# Exporting DNG files



## descoates (Oct 5, 2020)

I have a friend who still uses Photoshop CC6. When I send him images he requests them as TIFFs, stating he can’t open raws from cameras launched after 2013. Am I correct in saying that if I convert my proprietary raws to DNG in Lightroom and export as DNG they should open in the version of Raw in Photoshop on his computer? My camera is a Nikon launched in 2016.
Thanks, Des C


----------



## clee01l (Oct 5, 2020)

Yes, PSCC6 should be able to read any DNG file.   Your friend should download the latest DNG converter.   That will allow them to read any proprietary RAW file format and convert it to DNG just as you would. 

DNG images would not have any of the  Lightroom adjustments  just as would any RAW file.


----------



## descoates (Oct 5, 2020)

clee01l said:


> Yes, PSCC6 should be able to read any DNG file.   Your friend should download the latest DNG converter.   That will allow them to read any proprietary RAW file format and convert it to DNG just as you would.
> 
> DNG images would not have any of the  Lightroom adjustments  just as would any RAW file.


Thank you Cletus,
I don't understand why the DNG file would not have Lightroom adjustments?
Des C


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Oct 5, 2020)

descoates said:


> Thank you Cletus,
> I don't understand why the DNG file would not have Lightroom adjustments?
> Des C


I'm not Cletus (lots of people are happy about that), but this is where things get complicated.   As I understand it (and I'm only about 80% sure) the DNG you export contains the develop information but not the rendered image.  So if someone with a current lightroom or photoshop imported it, they see them.  But if someone with CS6 imports it I think "it depends", since CS6 doesn't support all the features of development in current versions.  How it will render... I just don't know.  It might decline to use them at all due to the process version, it might render what it can and ignore the rest, and it might just render the raw unmodified.  Unless someone here has a CS6 and can try it?


----------



## descoates (Oct 5, 2020)

Thank you Linwood and sorry about mistaken identity!! I'm interested in pursuing this as it helps my understanding of Adobe & Lightroom. I still think exporting as DNG is better than TIFF. - Better still if my friend just gets the subscription from Adobe.
I have an old computer (still going fine but not in use) with CS3 installed so I'm going to experiment.
Many thanks again for help
Des Coates


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Oct 5, 2020)

descoates said:


> Thank you Linwood and sorry about mistaken identity!!


No mistake, Cletus answered first, but I saw your question back to him and was sitting in front of lightroom so through I would try and answer.


----------



## clee01l (Oct 6, 2020)

We can’t all be here all the time. SO it is right that Linwood should step in.
Maybe I can expound upon Linwood’s answer. 
The DNG is quite versatile in that the format of the data bolock is quite variable. If the original is a proprietary RAW format then converting to DNG is going to simple copy unedited RAW data into the DNG Datablock. There are also times when the DNG data block contains RGB data (pixels) and these could be edited versions of the Lightroom Image. 
If you convert to DNG from RAW, the datablock will be the RAW unedited photosite data. 
If you Export to DNG you will be exporting RGB data and this will be no different from the TIFF file that you sent previously. 
The DNG file format standard is derived from the TIFF/EP6 standard as is TIFF and many proprietary RAW formats. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Oct 6, 2020)

clee01l said:


> If you Export to DNG you will be exporting RGB data and this will be no different from the TIFF file that you sent previously.


So that's what I thought would happen also, but it is not what appeared to occur.

I took a raw image in lightroom and drew on it with the brush in develop so I could clearly see the change.

I exported to DNG.  I actually expected to get a rendered not raw image inside a DNG package. 

What happened was it opened in ACR in Photoshop, so just to check, I went to the brush and hit reset -- the drawing vanished.  It was in there as develop instructions not as pixels. 

So it would APPEAR that an exported raw+develop actually wraps some form of raw up in a DNG and includes the develop settings.  Which is not what I expected, but is actually quite handy.


----------



## clee01l (Oct 6, 2020)

Ferguson said:


> So it would APPEAR that an exported raw+develop actually wraps some form of raw up in a DNG and includes the develop settings. Which is not what I expected, but is actually quite handy.



Interesting observation. If you do a Photo merge or HDR, the result is an RGB DNG file. I assumed the adjustments are applied. (Why would they not be since the derived photo is a composite?) 

If you Export a RAW file as original, do you copy the Proprietary RAW file format or do you put the RAW data inside a DNG wrapper?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Oct 6, 2020)

clee01l said:


> If you Export a RAW file as original, do you copy the Proprietary RAW file format or do you put the RAW data inside a DNG wrapper?


Well, in LR the option is "Export to DNG" it doesn't use the term raw, but it does present an option to embed the raw image (which I did not use).   My guess at what it is doing is the same as if you convert to DNG.

I actually tried that on a similarly edited photo, first I did an export as DNG, then I did a convert to DNG.   I opened each in ACR; the edits were there in both, but it was a raw image (at least it had all the editing options I would expect to see for raw).

I've never gotten a complete answer as to what happens when you do a convert to DNG (similar to the question of export now, I think).  Apparently Adobe does some partial conversion, so it is no longer manufacturer specific, but people claim it is still raw.  I'm not quite sure what that means, does it just encode the CFA matrix in some more standardized form?   Or is doing some linear debayer, leaving it kind of raw (no stretch) but not really raw?  Do you know? 

Regardless, I THINK that the export as DNG is included develop settings as a matter of course.  I see no way to exclude them by option, though another thing I tried which was interesting -- you can export a virtual copy as a DNG and if it had different develop settings those are used.  So you can actually send a bunch of DNG's, all with different edits, to someone. 

I still don't know what happens if they are new process edits though.


----------



## descoates (Oct 7, 2020)

Thank you both very much....so I have some more to think about. 
If he does open my raw file in CS6 the process version will be 6 iterations behind what is on my updated subscription plan. Also I've noticed that if I open an old proprietary raw file, say 6 years old, which I would have on my PC, I get a warning sign (exclamation) and hovering my cursor over it it reads "update software". And if I click on it something changes, but I'm not sure what but it seems very little. Is it trying to match the parameters of the older raw file? Incidentally, when I export as DNG to my CC6 man, under "file settings" I set " compatibility" to 7.1
I read all the threads on this site and gain a ton of info. for which I'm very grateful!
Des Coates


----------



## clee01l (Oct 7, 2020)

descoates said:


> Thank you both very much....so I have some more to think about.
> If he does open my raw file in CS6 the process version will be 6 iterations behind what is on my updated subscription plan. Also I've noticed that if I open an old proprietary raw file, say 6 years old, which I would have on my PC, I get a warning sign (exclamation) and hovering my cursor over it it reads "update software". And if I click on it something changes, but I'm not sure what but it seems very little. Is it trying to match the parameters of the older raw file? Incidentally, when I export as DNG to my CC6 man, under "file settings" I set " compatibility" to 7.1
> I read all the threads on this site and gain a ton of info. for which I'm very grateful!
> Des Coates



There is one reason that you can not expect a user with an older version of PS/Lr to be able to accept a more current version of development. Process versions continue to be updated. The current process version has adjustment sliders that are not recognized by older versions of ACR/Lr. 
A user with PSCC6 is going to be limited to the process versions available in that version of PS. You have two choices. 
The user processes the RAW file limited to the processing controls available to them or you send a processed RGB file (TIFF) that’s already has the edits embedded.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (Oct 7, 2020)

descoates said:


> And if I click on it something changes, but I'm not sure what but it seems very little. Is it trying to match the parameters of the older raw file? Incidentally, when I export as DNG to my CC6 man, under "file settings" I set " compatibility" to 7.1
> I read all the threads on this site and gain a ton of info. for which I'm very grateful!


So two different issues.  One is your experience is in up-converting versions.  Past process version 1 or 2, most of the changes in version are extremely minor going up because the new version tended to add features not change how features are rendered (there are some minor cases, if I recall, with noise reduction).   In other words, version 3 to 4 would not show a change because it is impossible for a version 3 image to actually have version 4 changes in it. Yet.

The reverse is not true at all -- if you have the current version you might have applied, as an example,  dehaze, or range masks. These are simply not supported in older versions, so going downward cannot work right.  Whether it even ALLOWS you to go downward and make any attempt I do not know.

By the way, these are called "Process" versions. 

The version in the DNG conversion on the other hand is completely different -- that's a DNG standard, how data is stored inside the DNG itself.  It is not about WHAT data is stored there (loosely speaking).  So picking a lower version there does not (again, loosely speaking, as I have not checked everything) reduce the available content you send to someone, just how it is stored. 

Now all this made me think of something else -- what happens if you, in your lightroom, downgrade the version to 1 or 2 or whatever was current in CS6 days (anyone know?).   *Note doing that WILL potentially affect your edits*, so you might make a virtual copy first.   But I think, maybe, if you did that, adjusted edits if needed, then exported that copy as a DNG, your friend may be able to get it with edits.

But exporting a TIFF or PSD with the edits already rendered is certainly the most simple path.


----------

