back zoom levels, the program has reduced your image. The algorithm can strongly change the appearance of detail. Photoshop does different things depending on the zoom level. If it's a zoom factor of 2, or a multiple of that (25%, 50%, etc.) it uses a different algorithm that able to zooms (33%, 66%). In Lightroom, at least in the library, he uses a dependent algorithm of the system but he always uses (except at the 1:1 and more zooms). Develop, it is something different altogether. Bottom line is that in any program, you may find real sharpness/detail if you are not 1:1 (100% in the PS) or higher zoom. The algorithm used to reduce adjustment views, has a strong influence on the appearance of sharpness.

• . DNG files not showing thumbnails in the Mac Finder

  Hello.

  I'm trying to convert to Lightroom for my photos on my Mac and when I downloaded the example for tutorials .dng files, I noticed that they do not appear in my files to the Mac Finder thumbnails. Clearly it is somewhat a disadvantage when there are file photos.

  .Dng files I downloaded all appear identical graphic icons that resemble an opening of the camera.

  Is it possible to get these files will appear as thumbnails on my Mac please?

  I'm running OS X on a MacBook Pro 10.9.4.

  AHA, this is what is happening. I downloaded the practice files. They are the new format dng compressed and scaled-down (like smart Lightroom previews) that Adobe just introduced with LR 5. Raw Apple libraries like also all non-Adobe software can not read those, unfortunately, so you will not be able to preview.

• Convert JPG & Delete DNG DNG?

  Hello

  I have a lot of old photos that I won't have to keep files DNG (converted from the NAVE). I'd rather have a JPG file (or DNG format which does not contain RAW data, leaving only JPG) for space saving purposes. Is there a way I can do this in just a few clicks of button on an important band in my library?

  If I were you, I would like to convert to DNG format with loss: compression bulky like jpeg, but with change in the benefits of raw.

  To do this, check the "use lossy Compression" box in the dng conversion dialog prompt:

  

  ~ R.

• DNG Blackmagic pocket camera

  This DNG format is compressed... is not compatible with the first cc 7.1

  UPDATE OF ADOBE...

  Hi sdb510,

  Thanks for the post. Yes, only the Blackmagic film camera cinema DNG files are supported. If you want that other forms of cinema DNG to be supported, please make a feature request: http://www.adobe.com/go/wish

  It's a confusing question, thanks to set us the record straight.

  Kevin

• LR 4.3: How to save * existing * Tiff with Zip Compression

  Dear all,

  -J' using LR 4.3 on a windows 7 x 64 PC.

  -J' use a catalog for each wedding/event/shoot.

  -J' I import all my images as CR2 or DNG and work with those files in LR and Photoshop CS6.

  -Once I finished making changes on a marriage, I find myself with, for example, 300 16-bit uncompressed Tiff images in a dozen different files (I shoot big 600 pax + marriages sometimes).

  
  -I want: Re-save/overwrite all these images as Tiff 8 bit images with ZIP compression.

  How can I do this?

  -J' tried to select all images and exporting 8 bit Tiffs Zip with the tab replace originals without selected warning. However I get the error that the file already exists and LR can do nothing about it.

  -J' tried to create an Action in Photoshop, but there are two problems: 1) photos are spread over several files and selecting each via file > batch > controller means the process requires manual intervention to reselect TIFF of the next file - I want to hit the action, go to lunch and come back to find ALL registered. (2) the action is outside the LR and I would like rather to avoid mistakes of "metadata has changed outside ' even though this is not really a biggie.

  Why not just save the images as TIFF Zip initially? I use a number of freelance retouchers, many complain that the compression process slows down their workflow initial (slower material).

  I would be very grateful for any ideas.

  (and yes - the space is considerable, there where I live the memory is still not cheap enough!)

  Thanks in advance...

  Have you determined the steps you want for a single photo in Photoshop?

  You have an action of these steps that does what you want in a folder?

  It would be wise to leave things as a 16 - bit where the layer blending options change too, but you can confirm one way or the other by testing with a complicated overlay of the edges carefully to feather situation and make sure that nothing looks bad after you convert to 8-bit.

  It seems it would work to use Bridge to select the whole lot of hair in a marriage to compress and eventually convert to 8-bit.  With the help of your file (s) example:

  Bridge point to the Jack and Jill marriage file, set the view to display items in subfolders, define the filtering in TIF, leave the bridge find all hair and then do a Select All on them and choose tools / Photoshop / lot... then indicate your photo-simple action and make sure that the source is bridge and whatever other parameters are required and let it go.

  You would like to experiment and perfect your batch processing on a copy of the records so it wouldn't destroy the real business until you were sure it was working.  It is possible that some thing would not work because you substitute on top of photos or make several subfolders or something else - I'm not much of an expert of action PS, but it should be relatively easy to check if it would work or not.