dng file from Lightroom: if I open it on Affinity Photo (1) I see no edits?

[musicfed]

hi guys

I edited a RAW file on Lightroom then exported as dng file. the preview clearly shows the edits 

if I then open this file on AP the file opens as original raw - it doesn't show any of the edits before or after hitting develop on AP.

is this normal behaviour?

[Ldina]

When you import a raw camera file into Lightroom, Adobe writes a TON of metadata to the newly created DNG file. This metadata has fields for every LR slider and setting and this info is specific to LR  and Adobe Camera Raw. They see and use this metadata to apply and display the file inside of those Apps only, so all those slider settings show up in the LR preview of the image. The actual raw data is still as recorded by the camera and only the metadata has been changed.  Most (perhaps all) of that newly written metadata is proprietary to Adobe products and is ignored by other apps, like AP, which uses a different Raw processor engine. So, yes, it is expected behavior. It is, after all, a RAW file and AP imports that original camera data as shot. 

[musicfed]

thank you! makes sense - so there isn't a universal type of raw file that includes edits that can be viewed by all editing software?

even sending the raw + XMP file needs to be opened by Lightroom or Photoshop, I believe, or you don't see the edits

[Ldina]

I don’t believe so, but my experience is limited to LR, ACR and AP. For example, LR and AP use different slider scales for WB Tint. If AP just used the LR Tint slider value, the color would be way off. They have their own scales, settings and controls. The DNG format is designed to be a “universal” raw format for the raw data itself, and allows vendors to write and edit metadata. Maybe some raw processors are able to “translate” metadata written by LR, but I don’t know. If you wish, you can instruct LR to use AP as the external editor, apply LR raw edits in LR, then open the file in AP WITH LR edits. LR should then deliver the file to AP with those settings applied, but what arrives in AP will be a pixel based raster image and no longer raw. That’s the way it works between LR and Photoshop too.

[musicfed]

thanks - yes using "edit with" and choosing Affinity Photo works well 

[Ldina]

Glad that works for you. Just know that you are using Adobe’s raw engine for conversion from raw to pixels. If you’re okay with that, party on!

[musicfed]

so essentially, in a commercial environment, when submitting raw photos w/edits to a client, one should always check what software the receiving end uses (hopefully the same)? otherwise they won't see the edits at all.

or the alternative is to send jpegs or other non-raw formats

[Ldina]

I believe so. If sharing with other LR or ACR users, also be sure your DNG metadata is updated in the file so they see the same edits. I’m not at my computer now, but LR has an update metadata feature to make sure all your current settings are recorded in the DNG file (or the XMP file if you are not converting to DNG format). Makes sure to send the xmp file along with the raw file if not using DNG format.

[walt.farrell]

1 hour ago, musicfed said:

or the alternative is to send jpegs or other non-raw formats

TIFF would be better, or PNG, as JPG will lose information.

[Ldina]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

TIFF would be better, or PNG, as JPG will lose information.

I agree with Walt if the goal is to retain maximum information and detail, and to send a file the other can preview accurately.

I often choose reduced-size JPGs when sending 'proofs' to clients to keep file size small. Besides, at this stage, I'm usually only interested in giving them small, lower quality previews, sometimes with watermarks, so they can select final images to work on. When submitting final files, I'll typically send TIFF or PNG, or high quality JPGs, depending on the situation. 

I have a few photographer friends and we often send each other RAW images (usually DNG format, but sometimes proprietary RAW formats) back and forth, and we all have LightRoom, so updating DNG Preview and metadata in the files allows the other person to see all our edits, slider settings, custom camera profiles, WB, etc, within LR, plus the files display properly with those settings inside LR or ACR (they both use the same raw engine and slider settings). We can also create different versions inside LR and create "snapshots" of each version, which can be handy and instructive. That's about the only time I send out RAW images. 

[musicfed]

11 minutes ago, Ldina said:

I agree with Walt if the goal is to retain maximum information and detail, and to send a file the other can preview accurately.

I often choose reduced-size JPGs when sending 'proofs' to clients to keep file size small. Besides, at this stage, I'm usually only interested in giving them small, lower quality previews, sometimes with watermarks, so they can select final images to work on. When submitting final files, I'll typically send TIFF or PNG, or high quality JPGs, depending on the situation. 

I have a few photographer friends and we often send each other RAW images (usually DNG format, but sometimes proprietary RAW formats) back and forth, and we all have LightRoom, so updating DNG Preview and metadata in the files allows the other person to see all our edits, slider settings, custom camera profiles, WB, etc, within LR, plus the files display properly with those settings inside LR or ACR (they both use the same raw engine and slider settings). We can also create different versions inside LR and create "snapshots" of each version, which can be handy and instructive. That's about the only time I send out RAW images. 

thanks Ldina

I am starting as unit still photographer so my clients will sometimes be happy just with JPEGs but other times they want RAW too, with or without edits

it really varies in this industry

[Ldina]

@musicfed As long as you are dealing with professionals or others who fully understand RAW, no problem. It helps if you are all using the same RAW engine and software, at least if you want your raw edits to display the same from one system to the next (factoring in differences in monitors, calibration, ambient lighting conditions, etc, of course). 

A RAW file is basically nothing more than a list of pixel locations on a grid, and brightness values for each pixel location, recorded as voltages, and these voltages are generated based on how many photons of light pass through the RGB coatings and reach the sensor. So, each red, green or blue pixel in your sensor has its own voltage listed in a table, based on light intensity. The camera also writes metadata designed to work optimally with the OEMs raw processing software. The RAW converter has to demosiac that data, convert voltages into 8/16/32 bit values, apply lens corrections, defringe, apply tone curves, etc. Most camera manufacturers (e.g., Nikon, Canon, etc) protect their proprietary algorithms and don't share them, so programs like LR/ACR and other RAW converters usually have to "reverse engineer" this raw image data and come up with their own settings that make the image look good in their software. So, even though DNG is designed as a "universal format" that everyone can read (if they are DNG aware), translating that data into a final image is dependent on the RAW engine, software, various presets, camera profiles, etc.