You understood something wrong. Backwards compatible means all old, predating the software version, DNG can be rendered correctly. What you think you got is forwards compatibility - which DNG isn’t as it’s a moving target and old software will not be able to correctly render newer DNG!
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
And I wouldn’t expect them to ever support these super resolution DNG - as the only DNG they truly support are those coming directly out of a camera as it’s native format. Also DxO doesn’t care to be backwards compatible within it’s own software series, so I’m wondering why you even care about LR not being forwards compatible with current developments!
M
mcslsk
Guest
Because I can convert any new camera raw file to DNG and open it in LR 6.14.
But when converting you have to select an old, obsolete version of the DNG file format that leaves quite a bit of potential quality on the chopping block because the newer DNG are not supported by the obsolete software you insist of running!
Last edited:
Denis de Gannes
Senior Member
I checked with C1 yes it does open the -enhanced.dng but it does not apply the 2x super resolution. I experienced the same behavior with LrC 10.0 before it was updated to 10.2.
I don't that you will see any other software apply the Adobe Super-Resolution feature.
C1 will read dng files but it uses it's own rendering engine and raw profiles.
For sure DNG is no Magical file format. I do not use in my normal workflow.
--
Denis de Gannes
Last edited:
Treat DNG as an intermediate, temporary file format that has it’s place inside the Adobe tools where it has some benefits. Don’t ever use them as long term format because when doing so the Adobe tools are fatally flawed as the DNG will be rewritten for even the tiniest of changes to edit or metadata - which by itself creates a backup catastrophy!
M
mcslsk
Guest
Tell me: What is the difference between "new" and "old" DNGs? Latest DNG Converter produces working, perfectly fine DNGs for use in 6.14. There is nothing "obsolete" about 6.14 other than that it doesn't cost a monthly.
You are losing a lot of quality as the newer process versions use more refined demosaicing, better noise reduction, better color profiles - an all round massive improvement over the old, outdated LR 6.14. And to be compatible the Adobe Converter only creates old DNG standard anyways, so it’s even worse than I thought because it’s on the level of Camera RAW 7.1 which is leaving out a lot of the newer developments - like referencing the masked sensor areas to gauge if any of the A/D converters that are creating your RAW is out of whack, instead substituting this with a DNG standardized single black level value computed from the sensor data - a one size fits all. Not doing so will result in more and more importantly patterned noise appearance and thus mandate higher noise reduction settings than would otherwise be needed (applied automatically by your old LR - as it doesn’t have the newer profiles)... I hope you have the original RAW still abailable, else the losses will be permanent!
M
mcslsk
Guest
I don't wan't the file to do anything with the raw data. And LR 6.14 with custom profiles and plug-ins for noise and sharpness is just fine. I am using both, LR 61.4 and the latest subscription LR - and there is no visible difference whatsoever.
Of you feed both with the same obsolete DNG then that’s no wonder as newer LR will fall back to using the old process...
M
mcslsk
Guest
Nope. New DNG. No difference. Sorry.
Wrong, use the native RAW, not a DNG!
M
mcslsk
Guest
Why? There is no visible difference. Anyhow, I am mostly using the raw from my cameras but do convert to DNG for use in LR 6.14. But back to th initial topic: The new superres DNG has compatibility issues - which is a shame.
False, you are using a too old software version - the new DNG uses newly defined features and is fully valid! DNG is an extensible format and Adobe would be stupid to not use this to their advantage and has done so several times in the past breaking compatibility for the sake of innovation and preventing DNG from becoming a hinderance to their development!
M
mcslsk
Guest
You are wrong. The latest DNG Converter converts raw files from most any camera into DNGs that can be opened in 6.14. SuperRes files can't. If Adobe wants to use the lack of compatibility to their advantage - fine. Another reason to take a closer look at other software.
Superres is a new feature that the old DNG readers can’t deal with as the files need to be handled differently. I - unlike you it seems - have read the DNG specification as published by Adobe and - being a software developer - know what can and can’t be done by the old DNG readers (that predate certain features that were added to newer DNG. If that prompts you to waste even more time and effort switching to something different, then do it now. But be aware that by using DNG you have made things worse for you switch with every day and without any benefit!
Last edited:
Denis de Gannes
Senior Member
So Photolab can read the -enhanced.dng file the real issue is do you get a 2x resized file on output? All you get is the original data encapsulated in the dng and Photolab cannot apply the resize.
To wit LrC and the Adobe DNG Converter allows you to convert a raw file from a supported Camera model to dng format. That dng file can now be opened / rendered by an earlier version of Lightroom or Adobe Camera Raw that does not support the Camera.
That conversion to dng does absolutely nothing to affect another none Adobe Application.
Raw processing capabilities and profiles are proprietary to Adobe, other applications that process raw files use their own proprietary processes and profiles.
Expecting other applications to have the ability to utilize Adobe’s Super-Resolution is a “pie in the sky”.
The option you need to use is to create a tiff via export from LrC or use the edit in feature to send to the applitor this can also be achieved by creating a tiff in Photoshop.
--
Denis de Gannes
Last edited:
Lloyd O'Daniel
Forum Enthusiast
Yes, I now see that PL sees only the original resolution. I was a bit too casual when I looked at the SR dng in PL.
Denis de Gannes
Senior Member
I have always expressed the view that converting to dng only provide any meaningful benefit is you are committed to only use Adobe applications. Using dng files with multiple applications creates more challenges than benefits.
Couple of thoughts, you cannot apply edits/ enhancements to raw data with more than one application. Once you start a process with a particular application and a raw file the file is rendered data and if you pass that process to another application the new application is not working with raw data.
If you go to a restaurant and request your steak to be cooked medium rare and when you find the steak well done. So you request the waiter to have that rectified.
Guess what the Chef has to start with a new steak!
--
Denis de Gannes
Couple of thoughts, you cannot apply edits/ enhancements to raw data with more than one application. Once you start a process with a particular application and a raw file the file is rendered data and if you pass that process to another application the new application is not working with raw data.
If you go to a restaurant and request your steak to be cooked medium rare and when you find the steak well done. So you request the waiter to have that rectified.
Guess what the Chef has to start with a new steak!
--
Denis de Gannes
Last edited:
Denis de Gannes
Senior Member
I can think of another opportunity that the option can present. I have a travel lens that I use very often it’s a 12-150mm and I wish to have another lens with additional reach.
Now I can use the Super-Resolution feature to provide me with the equivalent of a 300mm lens without having to purchase an additional lens.
Now I can use the Super-Resolution feature to provide me with the equivalent of a 300mm lens without having to purchase an additional lens.
