The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

  • We are looking for a committed forum member who would like to help with administration and moderation of our forum. Good communication and writing skills would be appreciated. Please message Olaf if you are interested.

Processing to DNG in C1; Import to LR

rga

Member
I searched threads to see if this had been discussed and cannot find any. My apologies if this has been covered.

Is there any downside to working on an IIQ file in C1 and then processing (exporting) as a DNG file? I know that the XMP has to be a sidecar, and I also know that when you import such a file into LR, the changes to the RAW file made in C1 follow it.

So that's why I'm curious as to if there are any downsides to this workflow.

Thanks for any opinions!
Bob
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Is there any downside to working on an IIQ file in C1 and then processing (exporting) as a DNG file? I know that the XMP has to be a sidecar, and I also know that when you import such a file into LR, the changes to the RAW file made in C1 follow it.
This is wrong.

One doesn't "process" a raw to DNG.

DNG is a raw file. When creating a DNG from a raw in C1 you are simply packaging the original raw data into an adobe-endorsed raw file format.

The image adjustments of any raw processor are wholly proprietary and cannot be shared with another raw processor unless you actually PROCESS the image into a JPG or TIFF (at which point the flexibility of the raw file is gone).

This is why it's so important to choose a raw file which will get the most out of your raw files, and which is good to work through thousands of images.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

Masters Series Workshop:
New England Landscape - Fall Color (Oct 5-8)
 

rga

Member
Pretty snippy answer Doug.

In C1 it's called "processing"; that's why I used the term. If you think they got it wrong in their terminology, give them hell...

Secondly, I noticed that when I worked on an IIQ file in C1 (I pushed the exposure on an under exposed file), and "processed" it (with the XMP Sidecar), opening it up in LR showed the increased exposure change I had done in C1.

So some changes must travel with the sidecar. So you've not answered my question.
Best,
Bob

This is wrong.

One doesn't "process" a raw to DNG.

DNG is a raw file. When creating a DNG from a raw in C1 you are simply packaging the original raw data into an adobe-endorsed raw file format.

The image adjustments of any raw processor are wholly proprietary and cannot be shared with another raw processor unless you actually PROCESS the image into a JPG or TIFF (at which point the flexibility of the raw file is gone).

This is why it's so important to choose a raw file which will get the most out of your raw files, and which is good to work through thousands of images.

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

Masters Series Workshop:
New England Landscape - Fall Color (Oct 5-8)
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Pretty snippy answer Doug.

In C1 it's called "processing"; that's why I used the term. If you think they got it wrong in their terminology, give them hell...
Very sorry if it seemed snippy. I certainly didn't mean it that way. I only wanted to help.

I do absolutely think they use the wrong terminology. It's an extremely common and understandable misconception that the DNG is processed because - as you said - it appears in the processing tab. In fact the entire functionality to create a DNG is sort of shoe-horned into the program. I have "given them hell" (though politely given it's really not a huge deal) about it and they are aware of it; frankly DNG is just not a high priority at Phase One.

Why? DNG is a format that sounds like a dream (infinitely compatible raws) but in reality just creates it's own set of compatibility/formatting/version issues. I have a personal bias against DNG because of issues it has created for customers of mine who bought into it as a "cure all" and got bit hard by some of the nuances (which I'd be the first person to tell you don't effect most users) of why it's not.

It's a lot like Esperanto. It attempts to address a real problem. It's not without it's uses/advantages. But for the most part it just created another language. When the details matter and quality is important nothing can replace the use of the native language of a native speaker.

Secondly, I noticed that when I worked on an IIQ file in C1 (I pushed the exposure on an under exposed file), and "processed" it (with the XMP Sidecar), opening it up in LR showed the increased exposure change I had done in C1.

So some changes must travel with the sidecar. So you've not answered my question.
As far as I'm aware the only data that syncs through XMP is metadata.

I'm not aware of any situation in which what you say occurs. Could you please double check that? Perhaps reduce the exposure rather than push it and see if that change also seems to sync? I'm thinking maybe you are noting the difference in ISO interpretation of LightRoom and C1 on some Phase files and interpreting that discrepancy as an exposure boost.

But of course maybe you're right and such functionality is possible and I've just missed it. I follow these things about as closely as anyone can, but I'm always open to the possibility I've missed a development at some point!!

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

Masters Series Workshop:
New England Landscape - Fall Color (Oct 5-8)
 
Last edited:

shaunmlavery

New member
I too have wondered about the DNG option in Capture One. To me, it would make more sense if the "process DNG" option was also available in the import tab. If it is, please enlighten me.

I have been shooting a camera that shoots DNG natively so I have not had to deal with this. However, I'm thinking of using a Canon along aside and would like a streamlined approach handling the .cr2's.

Bob, not trying to jack your thread, just another view on the topic at hand. The DNG option under the PROCESS tool tab is definitely a little confusing, at least to me.
 

rga

Member
As far as I'm aware the only data that syncs through XMP is metadata.

I'm not aware of any situation in which what you say occurs. Could you please double check that? Perhaps reduce the exposure rather than push it and see if that change also seems to sync? I'm thinking maybe you are noting the difference in ISO interpretation of LightRoom and C1 on some Phase files and interpreting that discrepancy as an exposure boost.

But of course maybe you're right and such functionality is possible and I've just missed it. I follow these things about as closely as anyone can, but I'm always open to the possibility I've missed a development at some point!!

Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
__________________

Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More

National: 877.217.9870 *| *Cell: 740.707.2183
Newsletter | RSS Feed
Buy Capture One 6 at 10% off

Masters Series Workshop:
New England Landscape - Fall Color (Oct 5-8)
I will double check this tonight. I was not notified that a response was posted to this thread so sorry I haven't checked it out sooner. As you suggest, I'll reduce exposure to see what occurs.
Thanks for your interest Doug,
Bob
 

rga

Member
I too have wondered about the DNG option in Capture One. To me, it would make more sense if the "process DNG" option was also available in the import tab. If it is, please enlighten me.

I have been shooting a camera that shoots DNG natively so I have not had to deal with this. However, I'm thinking of using a Canon along aside and would like a streamlined approach handling the .cr2's.

Bob, not trying to jack your thread, just another view on the topic at hand. The DNG option under the PROCESS tool tab is definitely a little confusing, at least to me.
Glad for another interested party in this thread Shaun.
For the camera producing DNG files, I assume you're not using C1, correct? If correct what do you mean by a streamlined approach to handling .cr2's?
Bob
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
I will double check this tonight. I was not notified that a response was posted to this thread so sorry I haven't checked it out sooner. As you suggest, I'll reduce exposure to see what occurs.
Thanks for your interest Doug,
Bob
Any update Bob?
 

rga

Member
Any update Bob?
Thanks for the reminder Doug.

LR does NOT process the developing changes made in C1. It does bring in the Metadata (e.g., DB name, exposure info, etc.), but, as you suspected not the development changes (such as layer adjustments, white balance changes, etc.).

Oh well....
 

dougpeterson

Workshop Member
Thanks for the reminder Doug.

LR does NOT process the developing changes made in C1. It does bring in the Metadata (e.g., DB name, exposure info, etc.), but, as you suspected not the development changes (such as layer adjustments, white balance changes, etc.).

Oh well....
Bad news for you :(. But I'm glad I don't have to find out that my entire understanding of raw processing needed revising! :)
 

rga

Member
Bad news for you :(. But I'm glad I don't have to find out that my entire understanding of raw processing needed revising! :)
Oh it's not all that bad really...
My C1 sessions are organized in one folder and, when I've finished the RAW processing of selected images in C1, I export them to .tif to refine a bit in CS5. Those refined images are then "added" to my LR catalogue.

I haven't really looked at Media Pro 1 for asset management, but probably will some day... Until then, C1->CS5->LR is working well.
Bob
 
I searched threads to see if this had been discussed and cannot find any. My apologies if this has been covered.

Is there any downside to working on an IIQ file in C1 and then processing (exporting) as a DNG file?
I think you have to try and see for yourself. I do this with my Sony files and in general I'm very happy with the results. I think all it does is apply the C1 profile. However, as a downside, the resulting DNGs are pretty huge -- more than double the size of the raw. Not sure why.
 
Top