Lightroom Classic Imports

[MrSparks999]

Hi All

Been using Photoshop for a while, but never used LR Classic. Now looking to add this to my workflow to make cataloging easier. So my question is this. Should i be converting to DNG on import or not? What are the advantages/disadvantages of converting as opposed to just copying. Any advice regarding Importing would be greatly appreciated.

 

[PKM-UK]

Hi Mark,

Like many things in life, 'raw vs DNG' is both simple and complicated at the same time (and subject to regular debate).

Both formats are considered to be 'raw files'. A raw file is untouched data from the camera, a DNG file is Adobe's creation - based on the TIFF format.

A DNG will (usually) be smaller than a raw file by virtue of stripping out certain meta data (if you choose to embed the raw file, the DNG will be bigger!).

Once you convert to DNG (assuming you choose to delete the original raw file - and not embed it in the DNG) you can't get back to where you started.

Some background blurb can be found - Here, Here and Here.


It comes down to personal preference. My choice is to (usually) keep the full raw file (plus *.xmp) along with the final jpg and ditch anything in-between (i.e. interim DNG's/ TIFF's) - unless there is a particular workflow I need for future reference/ use. (I don't retain the raw files for 'throw-away' images).

Note, even here things are usually not entirely straightforward - e.g. I may well 'pass the raw file' from LrC to DxO PhotoLab/ Topaz Photo AI (using their respective plug-ins), and/ or send it across to PS and they will export back a processed DNG/ TIFF/ jpg - the original raw file remaining untouched in LrC.

In terms of import advice, I always get LrC to rename the file (Initials/ Camera '-' File Number '-' YYMMDD, e.g. PR5-xxxx-240112.CR3) apply an Import Preset based on the camera and also some very simple Metadata (basically (c) info). Keywording is recommended, e.g. finding/ filtering specific images.

My take of course - others may well differ (and they wouldn't be wrong, as everyone will have their own workflow), so make of this what you will.

Finally, enjoy LrC! - Some tips and tricks can be found Here and some YouTube tutorial/ inspiration recommendations can be found Here.

Phil

 

[hedleyw]

Hi All

Been using Photoshop for a while, but never used LR Classic. Now looking to add this to my workflow to make cataloging easier. So my question is this. Should i be converting to DNG on import or not? What are the advantages/disadvantages of converting as opposed to just copying. Any advice regarding Importing would be greatly appreciated.

Are you shooting in the CRAW format? Assuming that you are, you will see approximately a doubling of file size by converting to dng for no benefit that I can think of. CRAW is an excellent format choice over RAW for the vast majority of photographers, most use it exclusively to save card and disk space.

 

[PKM-UK]

Are you shooting in the CRAW format? Assuming that you are, you will see approximately a doubling of file size by converting to dng for no benefit that I can think of. CRAW is an excellent format choice over RAW for the vast majority of photographers, most use it exclusively to save card and disk space.

Hi Hedley,

Good point - and a very worthy consideration. (I use CRAW some of the time).

Phil

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

I did it at first at the recommendation of Scott Kelby. Then I joined a photography group that ran contests which required authentication against original files for winners. I was shooting Nikon and converting NEF to DNG on input and was disqualified in multiple contests because the DNG was not created in-camera and could therefore be subject to manipulation. I was pissed, but I get it.

It's the least of the reasons not to convert to DNG, but for me it's enough. The only real "advantage" I've heard about DNG is that it's a format recognized by multiple post-processing systems and you don't have to worry about system specific prejudices. When I was an early adopter of new Nikon bodies I found that I could use an external DNG converter to be able to process raw files in Lightroom before Adobe added the new body it to Camera Raw, so I would do the conversion for processing and keep the original file as well for competition. That's the only time I've converted since. You can read the opinions but I honestly have zero reasons other than the one just stated to convert.

 

[MrSparks999]

So from what i am reading the only real benefit is that it creates a slightly smaller file, and that this file is more compatible across different applications.
Before trying LR i had no issues moving RAW files between PS and TOPAZ products, which is pretty much all i use. My only reason for now using LR is for the ease of cataloging. So i think i will stick with RAW.

thanks for all the feedback.

 

[koenkooi]

So from what i am reading the only real benefit is that it creates a slightly smaller file,[...]

It will only be smaller for one of the 3 DNG modes. For lossy compressed DNGs it will be smaller, but it debayers the image and is as the name says, lossy. Linear DNGs will debayer the image and be 6 times bigger than a CRAW (think 200MB for R5 images). The remaining DNG mode doesn't debayer it, but gets rid of a lot of metadata, which will hamper tools like PureRAW and DPP4. It will still be be larger than a CRAW.

And on the export side you will notice that only Adobe tools can handle those DNGs, since the edits are encoded as metadata, which AFAIK only Adobe tools use.

 

[RedCobra]

The only time I convert to DNG is when I run the file through DxO PureRaw which returns a DNG (labeled DeepPrimeEX2D.DNG) to LrC. Then if i send to Topaz I get back a .TIFF. I keep the original also. I don't use cRAW so can't comment on that. So a final procecessed file may have 3 versions .CR3, .DNG, and a .TIFF.
So, after I cull pretty much all files go to DxO and comeback as .DNG. Lightroom Classic doesn't care, it's happy and catalogs all versions of the file.
Yeah....storage space......but I don't care about that. I have plenty.

 

[Only RF]

Yes stick to RAW. Converting to DNG just makes it more work. The most important thing you need to know is that LrC uses a catalogue system. Your files are not the catalogue. It is just a database in steroids that works on the sidelines. However it is like a library. If you borrow a book from a library, return it and bypass the librarian and put it on some random shelf how will they find it.

The catalogue is a powerful tool when managed properly and that is easy to do. Planning out how you want to set your file system up and the first few days you use it are important. Using LrC to manage your file system is the most efficient method because you have to worry about anything. If yo use the OS you have to remember to tell LrC that you moved, renamed, etc any files folders.

Also you only need one catalogue. There is no known limit to its size. Some like to create one for work and another for play but I would just use one and create root folders for this categories. 5 years from now you will be happy that you did that.

3 MISTAKES Lightroom Users Make

All too often, I see photographers, who are new to Lightroom, make some critical mistakes when they're initially using it and setting it up. In this tutorial...

www.youtube.com

Here is my LrC folder structure. It is not independent. LrC does not create a separate set of files. It mirrors the OS.

Good timing as I just created a new 2024 folder. I used LrC to create it and as you can see it automatically created that folder in my Mac OS. Not a duplicate set of files. I just mirrors it.

 

[jcass]

I want to add two points to Only RF's sage counsel. First, watch the video and, like Only RF says, take the time right away to figure out your file strategy. It is painful to switch later down the road. Second, remember to have a backup strategy for your raw files. Lightroom will keep track of file info, meta-data, and edit history, but it you can't go back to 2015 (for example, or any other older imports) and redo edits without the original raw file.