Creating DNGs using Lightroom versus Adobe DNG

[kennordhauser]

I have recently switched to generating DNGs from my adjusted RAW files using Lightroom 2.2.   Prior to this I was using Adobe DNG converter 4.3

Does anybody know if there's a difference?  I haven't noticed IVMP acting differently when I catalogue my Lightroom generated DNGs.  Just curious if there are any caveats or limitations that others have come across.

Thanks,
Ken

[peterkrogh]

Ken,
The only differences are really workflow ones.  You can't get Lightroom to build a parallel directory structure of folders for the new DNGs like the DNG Converter will. There should be no difference in how the DNG itself is built.

Peter

[danaltick]

Peter,

I would like to ask a follow-on question to this.  I'm sure this has been answered already and I've just missed it, so I'll ask anyway.  I haven't played with LR in some time, but if you were using LR for your complete DNG workflow, would you ingest straight to DNG with no working folders, and make the adjustments afterwards?  I assume this is how you would do it since LR does not use the DNG embedded previews for thumbnails or media previews, but instead stores the ACR adjustments in its database, correct?

Dan

[peterkrogh]

Dan,
1. With a LR workflow for image adjustment, it makes sense to ingest as DNG (if you know you're going there anyway). Saves a step, and lets LR track the DNG instead of tracking a raw for part of the workflow, and then changing to DNG in mid-process.

2. As to using a Working folder, I think that depends on whether you are using a separate catalog application, and/or whether you are using more than one computer or master catalog.  Once you introduce any of the multiples (catalogs, computers or applications) it probably makes sense to use a Working folder. If you are a one computer, Lightroom only, one catalog user, it probably makes sense to ingest right into a permanent home.

Peter

[danaltick]

Peter,

Makes sense.  Thanks.

Dan