Converting DNG files back to camera raw (CR2) - PLEASE HELP, Urgent.

<p>Hi there,<br>

I've been shortlisted for a world photography award and they now want the original camera raw files. I, however used to follow the advise to convert them to DNG on downloading them from the camera. They say they will disqualify me me if I am unable to provide them with the original CR2 files. I use photoshop CS3. Is there a way to get them back- if there is could you please give me detailed instructions on how this is done. Thanks so much!<br>

Katja Heber</p>

<p>Hi Katja - congratulations. I'm afraid though you may be out of luck. As I understand it you cannot go from DNG back to CR2 unless you've chosen to embed the original RAW in the DNG when first converting to DNG (which is an option Adobe's DNG converter offers). Did you choose this option ikn CS3? If you did you can possibly revert to CR2. Can you read your CS3 instructions and see what they say about reverting to original RAW?</p>

<p>From what I've read - Lightroom's built in DNG converter doesn't offer this option so if you use Lightroom, you've hit a dead end with no return.</p>

<p>It may be that the competition organizers wil accept the DNG - it is after all a RAW file and is in reality the 'same' as the CR2. However given the recent fakery in some of the major competitions they all want original camera RAW's and I can understand why.</p>

<p>Riz - your post started well but ultimately was insensitive and unhelpful in my opinion.</p>

<p>Thanks for your responses so far. I'm using Photoshop CS3 and I'm not sure if I embedded the original information. How can I find out if I did and how can I convert back to the CR2 format? Is there anyone that could give detailed instructions on how this is done? I so far managed to get the image back to how I downloaded it from the camera when I first converted it to DNG, before I made any changes, but it is still in DNG. I usually keep the original DNG files. Once I've made changes I save them as TIFF.<br>

xx Katja</p>

<p>Go here: http://www.adobepress.com/articles/article.asp?p=412913&seqNum=3</p>

<p>Scroll down to Figure 3.3</p>

<p>I've not done this and embedded the RAW in a DNG but it WILL be something you would have to make a conscious decision to do, so chances are you've not done it without knowing.</p>

<p>The file size will be an indication - the DNG will be the same or slightly less than the original RAW file size. The DNG + RAW will certainly be almost twice the size of the DNG. So if you do File>Info and read the file size that'll be a good indicator.<br>

You might want to contact the organizers of the competition and explain your predicament.</p>

<p>Oh and also Figure 3.6 explains about extracting originals.</p>

<p>Katja, congratulations, and I hope it works out for you. I think John is right, though. Unless you selected the option to imbed the original RAW files in your DNG conversion, they're gone (assuming you formatted the camera card aftwards). Open the DNG converter, and check the preferences list in the lower left-hand corner. One of them should read "Imbed Orignial" or "Don't Imbed Original".</p>

<p>If the RAW files are not imbedded, what you should do is contact the people running the contest. The should be aware that DNG is basically an open, non-proprietary RAW format. All the the EXIF and IPTC data is still there, which should veriy the authenticity of your ownership. Try to convince them. It never hurts to ask.</p>

<p>Good luck...</p>

<p>Can't help you directly but when you talk to them, mention that some cameras capture DNG natively, hence no original RAW files.</p>

<p>Here's the list:<br>

<a href="http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html">http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html</a><br>

you need to scroll down.</p>

<p>I know your Canon is not on the list, but might make your argument stronger.</p>

<p>Good luck and congrats.</p>

<p>Thanks for your resonses so far, I will check the file size and whether I checked the box "imbed" when I get home. I'd phoned the competition office already and it doesn't look as if they will waver the rule. I'll try to e-mail them as well and then just submit my DNG files as it is obvious that I didn't manipulate the images they selected. But I understand that a rule is a rule and that you can't just make one exception - so I probably had it. Now everybody! Here is one good reason to keep your original camera raw files! All forums that I have read on this subject advise that DNG files are good enough! Anyhow, I'm very proud to have been shortlisted and it came as a total suprise to me. </p>

<p>a DNG is a raw file.. they should accept it. If you own a Leica M9 it shoot as DNG.. so you think they will reject all Leica file?</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Katja, who are these guys? Maybe we could gang up on them...</p>

<p>I probably didn't state it clearly enough, they will accept DNG files but only if they are the native file format of the camera. <br>

Katja</p>

<p>not many camera have a DNG file format native from the camera.. Leica have it, the 45k$ digital blad H3 i think have it..</p>

<p>I dont see what is the difference between your DNG file vs a DNG file from the camera? as anyone can adjust in camera setting to look as good as possible... if you dont crop, add gradient, remove noise and dust etc.. your DNG is as good as any DNG no?</p>

<p>Or just press the RESET button in Lightroom when you import your DNG, so all the setting will be as is..</p>

<p>best thing is to ask them, but asking for a raw format over a DNG, or saying that a DNG is good only if it came from a camera show that they dont know much (i can be wrong)...</p>

<p>There are tools that edit raw files and output DNG files. You would be amazed at how many different operations you can perform on raw Bayer mosaic data.</p>

<p>A sane contest would only accept a DNG file that was both camera native AND marked as camera original, no parameters changed.</p>

<p>Sounds like the BBC wildlife contest. They want RAW if the camera is capable of shooting RAW. They've had enough problems with "photoshopped" entries that I can see why they do this.</p>

<p>There's no easy way to recreate the original RAW file as far as I know. Since it's just digital data, obviously it's theoretically possible to write data to a file using the same format and coding as Canon do as long as you actually have the original data in some form. A JPEG has lost the data of course. I don't know enough about the structure of DNG files to know if all the required data is still there.</p>

<p>The big downside of doing this is, of course, if they detect that the RAW files you send are not authentic, original, Canon RAW files as shot in the camera, your reputation will be blown and you'll probably be barred from entering any future contests. The rules clearly state that you must have the original RAW files to be eligible for an award. If you don't have them, then you're out of luck and recreating something that looks like a RAW file and not telling them is unethical.</p>

<p>I'd confess to them what you've done (converted to DNG) and see if they will accept your entry. They probably won't, but then you won't be caught "cheating" either.</p>

<p>Thank you Bob,<br>

Thanks for your advise. Originally, my plan was to still submit the files and to inform them via e-mail of what I had done, but after seeing that I have to check a box stating that my entries oblige by the competition rules - although they do, in as far as that they haven't been changed, apart from their conversion to DNG- I thought I'd better ask them first, to verify that this is ok. By the way, it is the Veolia Environment Wildlife Photographer of the year 2010 competition. It's interesting that the BBC Wildlife Photography competition has similar rules. Is there no way of checking DNG files then? They are just as when I downloaded them from the camera.<br>

Katja Heber</p>

 

<p>Just one more comment from me. I believe that if they would just care to take a look at the original two files- in this case DNG- that they shortlisted, they would be able to see that I hadn't made any changes to them. One of them is underexposed - I do not care to hide it- and the other is ok, but would have been better if I had taken it with ISO 200 setting and a faster shutter speed. They were taken on my first digital DSLR camera, which I only had for four months and I was relatively inexperienced in shooting in raw. I also had to be very quick and didn't have time to change too many settings from the shot that I had taken before. The thing is that you are allowed to apply some changes as to exposure and white balance, for example. They would see the changes I had made when look at the TIFF files that they have also requested. Anyhow, I don't believe that they have chosen to shortlist me because of my technical excellence or great equipment, more because of originality. Anyhow I'm still awaiting a response from somebody I know - who is not part of this forum- who is going to give me an informed answer whether DNG files can be changed back to CR2 and when I get this I will all let you know. But I'm still upset that everybody advises one to convert raw files to DNG without warning you about possible consequences. <br>

Katja Heber</p>

<p>After reading the rules for that competition it appears that they are concerned about avoiding ethical problems, including a repeat of the type of controversy that resulted in the <a href="http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/whats-on/temporary-exhibitions/wpy/statement.jsp">2009 winner's photograph being disqualified</a>. It appears they want incontrovertible evidence of the camera raw file as it was captured in the camera. If that's the rationale, it's unlikely that "converting back" from DNG to camera raw would meet their standards, even if it were possible... and I seriously doubt it is possible. As you have described it, the camera raw file no longer exists.</p>

<p>Regarding warnings about the potential downside of converting camera raw to DNG, unfortunately that's the nature of a relatively new industry and medium. It isn't possible to anticipate all consequences until a situation occurs that makes evident a new problem that needs to be resolved.</p>

<p>As an example, when I studied journalism in the US in the early 1980s, the standard textbook we were assigned that covered issues related to photojournalism encouraged edits and modifications to photographs that would nowadays be rejected as unethical. In previous decades it was considered acceptable to modify a photograph to eliminate distractions such as a utility pole or line "growing out" of a subject's head. Such a modification was considered acceptable because it did not significantly affect the integrity of the image. Nowadays such a modification would probably be considered an ethical problem and, in fact, there have been a few specific instances in the digital era in which photographers have seen their reputations tainted by not disclosing edits that removed objects that the photographer considered to be a distraction.</p>

<p>At this point it's probably best practice for any photographer who anticipates seeking publication or sales to always shoot raw and archive the raw files immediately before doing anything else. Right now we can't anticipate every potential complication that might result from, for example, shooting JPEG only (which has been fairly common practice among PJs), or converting raw to DNG without archiving the original camera raw file.</p>

<p> It's NOT possible unless you have the original embedded raw file in your DNG file. </p>

<p>It is not possible for contest rules:</p>

<p>Were I a judge and the date of the raw file was significantly later than the image data you would be disqualified. Canon .CR2 generally use sidecar .XMP files to record all changes to the oriiginal raw file.</p>

<p>DNG is never needed unless for some reason you are beholden to an old version of Photoshop. Lesson learned.</p>

<p>I don't suppose there's any chance the deleted CR2 can still be recovered from your media card or disk? Something like this might be worth a try:</p>

<p>http://www.cgsecurity.org/wiki/PhotoRec</p>

 

<p>I wish this dng would go away. Sorry to hear of your troubles, Katja. Best of luck.</p>

<p>"DNG is never needed unless for some reason you are beholden to an old version of Photoshop."</p>

<p>My situation, exactly: PS CS3 + EOS 5D Mk. II = DNG needed. That said, I don't see anything inherently deficient in DNG file vs. CR2. Conversion is just a necessary (PIA) addtion to the workflow...</p>

<p>William, i totaly understand you.. but a you could also spend 200$ on upgrade to CS4-5 / Lightroom and be set.. after all, its no a big investment compare to your new toy ; )</p>

<p>The only time i use DNG is when ad agency ask me to provide a develop TIF and the original raw for there retouching department.. i know sound strange, but they want to have the photographer vision, and in need have the raw to go back and adjust it themself.. so by sending the DNG they have exactly this in the same file.. my vision + the original data.</p>

<p>That append maybe twice a year, on let say 12 images... the rest is always delivered retouched and ready to go.. so i dont need to convert anything as DNG.</p>

<p>Hi Katja,</p>

<p> Your shortlisting is fantastic. Might I suggest you contact Adobe and see if the DNG file contains any of the original Canon information from the RAW file. There might be some corroborative evidence relative to the body number and other proprietory CAnon RAW information.<br>

Its quick to email the DNG fie and ask their experts to look at it. Then you have their feedback to forward to the contest if needed.</p>

<p>CHEERS...Mathew</p>

<p>I would truly and honestly like to know how this plays out in the end... after all, DNG files do not accept any form of pixel manipulation, do they? Also, you cannot convert any other file type (TIFF, JPEG, etc) to DNG, so what is their beef? Katja, please, please, let us know what happens in the end...;-))))</p>

<p>Oh, and Lex, if you're referring to the guy who photographed the wolf for the 2009 competition, because I went to the exhibition and bought the book, if I'm not mistaken, he was disqualified not because of manipulation, but of using a trained animal, which was against competition rules. Chances are he COULD supply the original RAW files...hahaha...</p>

<p>Marios, I was referring to the wolf photo only in general terms regarding ethics and, more specifically, violations of rules for contest entries (regardless of whether another viewer might regard the same situation as unethical). In that case, presumably, the camera raw file would not reveal anything of interest in terms of contest ethics (unless the raw file also revealed the wolf was suspended by wires to enhance a perfect pose.)</p>

<p>I was referring more specifically to the disqualification of Stepan Rudik's “Street fighting, Kiev, Ukraine” photo. In a previous generation, as I mentioned in my earlier post in this thread, the edit done by Rudik (to remove what he considered a distracting element) would probably have been considered acceptable for most documentary and PJ purposes, since it did not significantly alter the integrity of the photo essay. Interestingly, the other modifications - monochrome conversion, fake vignetting and grain - did not appear to be considered unethical by the WPP. In this case the original file (presumably camera raw, altho' I don't know for certain) did reveal the alteration that the WPP considered to be a violation of their rules.</p>