DNG as a standard

Hi Everyone;
I was doing some research on raw files and their conversion (as a personal challenge I was writing a C# program to front end the conversion process using the Libraw library and display the files, writing them out as jpegs, TIFFs , or DNG - I learned a lot doing this) and I came across this interesting article at http://www.libraw.org/articles/2-ways-to-nowhere.html . What really caught my eye was the subtraction tests the author performed on DNG in his sections on the archival and universal nature of DNG as a standard.
Throughout this forum and in all the Adobe literature we are told and therefore assume, that the DNG standard has exactly the same information as the raw file. Apparently, according to these tests, it does not.
I have not performed the tests myself. Does anyone want to comment?
Jay
PS - I archive the original raws (the keepers) to offline (DVD) storage, convert to DNG on the computer and use DNG's from then on.

What really caught my eye was the subtraction tests the author performed on DNG in his sections on the archival
The first test is strange; it would be interesting to have the native raw file in order to reconstruct the test.
The second test is invalid; it does not prove anything related to the image data format, it proves only that the rendering software (ACR) changed in the meantime.
Throughout this forum and in all the Adobe literature we are told and therefore assume, that the DNG standard has exactly the same information as the raw file
I don't think you have been told that by any competent source. The native raw files contain masses of information, which is undocumented and of unknown purpose, and which will not be converted in DNG format.
What claimed is, that the image data is the same in the native raw and DNG. This is correct in most cases. There are some exceptions, which are all right. There were some exceptions due to conversion error; the program has been mended. However, such cases demonstrate clearly, that one has to be very naive to throw away the native raw file after conversion.
The real question is:
can all the knowledge about a camera, which is useful for the raw conversion be expressed in DNG terms? (No matter if that knowledge is stored in the native raw file or is implicite.)
and the real answer is:
Not always.

Similar Messages

Raw, Adobe DNG codec, LR Beta 3, frustration...

As an advanced amateur photographer, I decided that my New Year's resolution would be to stop shooting JPEG plus supplementary Raw on my Nikon DSLR, and to use only Raw. Also decided to try LightRoom Beta 3 (not a LR user previously; I use Windows Live Photo Gallery). Finally, also decided to use DNG instead of NEF to facilitate cross-application compatibility (ie, I like the idea of a non-proprietary datafile format) and to avoid creating sidecar (XMP) files for keywords. I use Windows 7 Pro and Home Premium on an Acer Netbook and Dell Inspiron notebook computer, although I've only created the DNG files on the netbook so far.
It's been a sinkhole of time to get working.
Once I had created some DNG files from the NEF files using LR3, the computer performance deteriorated completely. Eventually found that CPU was pegged at 100% utilization, and that SearchFilterHost.EXE was the culprit. MUCH sleuthing revealed that going into Windows Control Panel > Indexing Options > Advanced, and unchecking the DNG file type allowed the indexing to proceed to completion. When the DNG files WERE allowed for indexing, then the Indexing Options dialog box showed that the indexing stalled at some point; if the DNG files were DISALLOWED, the the indexing completed normally.
Secondly, when I opened Windows Live Photo Gallery, it showed that it was creating thumbnails (presumably the DNG files), but that it was proceeding at about 1 file per 30 seconds. The CPU was pegged at 50% during this time. Eventually all the thumbnails were completed, and CPU utilization dropped to a few percent.
In both cases, Windows Resource Monitor revealed that Adobe's DNGCodec was associated with the stalled/slow process.
I installed the latest DNG converter from Adobe, but the DNG Codec remained unchanged (version 1.0.0.2, dated from 2008). The DNG codec does not appear to have a recent version on the Adobe website.
Next, I uninstalled the Adobe DNGCodec, and downloaded and installed the third party codec from http://www.ardfry.com/dng-codec/Download.htm. The thumbnails in Windows Live Photo Gallery were generated at a rate of several per second, and the Windows Indexing Options proceeded without hanging up, although it was slow. It's definitely working better with the third party codec.
Searching the forums reveals that lots of people are dissatisfied with the lack of a 64-bit DNG codec from Adobe. This problem seems to have existed for over a year, maybe even two years. I don't use 64-bit Windows, but the codec problems are in 32-bit, too. How can Adobe expect users to adopt DNG as a standard when they provide such poor support? It's crazy that end-users should have to seek out, download, purchase, and install a codec from a third-party supplier in order to get reasonable performance.
Adobe: please fix your DNG codec.

Thanks to you, jackfrombc, for for proofing my concerns about why indexing loads my CPU so much after I install some new soft, and DNG codec among it. Now I'm able to switch indexing back on on my combuters not being afraid of it eating laptops' batteries.
Thank you, again.
ps. sorry for poor english, in advance.

DNG Codec - 64bit Win7

Creating a thread for 64bit Windows7 users to post in regards to support for the DNG codec on 64bit-Win7.
Currently 64bit nor Win7 is supported for the RC codec. Adobe supports 64 bit, in CS4, LR 2.x and LR3 beta. I expect 64bit and Win7 for the codec.
For those who want to play with the unsupported RC codec on 64bit win7, it would be great to get comments on this thread with your experiance.

www.gnu.org - free developement tools
www.adobe.com/products/dng/pdfs/dng_spec.pdf - freely available DNG specifications
Cost: $0
Now you are all set to write your own free DNG codec
Joke aside, Adobe is under no obligation to supply anything for free, where is the logic behind that claim? The Word and Excel document formats are open and, unlike DNG, actual international standards (see ECMA-376 and ISO/IEC 29500), does this means that Microsoft Office should be free? Microsoft makes free readers but it's entirely at their discretion, and the same goes for Adobe.
As for 3rd parties filling niches and charging for their work, what's wrong with that? What FPV and Ardfry charge is pocket change compared to the work involved with writing stable and well-performing codecs, and as David implied is certainly also pocket change compared to the cost of any photographer's kit.
Axel,
Imaging software and codec author
www.fastpictureviewer.com

Any idea when we get DNG plug-in for Vista?????

I am curious to know when we get the WIC plug-in for Vista?
I have the Canon one, but unfortunately I converted most of my RAW files to
DNG. I have LR and CS3, but sometimes I just want to use Windows Photo
Viewer to show files.
If Adobe truly want DNG as the standard then this is a big missing piece.
I would offer to be a willing guinea pig to test a beta version if Adobe is
looking for victims, I mean volunteers.
Heck, even Pentax has theirs out now.

Apologies, I use a news reader to view these forums and there is no DNG forum listed. <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected].. > The DNG forum is here > <a href=http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx?14@@.3bb5f0ec>

Converted Library to DNG now what about those other files?

I've just taken the plunge and converted all my CR2 images to DNG, replacing the originals.
However, I still have all the JPEG sidecar files left over. Can I safely delete these, or are they required by the DNG?
Also, I was previously using the option to write to XMP sidecar files. With DNG is there any real need to keep doing this?
Thanks

Converting RAW files to DNG does not replace the original file. Rather it places all the data from that file inside the DNG in a standard published format. It can also contain a full copy of the file in its original format if you select that option (although this is really a waste of space). Think of DNG's as a box with a standardised filing system into which you file your data previously filed in a way only understandable by Canon, Nikon or whichever company designed the format. DNG's have a filing system that allows anyone to now read that data instead of just a few people "in the know".
The DNG files will allow you to write what was formally contained in the sidecar files directly into the headers of the DNG file. If you had automatically write all changes into xmp selected in catalog settings, then this will continue with DNG files but now write the data into the file header rather than as a sidecar file. If you wrote the information yourself (by selecting write metadata to file from the metadata tab), rather than doing it automatically, then you can continue to do so. If you don't select this changes are stored only in the LR catalog and not in the file itself. The advantage of writing data into the file header (or as a sidcar file) is that other applications such as Bridge can read this data and if you import the DNG into a different LR catalog you can read the changes into that catalog, by selecting read metadata from file. The disadvantages include a small performance hit particularly on less powerful systems, you can still write the data to file manually in this case.
As far as jpg files go, if these have been imported as separate files and you still want to keep them as separate files then don't delete them. To ensure any changes you make in LR are written into the header files then select this option for jpgs, Tiffs and PSD files in catalog settings on the same screen as where you set the options for xmp data for RAW files.
Jpg files are not required by DNG's that contain a RAW file. A jpg preview file is embedded inside the RAW file and this will be also in the DNG file and used by applications not capable of decoding RAW data.

Import DNG Hang Problem with OSX not with Win 7

I installed LR4 on both my Mac Pro and Win7 machines for comparison purposes and have encountered a problem with importing files and converting to DNG format with OSX that is not present with Win7.
OSX machine
first gen Intel MAC Pro + 8GB memory multiple disks OSX 10.7.2
Win7 Machine - latest set of MS patches installed
Sandy Bridge Processor I5 2500K + 8GB memory multiple disks
On both machines:
I am importing 12 test images taken with my Nikon D300 and using a Kingston USB card reader
Copying to a data only disk that does not contain the catalog
Convert to DNG with copy to a sub-directory
Renaming the files to DSC_0001.DNG sequence format
Standard Previews
Dont import suspected duplicated enabled
No develop settings
Metadata with a simple copyright statement
OSX seemed to import the 12 DNG's ok as they all showed up on the Library grid screen... but the import seemed to hang before completion and no CPU was being consumed - this was prior to the previews being generated
I waited for 10 minutes with no CPU activity and then cancelled the Lightroom task, at that point LR4 generated the previews and everything looks fine, I can modify the DNG images and everything seems normal with them
With Win7 everything went as expected and completed in under 1 minute
I have screen shots available and I can reproduce this behaviour consistently on OSX

UPDATE - Further testing
I tried to import the images into LR3 and it worked fine on OSX (I don't have LR3 on WIN7)
However when under LR4 the hanging problem also occurs if I do a straight copy as well (ie: Dont convert to DNG format)

10.4.10 adds M8 support - isn't this DNG?

I thought that the M8 used the 'standard' DNG format i.e. the linear format without the embedded native RAW file (not sure of the exact name), which you could use Adobe DNG for to convert your Canon, Oly, Nikon etc. proprietary RAW to.
Now I know that Aperture doesn't support this type of DNG, but only DNGs with embedded RAWs from cameras it supports natively, so does anyone know how M8 support is implemented? Or does the M8 in fact use a proprietary RAW and not true DNG?
Regards,
Steve

Hi Stephen,
No I do not miss the point. The problem is that
people have the misconception that DNG is a standard
for RAW data. It is not.
Per,
I'm afraid that that's exactly what DNG is - a standard for RAW data. (At least in it's linear form). Read Ian Wood's post for a description of the 2 different types, of which Aperture only supports the first type. Hence the views that Aperture's DNG support is incomplete.
RAW data from different cameras are different and
need to be process differently, so in the very nature
of RAW data, there are no such thing as a universal
RAW format.
Yes there is.
If you search the forum you will find a lot of
entries on DNG issue.
The DNG issue on Aperture is that it does not support the linear format, which is the 'universal' format, only the DNG format which has the original RAW embedded within it.
It's not a perfect solution by any means, but if Aperture supported the linear DNG format, then this would be a method by which RAW files which are natively unsupported by Aperture, could be processed.
The M8 is supposed to use the universal format, and Aperture supports it. So how come it doesn't support DNGs converted from any other camera? Perhaps it does actually have a proprietary RAW format the M8 isn't quite as DNG as advertised, in which case the mystery is solved, or it is DNG and something else is going on.
I'm a programmer (with a programmer's curiosity) and I have Canon D-SLRs. My interest in this matter is purely a case of "How does that work?"
Regards,
Steve

PS4 rendering very "hot" compared to Bridge and LR2- HELP I am stuck

Have done all kinds of tests and still get a difference nearly equal to setting the vibrance to +50 and the saturation to +6 in LR2 to somewhat equal the look of the imported image in PS2.
Here are the facts:
I have used Bridge to convert the NEFs into DNGs using Camera Standard for the D700 with no other changes;
Lightroom 2 and Bridge give the same rederings in terms of colors and relationships of color to each other. PS4 however, adds lots of yelow, brightens reds and blows highlights. I have opened the file three ways in PS4, three attempts through Bridge with Save and convert, another time with Save and option click, another time with Open. All three methods look equally bad. I have opened the file directly through PS4, not using Bridge. Just as bad.
Now here is the interesting part: when I take spot readings for the image in Bridge and the image in PS4, I get the same numbers.
For example: R,G,B for Bridge: 232,205,162 PS4: 232,205,163.
Should look the same, right?
PS4 Color Settings: Prophoto RGB, Gray gamma 2.2,Dot gain 10%,Convert to working profile, ask for mismatch, Engine: Adobe ACE, all other options not checked.
If I desturate monitor colors by about 15% the image looks closer to Bridge and LR2, but is still more yellow. This is not a good solution for printing reasons, however.
PS4 version 11.0.1 Mac OS/X version: 10.5.8 (not using the latest which is SnowLeopard.)
I have sent the query to Adobe Support, but suspect they'll tell me I don't have support and then there is a time lag, also.
Camera Raw: 5.5.097, PS4 11.01, LR2: 2.5 with Camera Raw 5.5 in the dialog box
WHAT VARIABLE HAS NOT BEEN CHANGED?

Yes, sorry, you did mention that the Zoom has replaced the Netgear. Regardless, if the Zoom is providing the NAT & DHCP services ... which I would assume that it is by default, the AEBSn should be reconfigured as a bridge.
With AEBSn still configured as a bridge, please try the following:
o Power-down the Zoom, AEBSn, and computer(s); wait at least 10-15 minutes.
o While the equipment is powered-down, connect one of your computers directly to any available LAN port on the AEBSn using an Ethernet cable.
o Power-up the Zoom; wait at least 10-15 minutes.
o Power-up (plug-into power) the AEBSn; wait at least 5-10 minutes.
o Power-up the computer connected by Ethernet.
The computer should now be able to gain Internet access. Please post back your results.

.xmp not recognized by Bridge CS 5.5. All previous solutions here not working for me. Please help.

First of all, this issue has existed for me since CS4.
When I load an .nef file into photoshop from bridge, it opens in camera raw. Once I edit that photo and send it to photoshop, an .xmp file is created and those changes should show up in bridge, but they don't. Looking in my folder of raw files, I can see the .xmp file.
To make matters more confusing, this only occurs with one of my two cameras. I have two seemingly identical Nikon D300s DSLRs. One with a 14mm and one with a 70-200 zoom. Bridge's issue with failing to recognize .xmp files only occurs with folders that contain photos shot with the camera with the zoom lens.
I have exhausted all of the solutions I have been able to find on this forum: telling my mac to open .xmp files with Bridge, telling Bridge to always use high quality thumbnails with 100% preview.
Can someone please help?

I have exhausted all of the solutions I have been able to find on this forum: telling my mac to open .xmp files with Bridge, telling Bridge to always use high quality thumbnails with 100% preview.
For several years ago I decided to convert all my CR2 Raw files (I use Canon) to DNG upon ingestion of the files. Not only is DNG an open standard and therefor will it be long supported but mainly because I was growing mad of all the side car XMP files. DNG stores the XMP info into the file itself. No more hidden files no more mistakes in copy files leaving XMP lost in a folder, etc. etc.
Although it is strange one dSLR has this problem and the other not I don't think it is lens related as Curt kindly suggested. To my knowledge lenses affect the EXIF data and Bridge creates the XMP Data as a sidecar file (by default selected in the Camera Raw preferences) with rating, labeling and ACR settings.
By default Bridge also does not show hidden items (that XMP files are). Could you double check with Raw files from both cameras next to each other and after having altered them both in ACR (i.e. plus 2 in exposure to make a real difference) and in the Bridge menu view show hidden files (sort Bridge on filename for easy viewing).
And if one is not showing the altered result could you click on it and with right mouse click menu check 'purge cache for selection and see if this changes things. (If the changes are there in PS as Curt already asked this might also help)
Could you also convert both files to DNG (Adobe has a free DNG converter for download (see also this link or Google it):
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/extend.displayTab2.html
And could you provide a short summary of the solutions you already tried (all previous solutions is a little vague :-) )
Having set XMP to open in Bridge is not important, XMP is not meant to be opened by the user, Bridge uses it to read and write but other apps also. For instance I just tested on an old CR2 file with XMP and by default it opens in Adobe Photoshop Elements (also on my system like CS5 Suite, Aperture and Lightroom) as I discovered using the get info command. Bridge wasn't even on the list for possible opening options :-)
Also 100 % preview will not help, it just slows things down very much because the cache needs much more time to build and the cache file will grow to huge proportions...
Only if you want to use to compare all files at 100 % you might benefit from that setting.

Help! Images not showing up in ALPC

I have this afternoon shot a series of calibration images with my Nikon D300s but I am having problems when I try to load them into ALPC to create a lens profile. I have added the images to the project (have also tried drag & dropping them - same result) and the program recognises the images as it lists all the files, however they are blank when I click on them, they simply show as plain white squares with nothing in them.
Obviously this makes it impossible to measure the squares and create a profile. I am using DNG files I have converted from NEFs using the Adobe DNG Converter, I have also converted the same files to JPEGs but still they are blank.
Does anybody have any ideas? Don't hesitate to tell me if I'm missing something obvious! This is quite important as I need to be up and running ASAP.
Many thanks, Brad.

Same problem. Blank white images. Macbook pro, 4 G ram, cs5, everything updated.
First series: shot 4 interations of 9 each with zeis 24-70f2.8 ssm on a sony alpha 850 in raw with strobes using a 13x21 chart.
Loaded into bridge to convert to dng with no compression and retain raw format but not imbed original files. Drug to aclr which opened to have just white pages. Waited about 10 min thinking it might be working. closed it. reopened then selected the files - white pages. Deleted files and reloaded from camera into bridge as dng's in linear format. didn't work. deleted the files and reloaded from camera as raw. Ran them thru the dng converter with standard settings. white pages. converted to jpg's from bridge export panel - white pages. loaded raws into acr, clicked auto, selected all, saved as dng's. started aclr and loaded those dng files - it worked. Completed that calibration that way.
Second series, different lens: Sony sal 70-400G. Shot raw, 9 each, loaded into bridge as dng. Loaded teh files in aclr which was a new project. But, just white pages in aclr. Tried the same trick to run thru acr first and save as dng, but.... white pages again - didn't work this time. Tried clearing the aclr cache each time. converted to jpgs in export panel. white pages. Deleted them all and reshot in jpg extra fine format. to bridge as jpgs. in aclr - white pages. Ran the disc utility to reset permissions and clean up the disc. Reset the monitor values. Rebooted the machine. Still white pages.
Have run out of tricks, and patience.

Light Room Under Vista 1.3.1

Hello, I purchased lightroom back in 4/07 with hopes of eventually getting a new computer around christmas.
So around christmas I got my new computer and moved my copy of LightRoom from an XP machine to a Vista Home Premium Machine. Quad core 6600 2.4GHz 3GB Memory and 512MB Nvida 8800GT Graphics card. It seemed to run okay at first but then when I updated from 1.0 to 1.3.1 it got to were it barely runs. It can take upto 5 hours for it to import 25 10MP raw files from a card to DNG format, creating standard previews. about 20minutes ago I clicked auto tone for a photo still waiting 20 minutes later for the new render of the file.
I have tried disabling the AERO Feature, I have tired deleting and recreating the preference file.
On Adobe's website it shows it is windows vista compatible, but now that I click on there tech support site is shows they don't guarantee it to work under vista.
Then I read under the knowledge base that NVIDA Display Manger software creates a know issue with this. So they stat I should remove it. I am not sure if I have the version the reference as it is not called the same. But serves the same function and comes from NVIDA. It just seems kind of silly I buy a new computer with 2 22" monitors to work on photographs. Buy the software that is suppose to be great only to read in the knowledge base they recommend that you remove dual monitor support from your computer to get things to run. This really seems odd considering they tout my other software photoshop and its ability to use multiple monitors. Hence the reason I upgraded my machine in the first place.
Any help anyone can give it getting on the path to once again being able to use lightroom would be great.

Hello Breezez,
I think there must be something else going on on your computer, the dual monitor support should be no problem. I use Lightroom under Vista on a less powerfull machine with Aero switched on, dual screens and DNG files and have no problem whatsoever. I use an ATI Radeon X800 Pro video adapter, not exatly the most up to date video card for that matter. My database contains more the 7000 photographs, most af them DNGs. I would be surprised if the slow speed had anything to do with using two screens. It sounds as if some other process is eating processor capacity. Checking for updates for your video card, BIOS and chipset drivers seems good advice to me. Try switching off the antivirus program (temporarily of course!). There might be a resource conflict.
Hans

Using i5 w/ 7.0.3 when vewing photos I can't flip a photo between portrate and landscape. If I go to Edit

Using i5 w/ 7.0.3 when viewing phtos I can't flip a photo between portrate and landscape at will. In edit I can rotate a photo but then i can't scan from one photo to another

Hello,
just an additional question:
What are the recommended parameters to be set in the lightroom preferences for PSE9 for
- File format (I can choose between psd and TIFF)
- color space (I can choose between adobe RGB, Pro photo RGB, sRGB)
- Bit depth (8 bit, 16 bit)
- resolution
in order to make sure all modifications from PSE9 are coming back to LR.
(I am using dng as a standard file format in LR, most photos are from a conon 450D)
Thanks for you answer
Frank

Importing Camera Raw data in iPhoto

I cannot get iPhoto 08 to import camera raw data . It shows a thumbnail when I select the file to import but fails to import it. On all atempts with good photo files, this is the same. The files were made in the camera raw setting on a Nikon coolpix 5700.

I have the same problem with my Nikon 5700 and have had since iPhoto version 5. Discussions on dpreview forums confirm other users have the same problem. If you want a laugh, you can read about my experiences below and save yourself a frustrating call to Apple technical support. But the short answer is that you need software other than iPhoto. Any product of this type from other companies will handle your files no problem.
I have a new, up to date version of iPhoto 08 that came with my new MacBook and it will not import the 5700's RAW files. (The same files are imported perfectly by iView Media Pro, Adobe Lightroom, and by Photoshop.)
(iPhoto Version 4 supported RAW from the 5700 but, on upgrade, I lost the ability to import RAW. My existing imported RAW files lost the ability to preview too. Hundreds of users on web user forums reported the same problem. Attempts to revert to iPhoto 4 corrupted my library. I eventually had to reformat my drive to allow me to reinstall iPhoto 4. In the end, my confidence was shaken enough that I reluctantly switched to iView Media Pro.)
I also converted the 5700 RAW files to DNG (Adobe's standard open RAW format designed for just this purpose), but no luck there either.
I called Apple technical support and eventually got through to the "iPhoto department" and talked to someone who had no clue about the subject. He didn't even know what a DNG was.
I asked if he could supply a list of cameras compatible with iPhoto and he said no he couldn't. I noted that there was an "iPhoto Device Compatibility" link on the web site but that the link was broken. I suggested that this meant that such a list existed somewhere and that it was just a matter of finding it. He said that, if the list wasn't on that page, it didn't exist.
I asked if the technical question could be escalated to a higher level of tech support, and he didn't know what escalate meant. He eventually went away to talk to someone titled "Product Specialist" (I had thought that was who I was talking to) and the product specialist said that no one at Apple could confirm what devices iPhoto is compatible with. Apparently, the development team at Apple wrote the software and then promptly forgot how it works, so we're pretty much on our own.
In short, it appears that there's no guarantee that upgrades to iPhoto will continue to support RAW files from a given camera. Since iPhoto stores your catalogue info in a proprietary file (the iPhoto library), this means each upgrade runs the risk of all your photo library work going down the tubes.
This is a crying shame and a show stopper for an otherwise intuitive and elegant program.
Try Adobe Lightroom or iView Media Pro as alternatives. Lightroom is more expensive ($300), but gives great photo adjusting capabilities. iView Media is just a cataloguing program, but has a superb file organization system. Unfortunately, its interface is not as pretty as iPhoto's and it has a steeper learning curve.
Good luck!

I can't get a previously saved number spreadsheet to open.

I can't get a numbers spreadsheet to open in the new numbers program.

Hello,
just an additional question:
What are the recommended parameters to be set in the lightroom preferences for PSE9 for
- File format (I can choose between psd and TIFF)
- color space (I can choose between adobe RGB, Pro photo RGB, sRGB)
- Bit depth (8 bit, 16 bit)
- resolution
in order to make sure all modifications from PSE9 are coming back to LR.
(I am using dng as a standard file format in LR, most photos are from a conon 450D)
Thanks for you answer
Frank

DNG Profile Editor vs. Adobe Standard

I'm working in PS CS3, I shoot in Leaf 11.2 and process my files in Camera Raw 4.6. I've mostly be unhappy with the color differences between PS and Leaf. The adobe standard profile brings me close, but not enough.
I've attempted to shoot a color checker and use the DNG Profile Editor, but the profile created seems overly saturated, and gets me further from my goal of matching what I see in Leaf. Where am I going wrong? I imagined Profile Editor would be much more precise.
All comments/suggestions are welcomed
Thanks.

The short answer is the Leaf rendering is not "accurate" (a.k.a. "precise") by design. It is designed to look good, which is different. Attempting to build a very accurate profile using the chart feature of the profile editor will build a profile that is closer to being accurate, which is wrong direction if you are trying to match the Leaf rendering.
Start with the Adobe Standard profile and apply manual edits from there to move it closer to the Leaf rendering.

DNG as a standard

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for