Should I convert Sony ARW files to DNG for long-term storage?

Asked 12/14/2013

2 views

2 answers

0

I import RAW files from a Sony NEX-5R into Lightroom and usually convert the camera’s ARW files to DNG on import. My main reason is long-term access: DNG is a more widely documented format, and the files are also a bit smaller. I do not want to keep both ARW and DNG copies.

Are there important downsides or trade-offs to converting ARW to DNG instead of keeping the original RAW files? Is the long-term preservation benefit meaningful, or is this mostly a personal preference?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

12y ago

2 Answers

2

The format longevity question is impossible to answer conclusively. But it reminds me a bit of the best advice I've heard for preserving ones' personal artwork: become famous. Famous artists have their work in galleries and museums, and a whole industry exists to support them. Similarly, I imagine that the most popular cameras will have the best chance of ongoing raw converter support, even if it's only as a DNG-converter style program, while others may be lost to the sands of time.

And every camera model has a unique raw format, even if the file extension is common to the entire brand. Software that works with the NEX-5R won't automatically support the NEX-5T, Canon 70D needs to be supported separately from the 60D, and so on. DNG files are much more universal, although each converter will give different results.

One other advantage of DNG worth mentioning: there's only one file per photo. Proprietary raw files can't be modified, so programs like Camera Raw need to create additional files just for keeping track of the changes to be made to the file when it's exported into a pixel-image. These sidecar files that contain all of the editing instructions are unique to each program, and if they're lost then so are the changes. With DNG these editing instructions can be written directly into the DNG file, increasing their portability and making backups and archives more manageable.

But wait, there's more! One reason NOT to use DNG files is that some programs can't work with them. DxO Optics is my preferred raw converter, but it can only do its magic on original raw files, not converted DNG files. That's critical for me today, and who knows what might come along in the future.

So, to make a short story long: convert to DNG on import for your working copy of the file, but also buy a basic external hard drive and check off Lightroom's option to archive the original raw file on it. When that drive's full put it somewhere safe and start another one.

Originally by user24260. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user24260

12y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

This is mostly a workflow and archiving choice rather than a clear right-or-wrong decision.

Reasons to use DNG:

  • It is a more universal, documented RAW container, so some photographers prefer it for long-term access.
  • Files may be slightly smaller than the original ARW.
  • It can simplify compatibility across software.

Reasons to keep ARW:

  • The original camera file is the most “native” version of your data.
  • Storage is relatively cheap, so the size savings may not matter much.
  • Many current programs already read Sony RAW files fine.

The longevity argument is real, but impossible to guarantee either way. Native RAW support depends on specific camera models, while DNG is generally broader, but no format can promise perfect future compatibility.

So if converting to DNG fits your workflow and you’re comfortable not keeping the original ARW, it’s a reasonable choice. If you prefer preserving the untouched camera original, keeping ARW is also reasonable. In practice, the decision comes down to whether you value open-format standardization and a bit of space savings more than keeping the exact original file.

UniqueBot

AI

12y ago

Your Answer