DNG files only work with Photoshop and Bridge???

[Jonathan Levin]

Hi all.

I have a library of images that were originally 16 bit scans from B&W negatives done on a Nikon Coolscan 4000. I adjusted all the images, and thought for archive puposes that I would save images as tif files. As time went on, DNG sounded like a better way to archive, so I converted all those tif files to DNG.

The problem I am encountering it seems that the only two programs that "read" the initial adjustments, crop, etc. is PS and Bridge. If I view in a program like Apple's Photo app, the images show up, but they are in their uncorrected/cropped state and look awful. Apples own Preview app doesn't open DNG.

So my question is what app other than PS or Bridge support opening these types of files with their corrections. I'm thinkin' when I'm dead or something, who will be able to access the corrected images, and what if they don't have/use PS or Bridge????

BTW- this only happens with the iamges that were scans from B&W negatives >Tif>DNG. The raw NEF files from my Nikons converted to DNG work fine in Apple Photos. I just use Apple Photos to test how files open.

I realize I can re-open all those scanned tiff images, re-save them as PS, jpg, or tiff again, but I thought that DNG would retain the adjustment data reguardless of file type. One other thing I notice is on the converted tiff>DNG, no file previews are generated.

Any ideas?

I'm trying to figure out the best solution for archiving so someone can open my images and have them look as I intended.

[Lumigraphics]

Adjustments are specific to Adobe. You need to render them out as a PSD or TIFF or JPEG so other software can read the edits.

[Jonathan Levin]

I have to re-think the way I am going to archive. I'm not certain what use DNG will have if it is Adobe specific. If someone should open a file that I "processed" and it opens on their end un-adjusted, cropped, etc. that is not goingto work. I was hoping DNG would solve this. I am aware i can re-save everything as Tif, jpg, but I would be hesitant to save to psd. Although once saved, I assume that all my changes are "baked in" meaning that tey will open in any number of apps and look (sort of) like my original intention.

Jst trying to figure a workflow.

I also just noticed that nef's converted to DNG after editing don't hold those changes when in Apple's Photos. So now I am really scratching my head as to DNG's usefulness. Or maybe I am approaching this all wrong. Teach an old dog new tricks please.

Jonathan

[Lumigraphics]

DNG is a RAW format. Just like propietatry RAW files. Just think of it that way. If you need to archive edited files, save as PSD or TIFF. Just remember that those formats have features (say, layers) that may not be read by all software.

[Jonathan Levin]

Thanks Lumigraphics.

I think I see the purpose of DNG, to be able to open in any supoported (at the time) photo editing SW as a "blank canvas" and then get it's adjustments, crop etc. in that program. Tghis would be relying on the person working on the file to interpret what one has in mind for final Save. Which could be different than what I had in mind.

IF that person has Bridge and Photoshop in 50 years, I'm guessing all the files would open as I had corrected them. But that person(s) would have to own PS and Br. (Who knows in 50 years, 20 years, 10 years...)

Tiff files will open as corrected in any number of programs as will JPGs. I get that. Flattened of course.

Tiffs are HUGE. JPG's lossy, unless you save at maximum res. So for archiving purposes I'm am wondering your thoughts on saving everything as highest res JPGs. All the changes and decisions that I make are reflected in that file at least, though not the greatest of formats if they have to be edited for whatever reason again.

I could re-save everything using an Action to convert DNG>JPG. This has me wondering if I even want the DNG file around for someone else to interpret. Unless they have PS, this makes me wonder. Your thoughts?

Jonathan

[TheDigitalDog]

While DNG can be a 'raw format' you do not have to embed raw data into that container NOR are you doing so from your scanner. So it's really kind of pointless to be using DNG for scans IMHO, expect if you wish to store proprietary metadata edits into that container after which you'll need to 'render' the edits and the non raw data into something that might not read that kind of data, hence, the reason to be working in TIFF. So I'm not sure from the scan stage you really need to be working with DNG in the first place. Those scans are NOT raw data. Not by creation and not by saving in a DNG. You can save a fully rendered JPEG in a DNG. That's still 8-bit, rendered RGB JPEG, not raw. DNG is a cousin of TIFF. It's a container for data. That data may or may not be raw.