DNG 5.4 benefits over 4.6?

I've got Canon EOS 500D and Creative Suite 3 & Lightroom 2.4
Problem is that support for 500D .cr2 -files comes in Camera Raw 5.4 and CS3 supports only 4.6.
Now I'm converting all my images from CR2 to DNG (v. 4.6) when importing to Lightroom, to maximize compatibility with Photoshop CS3.
Is there any downside in converting to DNG version 4.6 instead of 5.4?
I can't find any difference in between DNG versions, except what cameras are supported. Now I can convert my 500D files to DNG version 4.6 and they will open in Photoshop CS3.

Thanks Panoholic
I'm not using Adobe DNG Converter. I convert CR2's to DNG in Lightroom 2 when importing photos from memory card.
In Lightroom (2.4) preferences there's an option to choose:
http://totoiv.pp.fi/pub/mallit/dng1.png
In that pull-down menu there's several options:
http://totoiv.pp.fi/pub/mallit/dng2.png
I'd understand if there was versions 1.3 and 1.2 to choose, but not. So you say that, if I convert to 5.4 (in that previous pull-down menu) the dng-file created will be compatible to Photoshop CS3?
Maybe I need to test this...
Edit.
If I convert CR2 to DNG using Adobe DNG Converter, it'll say "compatible with Camera Raw 5.4 and later". Still it seems that my Photoshop CS3 will open DNG-file, even if there's only Camera Raw 4.6 installed/supported.

Similar Messages

Business Objects benefits over Oracle OBIEE

Hi folks
I have a Presentation to make
What are the Benefits of BOBJ over ORacle OBIEE.
Can some one provide some points or insights

we have dashbaords already built in obiee..we have to have strong case to say BO is better than oracle obiee in order to convince Management to say BO is better solution for BI
Source is SAP for oracle too.
We are trying to create BW cube and them create dashboards on top of BW
Right now oracle is
we get the data in oracle db from sap thru ODI and then build Dashboards on top if it.

MPLS benefits over P-to-P Leased Links

Hi,
Benefit of MPLS over traditional P-to-P
is off course a cost. But apart from cost what are techonoloical benefits of having MPLS over leased links. Is'nt MPLS less secure as compared to leased circuit.
In a nutshell what are convincing factor for MPLS over P-to-P leased line.
Sounds too basic :)
Any link on cisco.com or any other is appreciated.
Thanx in advance
Subodh

MPLS VPN's have a direct comparision to other shared access media VPN's like Frame Relay ATM etc. It cant be compared directly to a P2P Private Circuit.
Here is a link comparing MPLS VPN sec to FR and ATM.
http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/cc/so/neso/vpn/prodlit/mpvpn_wp.pdf
Having said that it does not mean there are no loopholes in P2P private circuit and it is completely secure. Looking at the economy and the security provided by MPLS VPN's its comparable to P2P Private Circuit if not better.
But again providing MPLS based VPN;s has more benefits to the service provider that the end customer. For the customer the only major benefits is with scale more number of services would be available to him if using a MPLS VPN at lesser cost when compare to other technology based VPN;s.
HTH-Cheers,
Swaroop

HT201342 What are the benefits to using @icloud account over @me. account?

Do I need to change over to @icloud account for email and what are the benefits over @me account?

It's not a separate account. It's simply an additional address on your existing account and you can use it or not use it at your own convenience. Your @me.com address will be unaffected.

Any benefits to using Ext4 over Ext2 on SSD, or USB flash drive?

Hi.
I've been using Linux on, and off, again for about two years now, and I never really bothered using anything outside of the extn file systems.
I had at one point only used ext2 only on usb installs, and usually on temporary installs of RIPLinux, Parted Magic, or Puppy Linux.
But... now we have the option to disable journaling with tune2fs, or at the very least mounting the partition with options 'noatime', 'barrier=0', or 'nobh', should we use ext4 for any of these devices?
Are there any ext4 improvements over ext2/3 that would actually apply to SSDs, or other flash devices?
Right now I'm currently running Arch from an USB. It's being used to stream media to a video game console, download files in the 200 - 500 MB range, and act as my media viewer for movie files. ie - mpeg, mp4, mkv, and flv. My original idea was to have a future proof system setup that I could eventually clone over to my replacement hard-drive when it comes in the mail.
Should I just make the switch back to ext2, or does ext4 have benefits over ext2 on these types of devices?
While I'm considering a persistent journal disable, my only Arch partition is mounted as follows in the fstab.
UUID=546043fd-170f-4ed4-8af0-136113627e8c / ext4 defaults,noatime,barrier=0 0 1
tmpfs /tmp tmpfs defaults,noatime,mode=1777 0 0
tmpfs /var/tmp tmpfs defaults,noatime,mode=1777 0 0
tmpfs /var/lock tmpfs defaults,noatime,mode=1777 0 0
tmpfs /var/run tmpfs defaults,noatime,mode=755 0 0
tmpfs /var/cache/pacman/pkg tmpfs defaults,noatime 0 0
tmpfs /var/abs/local/yaourtbuild tmpfs defaults,noatime 0 0

midenok,
Welcome to Arch Linux. Take note that this is an old thread (but not overly so). When reviving old threads, we generally encourage creating a new thread and linking to the old. In this case, your answer is pertinent to the thread, and that thread had not reached a logical conclusion, so you are fine. I just wanted to drop this note so others know that a moderator has seen it.
Again, welcome.

What are the benefits of FXG?

I know the high-level benefits, like being able to code it declaratively. But what are the underlying technical benefits over an embedded asset?
For example: Take a panel that has a gradient background. The skin-class can: (1) be defined as FXG or (2) contain a BitmapImage who's source property references the background as an embedded image. What will the benefits be in terms of:
- compiled swf size
- on-screen graphics processing
Cheers
Tracy

You can also apply effects to FXG graphics dynamically. Suppose you have 3 states that you want to render differently. If you're using bitmaps you'd need 3 bitmaps, one for each state. With FXG, you could just turn on and off the appropriate effects (assuming that you could accomplish the desired visual changes with effects). Furthermore, you could transition between the effects gradually if you wanted to. With bitmaps, you'd get no transitions, just an abrupt switch from one state to the next. Finally, it is easy to tweak the effects at any time (in code) with FXG. With bitmaps, you're going back to the artwork and exporting every time you want to tweak something.
David Salahi

Benefits for using Oracle RAC in SUNCLUSTER

Hi SC expert,
What is the technical benefits of using Oracle RAC in Suncluster, Both are cluster can take care of HA and Load balancing. which are the features are not in Oracle RAC. I am able to configure and check the functionality of Oracle RAC with SC. But I want some technical highlights to project SC have specific benefits over OracleRAC.
Any suggestion and recommentation are welcome.
regards
karthikeyan.N

Hi,
goto http://www.sun.com/cluster and search for "White Paper, Sun Cluster 3.2 Software: Making Oracle Database 10G R2 RAC Even More Unbreakable"
It has all the technical details that you are looking for.
Regards
Hartmut

Automatically saving edits in the DNG

One of the reasons I import to DNG is the ability to save my edits directly in the DNG. According to Adobe Tech Support, selecting Automatically wite changes into XMP should do just that. However it does not work.
Using Ctrl + S in library mode is also supposed to write your edits to the header of the DNG. Then you should be able to take ycopy your dng and re-import it in other lightroom environments without concern for copying the entire LRCAT. I have done this with some success. Unfortunately a great deal of the time I get an error message "Writing XMP metadata did not complete successfully" with only a portion of the files containing the edits.
Is there a fix to this bug.
Jim

Hello Ian,
First I thought about the word "bug" and regretted using it immediately after I clicked the post message button. I understand that everything will not be saved. However, when I do get a successful save all the edited information is in the DNG, it can be imported into another version of Lightroom on my notebook without the lrcat. I tried to send you an example of a successful save but the forum will only allow up to a 5mb file and my dng files are all over 20mb
1. All files are in the same directory.
2. None of the files are write protected.
3 All files are on-line (accessible)
The most successful save was 6 out of 30 files selected when I pressed Ctrl+S. Today I have not been able to save any files successfully without the error message.
Just an fyi, I have been using Lightroom since it came out. Unfortunately, until recently I have not been an active forums participant. I have been a professional photographer for 40 years. Originally, Lightroom was such a change in paradigm for me that I wrestled with it constantly. Now I do not know what I would do without it. So now I plan to become more active in the forums community. However, first I need to get answers to all those hidden irritations that have bothered me for a long time. This is one of those irritations.
My purpose wanting to find out why this intermittently works this is that I am also a teacher. I need to be able to edit the files on my computer at my home office and them transfer them to my notebook to take to school for class lectures. I would like to do this without transfering the lrcat and let Lightroom create a new lrcat when I do the import. In addition, my students who have access to Lightroom on the schools computer need to be able to take their dng files, with their edits with them. School policy is to clean the data areas at least weekly. The new semester stars in a couple of weeks and it would be nice if some of my nagging questions can be solved.
Anything you can do to help me figure out why I cannot consistantly save the edits directly in the dng would be really helpful.
Jim

5D Mark II .dng files

I am converting 10MP (sRAW1) .cr2 files from a 5D Mark II to .dng using vers 5.2 of the DNG converter. My .cr2 files are usually around 15 megabytes (+/- a couple of megabytes) but I've discovered the .dng files are well over 20 megabytes. Why are they so much bigger than the .cr2 files? When I converted files from my older cameras (10D/20D, 5D) the .dng files were usually 10-15 percent smaller.
thanks,
jack

The sRaw is a special, semi-raw format, demosaiced but not color space converted. It is tri-color, but not every pixel has all three color components. When converted to DNG, the converter "invents" the missing color values; thus there is much more data in DNG format than in sRaw.

Benefit of DNG Lossy?

I just watched a free tutorial (well, several!) on Lynda.com regarding LR4 new DNG Fast and Lossy.
I understand that the Lossy DNG retains more information versus a jpeg. But if most of the world is using jpeg - exporting a Raw to Lossy will just finally result in converting to jpeg anyways, for print or posting on the web.
Benefits of Lossy, and how is it to be used in our workflow?
I never use DNG... now there is the DNG Fast... do many of you folks import your photos from Raw to DNG? Same benefits as working with Raw files?
the "DNG Fast allowing us to work 8X faster in the Develop Module" seems a compelling reason to experiment(!)
Thanks for your help

Up until now, DNG saved a little space on disk with its lossless compression, and it had the advantage of keeping XMP data internally instead of in a sidecar file. It also, in recent incarnations, keeps a checksum of image data, which allows easy computer checking of image corruption. Those are all relatively minor advantages.
The Fast Load data, if it works as advertised, is a compelling reason to convert all one's raw files to DNG. On that basis alone, I'll do it.
On a different thread, Eric Chan talks about lossy DNG compression. He claims that one of the ways it was tested was to create a lossy DNG and pass it and it's parent raw to Photoshop and see if people can tell which was which. Kind of a blindfold taste test. If you can't tell whether it was lossy-compressed or not, and it gives you the processing latitudes of a raw file, why not use it? The space savings are dramatic.
For somebody like me for whom an 8 x 10 print is big, lossy compression is a no-brainer except for 5-star images, of which I have maybe two.
Hal

DNFS with ASM over dNFS with file system - advantages and disadvantages.

Hello Experts,
We are creating a 2-node RAC. There will be 3-4 DBs whose instances will be across these nodes.
For storage we have 2 options - dNFS with ASM and dNFS without ASM.
The advantages of ASM are well known --
1. Easier administration for DBA, as using this 'layer', we know the storage very well.
2. automatic re-balancing and dynamic reconfiguration.
3. Stripping and mirroring (though we are not using this option in our env, external redundancy is provided at storage level).
4. Less (or no) dependency on storage admin for DB file related tasks.
5. Oracle also recommends to use ASM rather than file system storage.
Advantages of DNFS(Direct Network File System) ---
1. Oracle bypasses the OS layer, directly connects to storage.
2. Better performance as user's data need not to be loaded in OS's kernel.
3. It load balances across multiple network interfaces in a similar fashion to how ASM operates in SAN environments.
Now if we combine these 2 options , how will be that configuration in terms of administration/manageability/performance/downtime in future in case of migration.
I have collected some points.
In favor of 'NOT' HAVING ASM--
1. ASM is an extra layer on top of storage so if using dNFS ,this layer should be removed as there are no performance benefits.
2. store the data in file system rather than ASM.
3. Stripping will be provided at storage level (not very much sure about this).
4. External redundancy is being used at storage level so its better to remove ASM.
points for 'HAVING' ASM with dNFS --
1. If we remove ASM then DBA has no or very less control over storage. He can't even see how much is the free space left as physical level.
2. Stripping option is there to gain performance benefits
3. Multiplexing has benefits over mirroring when it comes to recovery.
(e.g, suppose a database is created with only 1 controlfile as external mirroring is in place at storage level , and another database is created with 2 copies (multiplexed within Oracle level), and an rm command was issued to remove that file then definitely there will be a time difference between restoring the file back.)
4. Now familiar and comfortable with ASM.
I have checked MOS also but could not come to any conclusion, Oracle says --
"Please also note that ASM is not required for using Direct NFS and NAS. ASM can be used if customers feel that ASM functionality is a value-add in their environment. " ------How to configure ASM on top of dNFS disks in 11gR2 (Doc ID 1570073.1)
Kindly advise which one I should go with. I would love to go with ASM but If this turned out to be a wrong design in future, I want to make sure it is corrected in the first place itself.
Regards,
Hemant

I agree, having ASM on NFS is going to give little benefit whilst adding complexity. NAS will carrying out mirroring and stripping through hardware where as ASM using software.
I would recommend DNFS only if NFS performance isn't acceptable as DNFS introduce an additional layer with potential bugs! When I first used DNFS in 11gR1, I came across lots of bugs and worked with Oracle Support to have them all resolved. I recommend having read of this metalink note:
Required Diagnostic for Direct NFS Issues and Recommended Patches for 11.1.0.7 Version (Doc ID 840059.1)
Most of the fixes have been rolled into 11gR2 and I'm not sure what the state of play is on 12c.
Hope this helps
ZedDBA

What's SQL Server express got over Access?

I have recently found out that there is a free version of SQL
server called SQL Server Express, and I wondered if anybody here
uses the express version.
What has it got that beats Access? What benefit can I get
from using it over Access? Does it have any benefits over MySQL?
Also, does it have a user interface or is it command line
based?
Any help and advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Mat

matthew stuart wrote:
> I have recently found out that there is a free version
of SQL server called SQL
> Server Express, and I wondered if anybody here uses the
express version. What
> has it got that beats Access? What benefit can I get
from using it over Access?
> Does it have any benefits over MySQL? Also, does it have
a user interface or
> is it command line based? Any help and advice would be
greatly appreciated.
> Thanks. Mat
>
The main difference is that it's a server, unlike Access
which is file
that the webserver connects to. It comes with Management
Studio software
that allows you to connect to the sql server.
If you own your own or rent a Windows webserver then you can
happily
install SQL express, but if you don't, your host will have to
offer it
to you as an add on, just like they have to offer MySQL as
part of your
hosting package.
Access is really a desktop application that can work on a
website, but
its not a "proper" sql server like MS SQL or Oracle or any
other other
big boys out there.
You don't need to know SQL to use it, but if you opt to learn
SQL, even
just the basics, then it will all make sense and will be
beneficial to you.
Steve

Difference between standard benefits and advanced benefits

whats the difference between standard benefits and advanced benefits

per one of our HR consultants. Below are the additional benefits that you get with advanced benefits over SOB. Please remember OAB needed to be licensed additionally.
•     Life event management with batch processing (in addition to on-line)
•     Automation of benefit administration
•     Flex benefit plan set up
•     Reimbursement requests
•     What-if Modeling
•     Communications Triggering, requested literature etc
Edited by: Sunthar Tharmalingam on Jan 2, 2013 10:05 AM

Advantage of Lenovo drivers/applications over Windows 7?

As operating systems mature there is less of a requirement for OEM drivers and applications. Many of the drivers/applications are designed for corporate customers specifically .e.g to give them a consistent interface across operating system versions and for other reasons that would not benefit an individual user. My windows 7 install works fine without any lenovo drivers.
I know some drivers/applications offer increased performance and stability, but which ones? Some are obvious e.g. Ultranav utilty allows you to programme your ultranv to a greater degree than the standard driver. But what about the fingerprint driver for example? Why should we install it? It would be valuable if we knew through the driver/application readme's exactly what advantage they gave over standard windows 7. If anyone who has installed any of the below packages can comment on what the advantage is over over windows 7, I think it would help many people. Please add others to the list if neccessary.
Bluetooth with Enhanced Data Rate Software II for Windows 7
Conexant Audio Software for Windows 7
Integrated camera
Intel GM45 Display Driver for Windows 7
Intel Matrix Storage Manager Driver for Windows 7
Intel Wireless LAN (11bgn) for Windows 7
Lenovo Fingerprint Software for Windows 7
Lenovo System Interface Driver for Windows7
Thinkvantage Access Connections for Windows 7

For Access Connections, here's my list of user benefits over the embedded OS functions, noting that substantial work was done on all of the ThinkVantage tools for Win7 to minimize and performance or boot time hit and make them more stable.
- More visual interface
- Better connectivity information
- Single interface for WiFi, ethernet, WAN, etc.
- Auto switch for wired & wireless (fastest available network - e.g. wired and wireless can be handled in a single profile)
- Integrated profiles for printers, browser favorites, security and more
- Launch Programs associated with profiles (your VPN, instant messaging, etc.)
There are many IT benefits to Access Connections that are still very valid for Win7 - pretty much all the TVT's have that story

IPhone 3G ** key does not allow me to access my land line voice mailbox...

OK, I have a great iPhone 3G issue for you. Here it is...
In order for me to retrieve my voice mail messages on my office land line, I have to call my office direct dial phone number. After that outgoing message begins to play, I have to press ** on my iphone keypad to prompt the voice mail phone system to let me know dial my extension number and password. On my old iphone 2G, it works fine. But with the new iphone, it does not. Another words, when I press **, it does not allow me to the part where I dial my extension number and password. It instead instructs me to dial my extension number and leave a message (not enter my password). Possibly the ** tones from the new phone are too short? Not sure? There are two other people at my company that are having the exact same issue on their 3G phones as well. I even went to the AT&T store and tested it on the display iphones there. Same problem...

I was on the phone for an hour today with tech support. I spoke first to a tech support agent and next to an iPhone product specialist. Neither had heard of this issue, but I referred them to this thread and they now know it is an issue.
The product specialist tried to solve the problem and could not. He told me he was emailing the engineers to determine a workaround. He told me he would call me by Tuesday at the latest. His name is Richard and I will continue to update our progress in fixing this issue as I receive information.
If we can't access our land line corporate voicemail I don't see how I can keep the iPhone even though it otherwise works well and has many positive benefits over the Windows-based smartphone I was using (and may have to go back to).

DNG 5.4 benefits over 4.6?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for