mike_sea

After some minor keyboard rage..not really...I have done some digging into .DNG files. I felt it right to share some of what I have found in case there are some others who are reading this thread. The reason the files are much smaller isn't because data is being stripped in terms of the pixels and information within the pixels. The "RAW" pixel data is not changed in any way but happy to be corrected. My understanding is that each company has their own RAW format for the metadata on the images. It is all the same information however the format and order etc is different. Somehow in my case, this account for about 5Mb of data when my RAW images are converted to a .DNG file. 1. I will get into the book you suggest but being profoundly dyslexic (I can type the english word and apparently well but struggle to read - and very slowly and with difficulty comprehending) it will be a chore similar to pulling teeth. Its mainly through YouTube university that I have been able to deep dive into what .DNG actually is. I am still on the hunt though. 2. This may be an option but a horrible workflow 3. For the newspapers, jpg is perfect however, for example, I am going to Antarctica again early next year and want every single piece of data I can get through the lens in digital format. 4. I just spent $15,000 on upgrading to the D5 (and three pro lenses) given the D5s isn't going to happen I had no choice. I still also shoot with a D3s which I love but that is my backup. Thanks for all the help here and hope my few words can help someone else. Mike

Hey All, Despite the journey it seems it is all for zero. One of the main reasons for the purchase was because I couldn't get Nikon D5 RAW images open in CS5. I went through the who DNG converter but discovered my 23Mb images came out to 18 Mb. I just didn't like the idea of losing about 1/4 of my data...it can't be a good thing. Hence the journey to Lightroom that I believed would open my RAW files. I bought Lr, installed Bridge (latest version) and did the appropriate updates etc. Bridge can clearly see the RAW images but still refuses to open the RAW files. Apparently, after putting my money down on the table and doing all the right things, I still don't have a "QUALIFYING PRODUCT" that will open RAW. I am so confused at this point that I don't know if I an stupid, been conned by Adobe, they have done this to their long time clients before, and this is their was them softly extorting you into their subscription package or that I have missed some minor point. I carry around $20k worth of equipment, I assure you that I am not being a cheapskate by wanting a simple licence. From happiness to frustration. Is what I am asking for a bridge (pun intended too far)?

I have bitten the bullet so to speak, Lr is installed on both my main computers. Trying to import just a single folder will be a challenge because it seems to want to work to the beat of its own drum. with 352,926 images...I really don't want to troll through that huge pointer file every time I open it up. It was the confidence offered and insights from here that got this sale for Adobe, not that they would even care. I got some lightning today so am trying to get them in ...now to see how it handles D5 RAW images.. The adventure continues. With help from some friends. Thanks to all and I hope this helps others. Mike

UNBELIEVABLE INFORMATION...MANY THANKS TO YOU ALL!!!! I feel like a kid on his first assignment again, lots of enthusiasm and no idea what I am doing. I have in the order of 300k images (I really don't actually know but in that neighborhood). I store them externally with live back up etc in a central HDD multiple bay using sync toy in a simple raid configuration. I can use two different computers to access these images if needed. For current work however, I can be on either computer depending on the type of job it is. As a result, I often have images in two or three different places and during the back up process multiple duplicates before the client gets their work and I clear out the local computers files. Does this mean: 1. I will have 300,000 error messages each time I log in when the back up system is not connected of switched on? 2. given the number of images will 2 x 300,000 images struggle with regards to running Lr? 3. If I go the Lr way, should I give up on my 2 decade workflow that has NEVER failed me? 4. Given the knowledge base here, is there anything else I should consider? Thank again

Hi All, I have been a long time Photoshop user and recently I have seen a couple of things in Lightroom that may have convinced me to finally get a copy. One of my concerns is that I have a very long standing and robust filing system going back more than a decade with the only updates coming from new cameras in my stable. I have been told (possibly incorrectly) that Lightroom MUST take over my whole filing systems of images. Given the TerraBytes of images I have that would need to be catalogued this would be enourmus, I would like to stay with my old system and bring images or folders into LR for working on and saving them back with my system in place. Is this a dream or do I have incorrect information in this regard? Thanks in Advance Mike