Nikon D800 RAW VS DNG Quality

Started May 11, 2014 | Questions
bakhtyar kurdi
Regular MemberPosts: 499
Like?
Nikon D800 RAW VS DNG Quality
May 11, 2014

Just by converting RAW files from my D800 to DNG to be able to process it in older PS,what I noticed is the size reduced from 71mb to 38mb.

Does that mean we lose information? how that possible?

Anyone knows what is the reason?

ANSWER:
BartyLobethal
Contributing MemberPosts: 828Gear list
Like?
Uncompressed vs Lossless Compressed
In reply to bakhtyar kurdi, May 11, 2014

Sounds like you're shooting uncompressed RAW. DNG is a lossless compressed format that will produce file sizes that vary according to the amount of detail / data in a given scene. Lossless compressed files (in principle) can be decompressed with no loss of data. It is possible that some Nikon-specific metadata is lost.

Compare the DNG file sizes that result from conversion from uncompressed RAW to the output from your camera using Nikon's lossless compressed option. They should be nearly the same for a given image.

-- hide signature --

BartyL

 BartyLobethal's gear list:BartyLobethal's gear list
Nikon D50 Nikon D700 Nikon D300S Olympus OM-D E-M5 Olympus E-M1 +15 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
bakhtyar kurdi
Regular MemberPosts: 499
Like?
Re: Uncompressed vs Lossless Compressed
In reply to BartyLobethal, May 11, 2014

BartyLobethal wrote:

Sounds like you're shooting uncompressed RAW. DNG is a lossless compressed format that will produce file sizes that vary according to the amount of detail / data in a given scene. Lossless compressed files (in principle) can be decompressed with no loss of data. It is possible that some Nikon-specific metadata is lost.

Compare the DNG file sizes that result from conversion from uncompressed RAW to the output from your camera using Nikon's lossless compressed option. They should be nearly the same for a given image.

-- hide signature --

BartyL

Thanks, yes I was shooting uncompressed, lossless compressed will be very close to that size

I didn't expect DNG to be compressed. .

I got the answer now.

Thanks again

selected answer This post was selected as the answer by the original poster.
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Steve Bingham
Forum ProPosts: 21,742Gear list
Like?
Re: Uncompressed vs Lossless Compressed
In reply to bakhtyar kurdi, May 11, 2014

. . . and when you convert to 16 bit tiff, they will be huge.

-- hide signature --

Steve Bingham
www.dustylens.com
www.ghost-town-photography.com

 Steve Bingham's gear list:Steve Bingham's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Sony Alpha 7 II Nikon D7200 Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM Tokina AT-X 12-28mm f/4 Pro DX +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
michaeladawson
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,406Gear list
Like?
Re: Uncompressed vs Lossless Compressed
In reply to bakhtyar kurdi, May 11, 2014

bakhtyar kurdi wrote:

BartyLobethal wrote:

Sounds like you're shooting uncompressed RAW. DNG is a lossless compressed format that will produce file sizes that vary according to the amount of detail / data in a given scene. Lossless compressed files (in principle) can be decompressed with no loss of data. It is possible that some Nikon-specific metadata is lost.

Compare the DNG file sizes that result from conversion from uncompressed RAW to the output from your camera using Nikon's lossless compressed option. They should be nearly the same for a given image.

-- hide signature --

BartyL

Thanks, yes I was shooting uncompressed, lossless compressed will be very close to that size

I didn't expect DNG to be compressed. .

I got the answer now.

Thanks again

And if I were you I would switch your camera to use lossless compressed as well.  There is absolutely no reason for you to be saving images as uncompressed.

-- hide signature --

Mike Dawson

 michaeladawson's gear list:michaeladawson's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX3 Nikon D200 Nikon D4 Nikon D800 Nikon D800E +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads