Skip to main content

exporting DNGs with ICC profile baked in & respecting crops

Comments

11 comments

  • Ian Wilson
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    Ana - DNG is just a different raw format. So if I have a Nikon raw file (NEF format) I can convert it to a different raw format (DNG) if I export as DNG. But it is still a raw file and as such doesn't get any adjustments baked in to it. 

    So you are not missing a step, but what you are attempting to do won't work. 

    You'll have to think through what you hope may be the future use of your files. 10 or 20 years from now, will you want to be able to re-edit them with whatever tools are available then?

    If you want a usable version of the slides that can be viewed by users of the archive, now or in the future, it is likely that they will want to view a JPG file or possibly a TIFF file. They are not likely to want to view a raw file.

    My guess is that If you want to preserve the raw file in some way that might be because

    • it could be processed again with some tools that are superior to what is available today, or
    • you want to have the scan of the slides available in electronic form in such a format as to preserve as much information from the slides as possible, so that if the original physical slides were lost or destroyed you have the best chance of recovering as much of the detail in them as you can. 

    Maybe there are other reasons I haven't thought of.

    It seems to me that there are two future scenarios, as well.

    • You have Capture One (presumably in a future version) available 
      - in this case you could package the adjusted raw file as an EIP and revisit your work on it in the future, or
    • You don't have Capture One in the future
      - in that case you probably need the original raw file. 10 or 20 years from now who knows, for instance what ICC profiles will look like, or what their equivalent will be? Adjustments made with a raw editor (whether Capture One, Lightroom, ON1 or whatever else) are not interchangeable so preserving with the raw file has no particular advantage unless you will be using the same tools.

    So the bottom line, as far as I can see, is deciding why you want to preserve the files, and what you imagine might be done with them in the near future, or in the more distant future. 

    I hope those thoughts help!

    Ian

    1
  • Ian Wilson
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    By the way, I think it is more suitable to discuss this here than in connection with a user guide article, so I've hidden that discussion. 

    Ian

    0
  • Walter Rowe
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    Adobe stores adjustments in DNG files. Few, if any, other tools do so. Keep in mind that any adjustments stored by a software package will not be useable by any other software package. The best universal format for storing archival images is a high resolution TIFF file with a high bit color depth and large color space alongside the original camera native raw file. This will best reflect the intent while retaining the original camera native raw data. Adobe has tried to convince us that our camera native raw files may not be supported later. To date that has not come true.

    1
  • SFA
    Top Commenter

    Am I right in my recollection that Adobe is currently responsible for overseeing TIFF standards as well as their own DNG creation?

    0
  • Walter Rowe
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    Yes. A quick search online says Adobe now owns TIFF.

    0
  • Keith R
    Top Commenter

     Adobe has tried to convince us that our camera native raw files may not be supported later. To date that has not come true.

    Of course it has! Every week there's a post on here complaining that Capture One X won't support camera Y, because the software is too old.

    -1
  • Walter Rowe
    Moderator
    Top Commenter

    Choosing to not add is different from dropping support. Has Capture One dropped support for a camera?

    1
  • Keith R
    Top Commenter

    No, Walter: you're regarding the phrase "Adobe has tried to convince us that our camera native raw files may not be supported later" as only having one single meaning. It doesn't.

    But here's evidence that in any event your one-sided interpretation is incorrect:

    https://www.photo.net/forums/topic/482033-canon-dpp-no-longer-supports-older-bodies/

    https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1405095

    It's a simple, verifiable fact that converters have been known to withdraw RAW support for old bodies.

     

    0
  • Marcin Mrzygłocki
    Top Commenter

    Links provided above talk about migrating RAW support to a new codebase, there is no information that this process has not been completed, which would indeed result in some cameras being effectively abandoned, so a statement:

    It's a simple, verifiable fact that converters have been known to withdraw RAW support for old bodies.

    Still needs any evidence.

    0
  • SFA
    Top Commenter

    I recall that some very early digital bodies (notably Canon but possibly a few others) were indeed dropped from support by Canon, and therefore other RAW processors and the OS tools that provided RAW file interpretations by making the embedded "jpg" files in the RAW files visible, at some point some years ago.

    This is all part of the regular problem that comes with continuous updates of or replacement of applications over time. Long term support for older hardware and peripherals - especially anything that may have been low volume uptake and use or is simply about as obsolete as a thing can be - is often dropped because the manufacturer opts not to support it in new software releases. For example,  my oldish model printer has no driver available after Win 7/8 and these days even finding "compatible" ink cartridges is becoming a challenge. OEM cartridges no longer exist as far as I can tell.

    Support for some of the earliest cameras in the family that eventually become Phase One backs has not always been carried forward in  new versions of the dedicated software  - but then they were typically quite noche cameras and it might be quite reasonable to expect that they also come with expectations of having to use older technology to process any files that people might still create using them from time to time out of interest (as opposed to a business need...)

     

    1
  • Łukasz Gałecki

    Regarding creation of preservation master files, do you follow any established digitalisation guidelines? FADGI(USA) and Metamorfoze(Netherlands) are established examples to check if you don't. TIFF is most common file format for preservation files. If you want to store raw files just develop them to tiff with all adjustments and store raw as EIP separately. EIP package will include all adjustments( Capture One), metadata, LCC and ICC in one zip file without compression. To be frank most digitalisation projects don't store RAW files after creation of preservation master TIFF files.

    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.