do you keep the nef file if converting to dng?

topcat07

topcat07

Suspended / Banned
Messages
431
Edit My Images
Yes
Just seeing what people do really as I have been importing photos as dng then backing this folder up before making any changes and deleting photos etc. Although in Lightroom there is a option to make a second copy which keeps original nef files and puts dng files in another folder. Should I be okay with just dng or keep the nef file to?


Looking to future proof as much as possible.

Interested on how other people tackle this really
 
I'd just keep the dng's. Out of interest why convert at all? If push comes to shove it's likely there'll always be a workaround.
 
droj said:
I'd just keep the dng's. Out of interest why convert at all? If push comes to shove it's likely there'll always be a workaround.
Click to expand...

remember reading DNG was future proof as it is more widely used and open equivalent to the PDF standards

Would be annoyed if in 15 years time i could not open files due to compatibility issues of the operating system, program or the file becoming obsolete


I did read a few other bits to which suggested NEF would always be supported to which is why i am not sure what is best
 
Reason suggests to me that it'll always be possible to work with NEF's - since there's a phenomenal number of them out there. If it did come about that we couldn't work with them directly, then there would doubtless be a way of converting them (to DNG or whatever) still available.

You invoke a comparison with PDF - which over time accrues multiple flavours, such as PDF/X-3:2002 etc ... so I'd always keep the source files that the PDF was generated from.
 
Last edited:
topcat07 said:
Just seeing what people do really as I have been importing photos as dng then backing this folder up before making any changes and deleting photos etc. Although in Lightroom there is a option to make a second copy which keeps original nef files and puts dng files in another folder. Should I be okay with just dng or keep the nef file to?


Looking to future proof as much as possible.

Interested on how other people tackle this really
Click to expand...


Hi, We cannot see the point of converting RAW files to DNG and then keeping the original RAW files.

On initial import into Lightroom we convert all RAW files to DNG to an external hard drive and then duplicate them to give us one working copy and one original copy on the same external hard drive.

We then copy the DNG files to two other external hard drives that are stored in two other different locations.

After we have made sure all copies are good we then delete the original RAW files from the memory cards via re-formatting in camera.

Others may find this as an overkill, but we have never lost any files and it works for us very well without problems.

Hope this helps.
 
In answer to the OPs question: yes, if I was converting to dng I'd keep the nef too. I always want access to the original file.

Personally, I'd ask why you'd convert to dng in the first place?
 
DNG is an 'open' Raw format created by Adobe many years ago in an attempt to get every camera manufacturer to adopt it as a universal standard. However, I think only Pentax, Leica and Hassleblad have actually taken it on. So in that sense at least, DNG failed in its primary purpose.

There is zero chance of any of the major camera manufacturers' Raw formats becoming obsolete but just to enure that, all you have to do is keep a copy of your current post processing programme. Lightroom is particularly good (being non-destructive) as it automatically keeps the untouched Raw file.

By far the greatest future risk is a personal hard drive failure and losing your originals that way. It is vital to back them up and there are numerous ways of doing so, but that's another question.
 
Thanks for all your replies.

Just had a quick read about nef files using a sidecar file alongside the master image.

Where as with a Dng file the settings are stored within the file upon saving , which would make back up easier? Or if you don't save all the changes are stored in the catalog database so would just need to back up all dng files with the catalog is this correct?

Sorry if this has gone a little of topic into specific software now
 
Always keep the NEF file. It's your original source so it's wise to keep it. I keep NEF and "worked" 16 bit TIFF file as the image set.
 
Digifrog said:
Always keep the NEF file. It's your original source so it's wise to keep it. I keep NEF and "worked" 16 bit TIFF file as the image set.
Click to expand...

Think I might start keeping them as a copy just to be safe but use dng as primary working file
 
HoppyUK said:
DNG is an 'open' Raw format created by Adobe many years ago in an attempt to get every camera manufacturer to adopt it as a universal standard. However, I think only Pentax, Leica and Hassleblad have actually taken it on. So in that sense at least, DNG failed in its primary purpose.
Click to expand...

..
If canon and nikon wemt to dng adobe would be shot. The only reason half the people updrage is camera raw. Its not like the offer a great deal of new software to use
 
topcat07 said:
Thanks for all your replies.

Just had a quick read about nef files using a sidecar file alongside the master image.

Where as with a Dng file the settings are stored within the file upon saving , which would make back up easier? Or if you don't save all the changes are stored in the catalog database so would just need to back up all dng files with the catalog is this correct?

Sorry if this has gone a little of topic into specific software now
Click to expand...
No that's hardly off topic but very relevant. Don't know the answer.

My current method is to backup the NEF's & the LR cat (I presume it's similar for Capture One?), & I don't bother anymore with DNG's. I went the DNG route before when I didn't have LR, but just the best update of CR that tallied with the version of PS I still have - which was too ancient to recognise my camera, so converting to DNG (free converter from Adobe) was an extra operation but a workaround for that limitation. Generally it's a minefield of compatibilities (unless you can afford the latest stuff all the time ...), between cameras, software & OS's, as things are always leapfrogging.
 
Last edited:
droj said:
Out of interest why convert at all?
Click to expand...

:plusone:


Oh! I forgot, to futureproof yourself, because there in no chance that adobes file format could disappear but nikon or canon's might, and adobe will never upgrade the format so that you need to subscribe to a cloud based system to use those dng's :thinking:

At the end of the day DNG is no more futureproof than nef or cr2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top