Converting TIFF to DNG

The profiles are only for raw files, not JPEGs (whether converted to DNG or not).

Oops. That should say camera "calibration", not "claibration".

I too converted my JPEGs to DNG and installed the beta profiles. However, I still only get the "embedded profile" option under camera claibration. I was expecting to see "adobe standard beta" as an option as per the adobe instruction page (http://labs.adobe.com/wiki/index.php/DNG_Profiles)

Any pointers please? I know my Olympus E1 is not specifically supported yet but my research tells me I should still get some kind of option which another Olympus owner claims improved things for him.

Thanks

If the DNG format works well with your workflow, then so be it. Just remember that DNG files created from JPEG or TIF images are not the same as DNG files created from raw files from the camera. They have been demosaiced, and they are linear DNGs. It ISN'T the same type of DNG file.

If I convert everything (jpgs, tiffs, different raw formats) to DNG first, then everything is much cleaner from an automation and workflow point of view for me. For instance, I don't have to worry about whether or not my 'open jpegs/tiffs with ACR' options are set correctly in Lr, Ps, Bridge, and ACR because it doesn't matter; all new images are DNGs. (I crash Ps on a frequent enough basis that sometimes I'll forget to resets the preferences, so the less I have to worry about them, the better off I am.)

This only became a concern for me recently after I had to start dealing with multiple raw formats as well as jpgs. I'd find myself accidentally editing my jpgs in Ps before I had exported them to psd's like I had to do with the raw files. Forcing all input images into DNG prevents me from making that mistake again and also helps me approach the editing of jpegs with a different set of eyes.

These reasons may not matter to most people; we all work differently. But I'm at the point where I ask myself 'Why shouldn't I initially convert everything to DNG?' Nine months ago I couldn't give you reasons why I should convert. Now, I can't really think of reasons (for me) that I shouldn't convert.

As the tools, technology and my work requirements change, so does my workflow. It's an ongoing optimization process. And my opinions and workflow will likely change when CS4 and other tools become available.

-X

> It also means that I can do non-destructive edits via ACR on those images.

You can do that to TIFFs too, as well as to JPEGs.

> If I wasn't using ACR, the (jpg|tiff)->DNG translation would be far less compelling.

It's totally, utterly unnecessary, far from "compelling"

Using DNG means that I have one image format as input to my workflow. It also means that I can do non-destructive edits via ACR on those images.

These are reasons enough for me to want to convert JPG to DNG. I'm not worried about image size. If I need more room, I'll buy another terabyte. As ACR becomes more automate-able in the future, these reasons become even more important. If I wasn't using ACR, the (jpg|tiff)->DNG translation would be far less compelling.

-X

You are not gaining anything by converting those images to DNG. The TIF image is not raw image data, so converting to DNG doesn't give you any of the advantages of working with raw images. But ACR/Lightroom will allow you to work on those TIF images without converting them. And you will have all the advantages that Jeff mentioned.

Why convert a TIFF file to DNG... Archiving? Last time I checked, TIFF_as_DNG files were about HALF the size of the originals (even when those had been "compressed").

OK. We can do the (tiff|jpg) -> dng translation with Lr or ACR.

How can we automate it?

If I'm constantly needing to convert to dng, I'd like to write bit of script (javascript, shell, perl, whatever) to integrate that into the automated parts of my workflow.

-X