DNG support half arsed...
Finally finally Capture One supports DNG in a way that makes it useable and compatible with a lot of other software.
But why would it still use XMP sidecars with DNG when I go for full sync? Why is there no option to embed basic adjustments and metadata editing like ratings, labels, etc. inside the DNG?
It could be so much easier and more reliable to move files and entire collections between Capture and Lightroom or Bridge.
And how about a function to convert into DNG? I have come to like DNG as it is a way to convert the highest quality RAW files from a Sony camera into a much more manageable file size without any kind of quality loss.
I really hope these features will be added in the very near future.
But why would it still use XMP sidecars with DNG when I go for full sync? Why is there no option to embed basic adjustments and metadata editing like ratings, labels, etc. inside the DNG?
It could be so much easier and more reliable to move files and entire collections between Capture and Lightroom or Bridge.
And how about a function to convert into DNG? I have come to like DNG as it is a way to convert the highest quality RAW files from a Sony camera into a much more manageable file size without any kind of quality loss.
I really hope these features will be added in the very near future.
0
-
As far as I know, you can export your images converting them to DNG when going through the output process recipes. I've never tried it, as my native RAWs are DNG, but maybe it could help.
Robert0 -
Two questions, two answers.
DNG and XMP
How I understand Capture One it considers a DNG RAW file as any RAW file and Capture One does not write to a RAW file, it only reads it. This is a safety precaution.
Embedding adjustments into DNG or XMP files for that matter does not work in a combined workflow with Adobe products, as they can not read the Capture One adjustments and vice versa. XMP is fine for transporting metadata and works fine between different products that support that standard.
Convert to DNG
You can convert almost any RAW format to DNG with Capture One. There are exceptions like the Fuji X-Trans files.0 -
Hello and thank you so much for your input.
Obviously adjustments embedded into the DNG wouldn't make that much sense. On the other hand - it did work the other way around. DNGs created by Adobe software could be read and basic metadata like ratings for example would be interpreted by Capture whilst adjustments that could not be transferred were simply ignored. I can't see a good reason why it wouldn't work the other way around.
And what capture offers is not what I would call a conversion. I have the option to export the files in DNG format amongst all the other options here.
The idea is to actually convert the files that are inside the catalogue or the session form their original Raw format into dng and erase the large original raw. Pretty much what Lightroom can do. And when you deal with a lot of Sony files this is the perfect way to get lossless compression of a full raw file.
The export function that Capture offers is by no means a replacement for that.
So a few of the best opportunities that come with DNG support have been pretty much squandered IMHO.0 -
I don't know about saving space. I just tried it on a picture that was a 31 MB Nikon .NEF raw image, and when exported as a .DNG it is 48 MB.
Ian0 -
Can's speak for NEF as I have no Nikon. But Sony produces uncompressed RAWs and the DNG produced by Adobe generally needs about 50% of the HD space. 0 -
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
How I understand Capture One it considers a DNG RAW file as any RAW file and Capture One does not write to a RAW file, it only reads it.
In my experience C1 does not write to any existing image file regardless the image file type, C1 will only write to new image files, meaning create new image files. The behaviour really bugs some users who adjust, export, examine, tweak and export again. C1 does indeed write to existing XMP sidecar files, but they are not "image" files.Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
This is a safety precaution.
Alledgedly, yes. It could also be the lazy way out.Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
Embedding adjustments into DNG or XMP files for that matter does not work in a combined workflow with Adobe products, as they can not read the Capture One adjustments and vice versa.
I believe it is safe to say that adjustments made and saved to an image file or to a sidecar file by application A are generally useless in application B unless applications A and B are both from the same maker, like A and B both made by Adobe. There are probably some successful adjustment exchange via Adobe's PSD file format using PSD-friendly applications.Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
You can convert almost any RAW format to DNG with Capture One.
Do the resulting DNGs always come with an embedded thumbnail and embedded preview like "real" DNGs do? (I have little experience with C1 and DNG)0 -
Bottom-line is that when you like to go with Capture One, forget DNG. DNG works great with Adobe products, no discussion here.
We could argue whether it could a little more of this and that in Capture One, but Capture One works best with the original raw file.
And for storage, fortunately, it is rather cheap these days.
This is the most honest advice I can give you.0 -
OddS wrote:
Alledgedly, yes. It could also be the lazy way out.
What's lazy about it? It'd be a trivially easy thing to change in the code - but there's no significant demand for it.
Besides, I'd argue that it's "lazy" to complain about having to delete a few files outside of Capture One - there's no way it's that much of a chore...0 -
Besides, I'd argue that it's "lazy" to complain about having to delete a few files outside of Capture One - there's no way it's that much of a chore...
In a professional situation under extreme pressure where time really matters every extra step is one too many.0 -
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
Bottom-line is that when you like to go with Capture One, forget DNG. DNG works great with Adobe products, no discussion here.
We could argue whether it could a little more of this and that in Capture One, but Capture One works best with the original raw file.
And for storage, fortunately, it is rather cheap these days.
This is the most honest advice I can give you.
Hi Paul,
thanks again for your input.
I partially agree.
Unfortunately Adobe software is still widely spread in the professional world so I am afraid I am in no position to forget about it. DNG makes it much easier to share RAW including ratings etc. with a client, graphic designer, retoucher etc.
On top: Capture One is still incapable to handle really big catalogues (30k upwards). This means I am forced to organise my entire archive through Lightroom. Impossible to do with C1 as the DAM functionality is weak and buggy until today. DNG once again a very handy format.
Storage is generally cheap as you mention and sometimes not all. We have normally on production a fairly high spec Macbook with a 2TB internal SSD. You might be aware what extra SSD space in a Macbook costs these days.
And it simply makes a huge difference for me if my production machine is filled up after three days or after 6 days as generally my productions run between 3 and 6 days.
In my line of work it is important that we have ideally all the material of a production together and don't have to split into multiple Sessions on different external drives etc. I had to do this in the past and later bring them together again. With C1 this takes many many hours...
And sometimes we need to transfer files via internet to a server and obviously smaller is faster.
So believe it or not, smaller file size still holds value in 2019.
Phase one improved DNG functionality in V20 which is telling me they see the need for this format. All I am saying is that there is still a bit of room for improvement.0 -
Fair enough. 😉 0 -
You seem to have a direct line to Phase. Can you tell them to finish their DNG support and - for crying out loud - to fix the DAM functionality... 😉 1 -
BerndInBerlin wrote:
You seem to have a direct line to Phase. Can you tell them to finish their DNG support and - for crying out loud - to fix the DAM functionality... 😉
I like that. I will tell them over a beer or two. 😂1 -
Many people (including me) will be forever grateful and shall sing your and Capture One's praises. 😄 1 -
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
BerndInBerlin wrote:
You seem to have a direct line to Phase. Can you tell them to finish their DNG support and - for crying out loud - to fix the DAM functionality... 😉
I like that. I will tell them over a beer or two. 😂
Now that is a pub meeting I would like to attend and I don't even drink beer. Pick a place where there is some decent scotch too please 😄0 -
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
Bottom-line is that when you like to go with Capture One, forget DNG.
Spoken by someone who doesn't use a camera that creates DNG files 😂
As for not updating existing image files -- I'd say that is more of a processing philosophy than laziness. I understand the reasoning although I slightly disagree with it. My disagreement is that it is easier to manage one file than it is to manage two. With two files it is too easy to get them out of sync if only because you forgot to copy the XMP file and lose all your metadata updates as a result.0 -
marchyman wrote:
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
Bottom-line is that when you like to go with Capture One, forget DNG.
Spoken by someone who doesn't use a camera that creates DNG files 😂
I still have an iPhone... 😉
Some nuance for those who come along these posts.
Capture One 20 is a great step forward regarding non-supported native DNG. The Capture One team has put quite some effort into it to achieve that. Supported native DNG are processed fine in Capture One. I had a Leica M8 and I have always been happy with the results.
Converting RAWs to DNG is not a preferred solution when working with DNG in my opinion. That is the main point.
Adobe products take the DNG-centered workflow to another level. You won't find that kind of workflow in Capture One.0 -
marchyman wrote:
As for not updating existing image files -- I'd say that is more of a processing philosophy than laziness. I understand the reasoning although I slightly disagree with it. My disagreement is that it is easier to manage one file than it is to manage two. With two files it is too easy to get them out of sync if only because you forgot to copy the XMP file and lose all your metadata updates as a result.
That!
Don't really care about philosophies. The fastest, most reliable and easiest workflow is the goal. And obviously Metadata in a DNG file (or any image file) can be altered without corrupting the image data. Other applications seem to be doing just fine.0 -
BerndInBerlin.... DNG makes it much easier to share RAW including ratings etc. with a client, graphic designer, retoucher etc.
wrote:
everything is a kind of collaboration this days and when clients insist on raw files I too think dng is the best option for photographers because you can handle them over with your desired look and not just default settings.
so the bigger issue is that almost nobody other than photographers know or use capture one in our industry but every agency, graphic designer knows and uses adobe products. I also think the idea that c1 should support dmg is akward but I think this underlaying issues should have been addressed long ago but it would have needed some kind of vision and dedication to professional user.
so one solution I can imagine is a kind of photoshop plugin which would allow to open and edit basic adjustments of EIP packed raw files. if such a plugin would be reasonable priced this would also work as an additional revenue for c1. everybody can hate adobe but there is a reason why they are the market leader because beside adding new tools they have developed a clear vision what digital imaging will be in the future something which I don't see here.....0 -
Horseoncowboy wrote:
everything is a kind of collaboration this days and when clients insist on raw files I too think dng is the best option for photographers because you can handle them over with your desired look and not just default settings.
so the bigger issue is that almost nobody other than photographers know or use capture one in our industry but every agency, graphic designer knows and uses adobe products. I also think the idea that c1 should support dmg is akward but I think this underlaying issues should have been addressed long ago but it would have needed some kind of vision and dedication to professional user.
so one solution I can imagine is a kind of photoshop plugin which would allow to open and edit basic adjustments of EIP packed raw files. if such a plugin would be reasonable priced this would also work as an additional revenue for c1. everybody can hate adobe but there is a reason why they are the market leader because beside adding new tools they have developed a clear vision what digital imaging will be in the future something which I don't see here.....
You are absolutely correct!
In a professional environment collaboration is the key. And Phase with Capture acts like it's the one and only.0 -
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
Converting RAWs to DNG is not a preferred solution when working with DNG in my opinion. That is the main point.
Adobe products take the DNG-centered workflow to another level. You won't find that kind of workflow in Capture One.
I totally agree. For instance when Lightroom converts a Nikon NEF or Fuji RAF to DNG it truncates the lens description in the metadata - "Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4" is truncated to "16.0-35.0 mm f/4.0". Capture One does not recognize this so applies Lens/Profile/generic and the user has to go to the metadata tab, interpret what lens was actually used and then go back to the lens tab and search for that lens in the profile drop down.0 -
BerndInBerlin wrote:
Don't really care about philosophies. The fastest, most reliable and easiest workflow is the goal.
Well that is a philosophy: go as fast as you can, change what needs to be changed to preserve speed.BerndInBerlin wrote:
And obviously Metadata in a DNG file (or any image file) can be altered without corrupting the image data. Other applications seem to be doing just fine.
LOL stuff happens and you *can* end up corrupting files if you make a mistake (I have seen it happen - not with photos but same issues). If you philosophy is to guarantee that originals stay safe then the decision to never alter an original *is* the correct one.0 -
David532 wrote:
Paul_Steunebrink wrote:
Converting RAWs to DNG is not a preferred solution when working with DNG in my opinion. That is the main point.
Adobe products take the DNG-centered workflow to another level. You won't find that kind of workflow in Capture One.
I totally agree. For instance when Lightroom converts a Nikon NEF or Fuji RAF to DNG it truncates the lens description in the metadata - "Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4" is truncated to "16.0-35.0 mm f/4.0". Capture One does not recognize this so applies Lens/Profile/generic and the user has to go to the metadata tab, interpret what lens was actually used and then go back to the lens tab and search for that lens in the profile drop down.
Hmm.
The Wild West of lens identification.
Even manufacturers break rules when it does not affect their internal activities.
Absent fully implemented and followed standards there is no point in anyone anywhere in the forum attempting to criticise whatever personal standards are being followed.0 -
I add my 2 cent since it's a problem that bug me too.
Today all modern smartphones shot in raw dng. And with new Apple iPhone 12 Pro model with Apple ProRaw we get also DNG files.
I'm having problems to sync the Adobe Lightroom workflow (easy to use since I have the iOS app) with the Capture One rating system.
The problem arise in the moment I do selection in Capture One and want to synch that rating (so only the rating no any edit!) to the DNG in Lightroom. Seams that, not only Capture One can't write to the DNG, bu also the external XMP file isn't readable from Lightroom since I can't get back this rating from the DNG.
It's a pity and I hope the team in Capture One could have a look about it!
0 -
I just want to use the superior XTRANS RAW conversion in Cap1 and am willing to pay just for that, but as it is now, I can't do that.
Every few years Cap1 comes up and I check out the features of the latest version. Guess I'll try back in a couple more. I've def learned not to pin my hopes on Adobe upgrading their RAW conversion process to work better with Fujifilm cameras. I'm frankly shocked it didn't take them years to support the M1 Macs...
0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
25 comments