CR2 to DNG. Any loss of quality or funcionality?

Hi.
So, the same questions arise with me but I can't get a definitive answer...
1. Adobe Bridge CS3 (and I presume CS4 as well) will "Convert to DNG" upon importing from your card reader. It's a simple checkbox option. Will this function convert 5DMK2 CR2 files to DNG properly or do I need to use the standalone Adobe DNG Converter because only Bridge CS4 will do it right?
2. If I process a CR2 file in ACR and make adjustments, then convert the CR2 to DNG, what happens to my edits saved in the XMP sidecar? Does it come along for the ride or is the XMP file now ignored forever?
3. Are there any features/benefits/downfalls in converting to DNG first then processing it in ACR? Anything that a CR2 file offers that a DNG file does not? Is there an ACR function that is now grayed out or something?
4. Is the quality of a DNG identical to the CR2 file? Same file size too?
5. Will presets I've created in ACR to run against CR2 files also run against DNG files?
6. If I convert a CR2 file to DNG and open it in, say DPP, then make changes such as sharpening and noise reduction, then open that DNG in ACR, are those changes seen or ignored?
7. People have said "Convert to DNG. Who knows how long you will be able to read CR2 files." I'm not sure how this statement holds water -- the DNG format was only released in late 2004. It's not a long-standing standard. I could make the argument that both CR2 and DNG files have an equal chance of becoming obsolete or changing drastically. Thoughts about this?
I've worked with raw files and a 40D for a long time now and my workflow is great for me: Import into Bridge --> Edit in ACR. If I get the new 5DMK2 I would hate to lose this functionality and I'm willing to upgrade to CS4, but why bother if CS3 Bridge's "Convert to DNG" function will convert it upon import, or if the new DNG Converter will do a whole directory in a few minutes... but I need to be sure that I don't lose any quality or functionality by doing this... and, if I decide to convert a whole year's worth of CR2/XMP files to DNG for long-term compatibility reasons, I need to be sure that all my XMP edits come along for the ride. If not, that's hundreds of hours of work gone... I might as well export to hi-quality JPG.
Thanks,
-Dave

> It's a shame that an edited CR2 file contains the edit information embedded in the file instead of within an XMP DPP can store the adjustment in a parameter file, but other raw processors would not recognize that. > Many times I'd like to use, say, DPP to apply NR and Sharpening, but I'd like to use ACR for the rest You seriously misunderstand how this works. We are talking about i parameters for the raw processor. Here is a crop from the XMP parameters: <PRE> xmlns:crs="http://ns.adobe.com/camera-raw-settings/1.0/"> <crs:RawFileName>40D01784.CR2</crs:RawFileName> <crs:Version>4.5</crs:Version> <crs:WhiteBalance>Auto</crs:WhiteBalance> <crs:Temperature>2850</crs:Temperature> <crs:Tint>+21</crs:Tint> <crs:Exposure>-1.20</crs:Exposure> <crs:Shadows>1</crs:Shadows> <crs:Brightness>+10</crs:Brightness> <crs:Contrast>+50</crs:Contrast> <crs:Saturation>+15</crs:Saturation> <crs:Sharpness>50</crs:Sharpness> <crs:LuminanceSmoothing>0</crs:LuminanceSmoothing> <crs:ColorNoiseReduction>0</crs:ColorNoiseReduction> <crs:ChromaticAberrationR>0</crs:ChromaticAberrationR> <crs:ChromaticAberrationB>0</crs:ChromaticAberrationB> <crs:VignetteAmount>+20</crs:VignetteAmount> <crs:VignetteMidpoint>50</crs:VignetteMidpoint> <crs:ShadowTint>0</crs:ShadowTint> <crs:RedHue>0</crs:RedHue> <crs:RedSaturation>0</crs:RedSaturation> <crs:GreenHue>0</crs:GreenHue> <crs:GreenSaturation>0</crs:GreenSaturation> <crs:BlueHue>0</crs:BlueHue> <crs:BlueSaturation>0</crs:BlueSaturation> <crs:FillLight>0</crs:FillLight> <crs:Vibrance>+15</crs:Vibrance> <crs:HighlightRecovery>28</crs:HighlightRecovery> <crs:Clarity>0</crs:Clarity> <crs:Defringe>0</crs:Defringe> <crs:HueAdjustmentRed>0</crs:HueAdjustmentRed> </PRE> LuminanceSmoothing and ColorNoiseReduction are the parameters for noise reduction. If DPP would do the parameters in this or some other but metaformat, ACR or other raw processors could interpret the setting. However, the result would be ACR noise reduction. In order to get the DPP noise reduction result, you have to convert the raw file in TIFF or JPEG by DPP.

Similar Messages

Any loss of quality with iPhone from 256 to 128 kbps

I have to decompress my iTunes songs for my iPhone as I have them as AIFF.
Is there any loss of quality with the limits of the iPhone if I use 128 kb instead of256 ?
Thanks,
Greg

Greg, I don't think you will notice a big deal of a difference.

DVI - VGA -Any loss of quality?

Hi,
I'm awaiting delivery of my Mac Pro and am in need of two monitors. I can't afford the Apple displays but i was wondering if quality is lost when connecting VGA monitors via the VGA to DVI adaptor? The reason is i can get two 22" LG L225WS-SF displays for £275 but they are VGA not DVI.
Also is VGA going to die a death or is it with us for a while?
Message was edited by: Mark Thornton

A DVI to VGA adapter won't affect the image quality. It just passes the analog video signals from the graphics board to a VGA connector. For LCDs, DVI can give a slightly sharper picture, but the difference is not always noticeable.

How to transfer pictures to a CD without any loss of quality

I made some adjustments in Aperture, pictures were shot in RAW and wanted to put them on a Cd for transfer to a relative.
I dragged and dropped and the size reduced from RAW 13-19 mb to 600k jPeg.
I do not have a problem with the jPeg, actually my relative prefers it but I do not want the large reduction in size.
I just got Aperture so please forgive me if I am missing the obvious.
Greg

I do not have a problem with the jPeg, actually my relative prefers it but I do not want the large reduction in size.
To be honest you shouldn't be concerned with the size of the image you're giving to your friends. What matters is the quality of the image for use they will put it to. If you can get that in a file thats 100 bytes so be it, if that doesn't give them the quality they need then of course increase the quality. Bit always be thinking in terms of image quality for the intended use not file size.
So are the files you're producing of adequate quality? If not there are two ways to go about increasing the quality.
One is to increase the quality of the previews that Aperture is producing. This will allow you yto continue to drag the images out of Aperture and not have to go through the export process. To increase the preview quality go to Aperture->Preferences->Previews. You can adjust both image size and JPG compression. Remember changing the preview settings only affects previews made after the change. Previews already in Aperture will not be upgraded . To upgrade current previews you need to force Aperture to re-create them. See the Photos->[Delete/Generate] Previews.
If you can't get the quality you need with previews then you will need to export the images. Then you have complete control over all aspects of the exported image.
Either way remember its the quality of the image not the files size that matters.

Import(?) then export pdf's - loss of quality?

Hi-
A complete newbie to printing. I prepared layouts in my database (filemaker pro), exported as pdf. They look great when opened in Acrobat Pro, and print nicely. Now I find out most companies want pdf from In Design or a similar program. If I open pdf's in In design, can I then export them like the printing company wants without any loss of quality? This would all be grayscale, but has a numver of images (it's a book from a specialty dog show).. The layouts are just what I want, with tables that were finicky to get right, and data straight from my database. I would HATE to start over! Any help / ideas would be deeply appreciated!
BTW - there is no way to mimic pdf''s from In Design in Acrobat Pro?
Many thanks in advance.

Interesting question, there's two elements to it, firstly what you assume 'most companies' want and secondly what can Indesign do to help you.
Firstly, all companies are different and have different workflows and requirements. The simplest thing to do is to send 'the company' your PDFs as you have them now and ask them to make sure they are suitable. If not, or if this won't work for you move on to the second question...
Secondly, yes, Indesign can do that, and I for one frequently use Indesign for just that purpose, refrying PDFs from multiple sources to a more consistent standard. It depends on what you are using the PDFs for as to what export settings you use but Indesign is very good at this, with the exception of the greyscale part you mentioned. Others could offer more detailed advice but you have to use Acrobat Pro to make sure this is working properly and apply fixes as necessary. Personally if greyscale id needed I use the 'TouchUp Object' tool and a plugin called Pitstop but there are other methods too, let us know your specific problems, if any.
One very useful tool when putting PDFs through Indesign like this is Scott Zanelli's MultiPageImporter, highly recommended for placing more than one page, and sometimes even when placing only one page too!

Iphoto loss of quality

Hi,
We are importing photos into iphoto directly from a Canon camera. The file format of the camera is jpg.
1. Is there any loss of quality when importing them from the camera and exporting them onto the Hard Disk when using iPhoto to achieve this.
2. We rotate some of the photos using iphoto before exporting them - we noticed that the file size reduces - is there a loss of quality because of this?
Many thanks,
L&Z

If you're looking for a lossless rotation of those portrait photos tryXee.
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 08 libraries and Leopard. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

Convert DNG twice in lossy format, additional loss of quality?

I've got some DNG that by mistake I converted with embedded raw all spread in my Lightroom catalog.
I want to discharge raw, so as Lightroom doesn't allow to sort files by size (whyyy?), the easier solution is to choose all DNGs and convert them again to DNG unchecking "embed raw".
My question is: will this procedure convert twice my image in lossy format resulting in a additional loss of quality or the already compressed image will be untouched?

I've got some DNG that by mistake I converted with embedded raw all spread in my Lightroom catalog.
I want to discharge raw, so as Lightroom doesn't allow to sort files by size (whyyy?), the easier solution is to choose all DNGs and convert them again to DNG unchecking "embed raw".
My question is: will this procedure convert twice my image in lossy format resulting in a additional loss of quality or the already compressed image will be untouched?

Editing iPhone video without loss of quality

I've a stack of video clips taken from my iPhone 3GS which I want to simply stitch together and edit down a little WITHOUT loss of quality.
All I want to do is import, crop and stitch them together, thus create a single file *with no change in image quality*. (for smaller projects, I used to do this kind of thing in older versions of QuickTime Pro.)
What is the best procedure for this in iMovie 09? Indeed, can it be done?
My understanding is that ANY re-compression will result in artefacts and loss in quality.
Further info...
I've managed to import the clips ok (making sure any options to 'optimise' anything are turned off) and edit them together in iMovie. This way, the import is fast and the images seems untouched, so I assumed no conversion has been done on the video (I think I'm wrong here?)
(Setting the project aspect ratio to 4:3 was the other gotcha.)
Having sorted the above out, and done some editing, I now want to export to a single file. I understand the iPhone codec is H264. However, when I export (via quicktime) and select H264, it wants to re-compress. I worry this will loose quality.
When I export with lossless compression, of course I get a 150G file - owch. The sum total size of the originals are 2.63G
Any suggestions?

iMovie will re-compress. To me this is a small price to pay for having an edited movie. Personally, I would optimize, but if you keep your movies simple, you will be OK without. If you decide to apply image stabilization or speed changes, you will definitely need to optimize. Optimization resolves the highly compressed h.264 frames into full frames in Apple Intermediate Codec.
While the quality loss you may experience is not likely to be visible to the naked eye, if that is your only criterion, then avoid iMovie and follow QuickTime Kirk's advice.
Here is a [sample video|http://vimeo.com/7093442] that I made in a Dentist Office. You can see what the re-compression looks like. In this case, I did not optimize.
Editing in iMovie is non-destructive, so you can try it both ways (imovie and QuickTime Pro) and see if you can tell the difference.
Message was edited by: AppleMan1958

Imported & Exported HD Video Imovie '11 Big Loss of Quality

This is plain outrageous i noticed this flaw about a week ago.
I noticed how iMovie '11 degrades the quality of any HD Content whether it be a an Imported file or card or camera regardless. And Yes in the Prefrences FULL QUALITY is selected under the video tab. The Exported Content is the same Poor quality under highest settings quality FULL 1080P as imported even if exported a Quicktime X file H264 compression. The bottom line the imported content looks horrible in iMovie '11 it exports horrible too under the highest settings.
I tried Final Cut X on the other hand and It was Great no loss of quality there via the comand import Imovie Project. But I did notice how Final Cut X messed up on some of the transitions and the titles were off but that was an easy fix
Something has to be done iMovie '11 When Are you going ship '12 or '13

Welcome to iMovie Discussions.
(..Sob!..) If you can bear the anguish and argument and technicalities and angst, Search for "Steve Mullen" and follow any of those threads: you'll find all manner of description about what's happening, what's going wrong, how to correct it, whether it can be corrected ..and so on, and so forth..
(See this thread: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=11846858&#11846858 ..)
I've never noticed this problem: but when I HAVE seen poor quality - by adding an iMovie '09 title onto pristine DV footage, like this:
..I've followed Karl Petersen's instructions about how to change it into (apparent) top-notch quality like this:
Karl suggested opening the exported movie in QuickTime, and pressing ⌘ and 'J' and ticking the 'High Quality' box in the lower-right corner of Video Settings:
See here, and click on 'Start Slideshow'.
Steve disagrees, I think, with this, and says that this simple fix doesn't work.
Try it, and see if it works for you.

Quicktime loss of quality in web browsers?

Hello. I'm trying to upload a 30M MOV file to my website. I noticed that there's a loss of quality when the movie plays in a web browser as opposed to just playing it in the Quicktime player outside of the website. Is there something I need to add to the code?
Note - this applies to just trying to play an MOV in any web browser (meaning, with no HTML - just going 'file', 'open' in any web browser).
Can I add something to the HTML code that will make the quality match how it looks in Quickime?

ASP-CT wrote:
It is so obvious that there is a noticable loss of quality in all files exported from LR
Most of the people in this forum who try to help others with Lightroom are pleased with the quality of exported results we're getting. If you are unsatisfied, it would behoove to explain.
I mean, for me, there is no loss of quality (in fact, image is 100% same) when exporting in original format. And when exporting in reduced sizes in formats like jpeg there is some softening unless output sharpening is applied.
Otherwise, color is same, tone is same, brightness is same - it's all good for me...
Exception: some viewers are not color managed, or are color managed but do it "wrong" (I have no idea why color management tends to be so problematic) - in which case color (and to some extent tone) will be off...
What about you?
PS
ASP-CT wrote:
it is assumed that the photographer is doing something wrong
Operator error is a frequent culprit, but it's not the only culprit - sometimes computer setup is to blame. But if that's the case, you know who is going to have to make it right, right? Anyway, if all is well using another software, that may be a path of less resistance.
Don't get me wrong - Lr may have bugs which are influencing correct functioning in your case - but insisting that it's all Lr and none you (or your computer..) is a place from which there is nowhere to go, except to that other software we were talking about, but beware - it may have problems too .
My advice: take a deep breath, maybe a walk, even sleep on it if need be, then start again from a cooler place.
Rob

Is there any loss when converting MP3 to ACC?

Lately, I've been converting all my MP3 files to ACC (192 kbps, VBR) before transferring them to my IPOD. Is it convenient? Is there any loss of sound quality?

I've found that there's no difference of sound quality in transferring the MP3 fromat to the ACC Format.
However, it is more convienent. The ACC format takes up less space in the iPod. So if you have all ACC files, you can fit more songs than if they were all MP3 files. =]
Microsoft Windows XP

Color change in RAW file from CR2 to DNG

I recently got a new Canon camera, the 60D and when converting from the CR2 file format to the DNG format using the latest 7.2 version of DNG Converter I notice a color change between the original image (CR2 file) to the new DNG file. Once I open it into Camera RAW (version 4.6 with CS3) the color issues go away and if I save it as a JPEG the color issue is no longer a problem but if I were to resave the DNG file to another DNG file it reverts back to the color changed view in MacOS. Is this something that I need to be concerned with for future use of the RAW files or is it a display issue in MacOS and iPhoto. The DNG file also shows the color change in iPhoto. Below are the two screen caps.
RAW CR2 file straight from the camera
Converted RAW CR2 to DNG using DNG converter
This issue only appears to occur in preview mode or in iPhoto.
Thanks,
Nathan

Try changing the CAMERA’S color-profile settings from sRGB to Adobe RGB or from Adobe RGB to sRGB, switch to the opposite one, and see if the previews are any closer for new CR2 you convert to DNGs. The theory is that the preview is in terms of the camera Color Profile setting (sRGB vs Adobe RGB) and when the image is converted to DNG that profile is lost for iOS to see, and it is defaulting to the wrong profile.
In the end , what matters is how Camera Raw converts the file.
Also DNGC 7.3 is the latest version: http://www.adobe.com/downloads/updates/

Exporting to WMV with a massive loss of quality

Hi there!
I've never had an issue with this before, but I need a little expert help on this one.
I'm trying to export a time line, source of 1280x720, into a WMV file. I've done it before with no issues.
But now, it seems like when the exporting is done, and I open the file, there is a loss of quality in the beginning. It's odd because, it seems like the video starts off just fine, but then a few seconds in, it degrades. The degragation continues for about 5 seconds, making the image a little blurry, but then it kicks back into the high quality it was. It maintains the high quality for the rest of the sequence.
What is even odder is that, when I export the individual, 5 second scene that looks degraded in the main file all by itself, it looks just fine.
I can't help but thing that it's something about it in my sequence that is making it do that. There is no effects or transistions between scenes involved at all.
Im exporting:
FORMATL Windows Media
PRESET: HDTV 720 60 High Quality (thought I have used 30 as well, with the same issue)
Video settings are
CODEC: Windows Media Video 9
Encoding Passes: Two
Bitrate mode: Variable Constrained
Framerate: 59.94
Pixel Aspect: Square Pixels
Decoder complexitiy: Auto
Keyframe interval: 5 seconds
Average video bitrate 5000
Peak Video bitrate 8000
peak video buffer size 5
Thanks in advance for any help!

Correct, it has its own ways to mess up your video.
So, you're not helping with the question at all, you're just rallying against YouTube?
Thanks for your help.
We had issues like that with 2 Pass VBR. We even dialled in huge data rates which did not fix the issue,m Switching to a CBR profile fixed it "good enough" but not perfect. In our case wmv was demanded by the client (PowerPoint). I concluded the wmv encoder was defective in AME and best avoided.
Can you use H.264 instead for your purpose?
Thanks for the suggestion! I just tried H.264 and had the same exact issue, though.
Since the individual pieces weren't having the problem, I decided to try some tests. Every piece along was fine, except for the "Begin Transmission" part, which still screwed up.
So, I tried various renderings with and without it, the words, the static...and eventually came to find out that it was the "Static" video that was doing it. I suppose it may have been because that video was originally 640x480, and I just zoomed into it to make it fit the screen. For whatever reason, that was the problem, and when I re-encoded it with the static gone, it worked just fine.
Thanks for your help, though!

How many minutes without loss in quality?

I started using iDVD in 2003. Back then, I was told that you can put up to about 80 minutes on a DVD without any noticeable loss in quality. Based on my experiences, that seemed to be a good rule of thumb.
Have there been sufficient improvements in the encoder to allow significantly more minutes at high quality? I use iDVD for archiving and don't want to come back years later and realize that the quality was compromised. On the other hand, I don't want to waste discs with over-kill (some misguided individuals think that 60 minutes is the limit).
Message was edited by: Michael Collins3

iDVD encoding settings:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?path=iDVD/7.0/en/11417.html
Short version:
Best Performance is for videos of up to 60 minutes
Best Quality is for videos of up to 120 minutes
Professional Quality is also for up to 120 minutes but even higher quality (and takes much longer)
Professional Quality: The Professional Quality option uses advanced technology to encode your video, resulting in the best quality of video possible on your burned DVD. You can select this option regardless of your project’s duration (up to 2 hours of video for a single-layer disc and 4 hours for a double-layer disc). Because Professional Quality encoding is time-consuming (requiring about twice as much time to encode a project as the High Quality option, for example) choose it only if you are not concerned abo
In both cases the maximum length includes titles, transitions and effects etc. Allow about 15 minutes for these.
You can use the amount of video in your project as a rough determination of which method to choose. If your project has an hour or less of video (for a single-layer disc), choose Best Performance. If it has between 1 and 2 hours of video (for a single-layer disc), choose High Quality. If you want the best possible encoding quality for projects that are up to 2 hours (for a single-layer disc), choose Professional Quality. This option takes about twice as long as the High Quality option, so select it only if time is not an issue for you.
Use the Capacity meter in the Project Info window (choose Project > Project Info) to determine how many minutes of video your project contains.
NOTE: With the Best Performance setting, you can turn background encoding off by choosing Advanced > “Encode in Background.” The checkmark is removed to show it’s no longer selected. Turning off background encoding can help performance if your system seems sluggish.
And whilst checking these settings in iDVD Preferences, make sure that the settings for NTSC/PAL and DV/DV Widescreen are also what you want.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1502?viewlocale=en_US

Loss of quality in loaded clips

Problem:
http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/3715/probka.png
It's sample of video I have. It's quality isn't already gratifying, but when I load it to Premiere CS4, sample looks this way:
http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/7840/probka2.png
Second picture shows apparent distortion and pixelize, general loss of quality.
How can I fix it? Any settings which I could change to improve quality of loaded clips?
thanks for help and sorry for my poor english

Did you drop your footage in a PAL widescreen sequence with the fields set default to lower or did you set up a sequence with the fields set to upper
because that is what the mpeg files are: TFF
Sequence should match the footage.

CR2 to DNG. Any loss of quality or funcionality?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for