DNG Converter: Enable JPG conversion

  • 440
  • Idea
  • Updated 2 months ago
  • (Edited)
Lightroom is capable to convert JPGs into DNG. The DNG Converter unfortunately currently is not. Please add JPG support to the Adobe DNG Converter. Thank you very much for considering!
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes

Posted 5 years ago

  • 440
Photo of Stefan von Borbely

Stefan von Borbely

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Please add jpg to the DNG converter
Photo of Swen Halverson

Swen Halverson

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
We need this for TimeLapse Previews in LRTimelapse
Photo of Byron Roberts

Byron Roberts

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Adobe ... millions of us have happily supported your Adobe products for years. Please continue to allow us to expand and create our visions by enabling JPG conversions with your DNG Converter software. We're growing with you, so please grow with us.

Byron Roberts
Photo of Pete Greene

Pete Greene

  • 10 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Please implement this adobe. Sure raws are great but I've got lots of timelapses I am doing with gopro(due to space contraints) and really this would make a huge difference to me. Surely I'm not the only one and it appears from Gunthers comments, it appears not too big a step to take in development. 

Please adobe - you've got my subscription now listen to the community. Otherwise what are we paying for
Photo of Jeremy Hanlon

Jeremy Hanlon

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
please implement this update to the DNG converter
Photo of MICHAEL KIRWAN

MICHAEL KIRWAN

  • 68 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
With Bridge and ACR you can batch convert JPG to DNG.  Select the JPG's in Bridge, select open in Camera RAW, then select Save Image select DNG as he Format and hit save.  Not quite as productive as using the DNG converter but close.  Maybe this helps the Time Lapse folks?
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
No, this won't do it, since I need the possibility to trigger the conversion via DNG Converter in bakground by LRTimelapse.
Photo of Kaptan Vandetta

Kaptan Vandetta

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I support Gunther's request, and i want to this improvement.
Photo of You sold my name

You sold my name

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I support Gunther's request. It is a workflow issue, not an issue of inherent image quality or the availability of other tools.
Photo of James Hess

James Hess

  • 257 Posts
  • 42 Reply Likes
I don't claim to be an expert in this area. But if you want to convert from raw to JPEG  immediately without any postprocessing, why not just shoot JPEG in the first place?
Photo of Michel BRETECHER

Michel BRETECHER, Champion

  • 1266 Posts
  • 268 Reply Likes
I don't claim to be an expert in this area. But if you want to convert from raw to JPEG  immediately without any postprocessing, why not just shoot JPEG in the first place?
That request is precisely because we don't want to convert from raw to jpeg immediately without any processing. It's because we have different workflow reasons to batch process jpegs to DNG for ulterior processing. I suggest that you read the first posts for examples.
Photo of Hilli Billi

Hilli Billi

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I support Gunther's request, so please add JPG support to the Adobe DNG Converter.
Photo of motionblur

motionblur

  • 4 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
+1
Photo of David Elkins

David Elkins

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hello Adobe? Please add this functionality to DNG Converter. Pleeease.
Photo of adriana ohlmeyer

adriana ohlmeyer, Employee

  • 43 Posts
  • 13 Reply Likes
You can open your DNG files in the ACR plug-in and/or Lightroom and convert the files to JPEG or other formats.
Photo of Michel BRETECHER

Michel BRETECHER, Champion

  • 1233 Posts
  • 256 Reply Likes
Adriana, the problem is to turn jpegs into DNG. Not the other way round...
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1180 Posts
  • 295 Reply Likes
And in ACR, there is a big Save button in the bottom left corner. DNG is one of the options.  LR can save DNGs from JPEGs via its Export function.
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
Let me explain again. For our time lapse purposes, it doesn't help that Lightroom can wrap jpgs into DNGs. ACR doesn't help either.
Our request is that we need this same feature in the Adobe DNG Converter in order to be able to use its batch functionalities.
TIFF and JPG support for the DNG converter would be really, really useful. It would allow us to use JPG and TIFF sequences exactly the same way as RAW files, when working on time lapse sequences with LRTimelapse. For the user the conversion to DNG would happen totally transparent in background.
@adriana It would be really helpful, if you could find a way to put this on the agenda. I'm here to talk about further details at any time. Thank you in advance. You or someone from your team can reach me via info(at)lrtimelapse(dot)com too to discuss this.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1180 Posts
  • 295 Reply Likes
You say "batch functionalities" but to you is the important thing that you want to automate DNG Converter? Because batches can be output by ACR and LR, and LR exports/imports can be scripted as you know.
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
Exactly, I've to trigger it seemlessly in background from my software.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1180 Posts
  • 295 Reply Likes
Why must it be done by DNG Converter? DNG Converter does have a very specific purpose, so I would be pretty surprised if Adobe changed it for this.
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
DNG Converter is the batch tool to convert files to DNG. Since it is already possible to wrap TIFF and JPG into DNG in ACR and LR (the GUI tools) it would only be a logic conclusion to have this same feature too in the DNG Converter, since it's the designated tool for batch conversions.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1180 Posts
  • 295 Reply Likes
DNG Converter is the batch tool specifically intended to convert raw files to DNG because of issues with proprietary raw files. LR and ACR also having that capability doesn't make it logical to duplicate other capabilities in DNG Converter. Have you looked at automating Adobe's Media Encoder? Or at automating LR?
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
John, Lightroom and ACR aren't tools that can be well launched and automated from 3rd party programs. Please trust me that for the time lapse community my request would be very important. It's open now for more then 3 years, and I/we still have the hope that Adobe will consider it. If there would be another solution, I'd for sure have considered it. Let's wait what Adobe has to say.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1180 Posts
  • 295 Reply Likes
Maybe  3+ years is already their answer, Gunther?

By the way,  LR's URL handler lets a 3rd party tool generate DNGs from JPEGs. External control might be harder with Bridge/ACR, but Photoshop would work, or maybe the DNG SDK contains an uncompiled version of the Converter? But whatever tool you use, I'd be surprised if Adobe altered the DNG Converter. Maybe there's a German equivalent of our expression "barking up the wrong tree"?
Photo of Jody Brown

Jody Brown

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
There's seems to allot of people that want this functionality, including myself. What harm would it cause you to have implemented Jon?
(Edited)
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1180 Posts
  • 295 Reply Likes
Who said it would?
Photo of Jody Brown

Jody Brown

  • 3 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Good, then we will stay positive that adobe may consider it in the future.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1180 Posts
  • 295 Reply Likes
Better to stay realistic, and question if alternatives have been properly considered.
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1660 Posts
  • 545 Reply Likes
> Maybe  3+ years is already their answer, Gunther? >

Maybe, but I've been pleasantly surprised to see some of my feature requests be fulfilled after more than 5 years waiting, and even exceed my request and expectations. So we can always stay positive if we can manage to just live long enough.<G>
Photo of Andrés Cuevas

Andrés Cuevas

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I support Gunther's request, so please add JPG support to the Adobe DNG Converter.
Photo of Peter Schon

Peter Schon

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Hi there,  I also support Gunthers request since I just got locked in the workflow and needed time consuming getting everything converted so I could continue.
Photo of Mauro Tezzon

Mauro Tezzon

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I, too, support this request.
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
What advantage would there be placing a JPEG into a DNG? Doesn't make it raw. Container allows embedding of metadata like DNG. 
A true raw, converted to DNG and with processing instructions from ACR/Lightroom can embed a decent sized JPEG of that rendering in the DNG container and now that IS useful. But you've setup ACR/LR for that specific rendering. Nothing like that will ever find it's way into the DNG converter! There are two other pay-for tools for that task. 
(Edited)
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
I know all of this. The advantage would be, that I'd have the JPG data inside the container along with the Dng preview that has the xmp-data for development applied.
Trust me, for the whole timelapse community it would be important to have this feature. Since it's already in Lightroom (Classic and before), it shouldn't be a major issue to allow the Dng Converter to do that JPG wrapping too.
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
The product has one role: to convert raw to DNG. 
The product has no provisions for rendering raw to anything rendered. That's what ACR/LR are for. 
IF they had some auto convert raw to JPEG, you'd have no idea what you'd get. It be akin to the default conversions of the raws for previews in ACR or LR. Without presets! 
Might as well extract the existing rendered JPEG from the camera that exists in the raw! Might as well ASK Adobe to do this; provide/embed an existing rendered JPEG from the raw when converting to DNG. Not turn the DNG converter into a raw converter to produce a JPEG (what size??). It's a free product to provide a path from proprietary raws. Nothing else. 
(Edited)
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
I guess you are not from Adobe, so why bothering? It's not helpful at all for our request.
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 5161 Posts
  • 2015 Reply Likes
I'll add another plus. You can't accidentally save over a DNG, but you can a JPEG. If the JPEGs are your "original", then it's another safeguard.

Oh, and you can have a validation hash too, of course.

I think it's up to Adobe to set priority on its inclusion.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1229 Posts
  • 318 Reply Likes
A 3rd party app can call LR's URL handler and make LR automatically generate DNGs from JPEGs. You have full control over the process.

I think one can also automate Adobe's Media Encoder.

I'd be pretty surprised if Adobe made this change to what is a free tool intended for a very specific job.  But life is full of surprises.
(Edited)
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
Your request makes no sense and that’s why after so many years your getting no traction Günther!
Photo of Michel BRETECHER

Michel BRETECHER, Champion

  • 1266 Posts
  • 268 Reply Likes
Tip: using Elements (even old versions) as a third party jpeg to DNG converter.
- In the editor, menu File >> Open in camera raw
- select a whole folder of jpegs (I have not tested more than 100 files at the same time)
- click on the 'Select all' button on the top of the left side film strip.
- click on the 'Save' button and set your preferences, including choosing the destination folder.
- Wait for the conversion to be complete (very fast)
- click 'Cancel'
That's all.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1229 Posts
  • 318 Reply Likes
Can Elements be scripted, Michel? The underlying need is to automate the process.
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
Elements might be scripted, at least in the past (Pixel Genius had an Automate plug-in for Elements using scripts years ago). No idea if it can still do so, PG stopped supporting Elements a good 6-8 years ago. 
(Edited)
Photo of Michel BRETECHER

Michel BRETECHER, Champion

  • 1266 Posts
  • 268 Reply Likes
Yes, that's the need of Gunther Wegner, the original poster.
If you read my post at the beginning of the discussion, the need to convert jpegs to DNG was different. To simplify that was to find a workaround to the limitation of the organizer which can't open selected jpegs directly in the ACR module. Only the editor can open in ACR. There are huge advantages in opening jpegs as well as raws in the ACR: not only quality, but to enable powerful and fast non-destructive batch editing. In recent Elements editor versions, the ACR module can open a big number of files, jpegs or raws. The limitation of the organizer does not exist with LR, Bridge, PS...
It's understandable that Adobe is reluctant to offer the ability to open jpegs in ACR in the organizer not to compete with LR; same for the DNGconverter ability to convert jpegs to DNG which would solve the problem. Note that I convert all my files, jpegs as raws in ACR.

I don't know anything about scripting, but I assume Elements can be scripted, since a number of add-ons like Elements+ or OnOne are managed via scripts. Elements+ even has scripts to edit layers in ACR or to restore full ACR options like HSL or lens correction which are not present in the limited version of Elements ACR.
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
Editing a JPEG in ACR isn't non destructive. There is no free lunch here altering numbers in an 8-bit per color compressed document. Yes, the original is untouched and the same could be said of using layers on a JPEG in PS and saving off a new JPEG. The edited JPEG was destructively edited! But yes, doing this kind of work in ACR has many advantages including the high bit processing path (which gets knocked down to produce that JPEG), edits applied in best processing order (not necessarily by the user), a very wide gamut processing color space and some unique tools. But non destructive isn't in the mix; if you don't want to degrade pixels, don't edit them, or edit in high bit. Not possible with JPEG. 
Photo of Michel BRETECHER

Michel BRETECHER, Champion

  • 1266 Posts
  • 268 Reply Likes
Andrew, I know that very well. You know, I have been following your posts and your site with great interest many years ago and I never miss an opportunity to refer posters on the Elements and other forums to your site.
I think that with all the excellent advice you are giving to beginners as well as pros, you can understand that there is a very wide market of serious amateurs who don't want or need to go to the LR plus Photoshop plan. I don't mind having a software for which I only use 20% of the features but really, I only need or use no more than 2 or 3% of the CC plan features. The missing features (for me) are precisely available via hundreds of external scripts or free third party software. And yes, I also had LR since version 3 and Adobe offers me LR and PS for free as an ACP. I don't use them otherwise than to guide other Elements users to use Elements tools.

So, please look at the millions of users like me who are using both SLR or advanced raw capable cameras... and which are true, genuine photographers because they also use small size cameras or smartphones not to miss the "instant décisif".
The pictures from my recent smartphone are technically very good, even in low light.
They are aout-of-camera jpegs, and that is the original format.

So, non-destructive for me means both keeping the original out-of-camera jpeg and storing the parametric editing settings, in the jpeg header, in an xmp file or in an ACR database.
That's precisely because the best you can get technically from an 8-bits file is to process it in a 16-bits software like ACR, you know why. That's enough for me to avoid any kind of posterization. The processed files can be opened, edited and saved in other 16-bits formats. 90% of my jpegs don't need ulterior editing in the pixel editor.

Something I like very much in your teaching is how you insist on what the eye can really see and how the theoretical color models have been created based on statistical perception studies of real persons. So, if I want to tease a little...
What's the workflow to achieve the best photo editing with realistic 'serious amateur' conditions today:
- most output to the Web, no comment...
- only a few large prints on home computer (my 6-inks HP is good enough for me and does better than sRGB)
- book printing mostly on sites which accept only jpegs and sRGB.
- editing on serious displays with low-cost hardware calibration; yes, not wide gamut...
- editing in Elements with only sRGB or aRBG available.

My answer is to use the ACR module even with jpegs. Anyway, in my workflow, the ACR editing, the further editing in 16-bits in the editor will only produce 'temporary' tiff files... which will be :
- printed in aRBG mode on my 8-bits printer
- sent as... jpegs final output files.
(Edited)
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
For me, true non destructive editing is creating virgin RGB pixels from raw data with parametric instructions. From there, editing those RGB values high bit (what some call 16-bit) editing, with layers or parametrically. There's still data loss with more than enough data so the damage isn't visible. So it's not really non destructive. But the data loss is moot. That isn't the case when you edit a JPEG. 

One issue is we don't know the qualities of even web output in the future. There was just a 10K video cabling standard shown this week on the web. It is entirely possible that the color gamut, resolution, dynamic range of web output in the foreseeable future will be more demanding than output to print today. When possible capture raw. Encode in the biggest color gamut, highest bit depth, highest resolution you can. Move on from there unless there's a very compelling reason to re-render and start again (some much better raw converter?). 

I consider a JPEG an output specific file format. For the web and mobile devices will all it's warts (8-bit encoding, usually sRGB yuck). So my answer isn't to use ACR on JPEGs although I think that's a great tool IF you must. My answer is to create JPEGs from raw/edited data and post them: done. 
(Edited)
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
What you wish to do, convert a DNG to a JPEG is possible today

Open DNG converter, set preferences for the size of embedded JPEG you wish (probably Full Size).
Convert to DNG. 
Extract the JPEG from the DNG using this free utility on Mac or Windows:
http://michaeltapesdesign.com/instant-jpeg-from-raw.html

Thanks to some new data from Thomas Knoll, it's clear that the DNG converter produces it's own JPEG from the raw which is ideal. It uses a default but it's still a high quality, high resolution JPEG:
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/dng-converter-preview-ignores-image-orientati...

I just tested this with a virgin CR2. Converted, used large preview for JPEG and extracted that JPEG from the DNG. From a old Canon 5D, got a 4K sized JPEG on the long axis!

The DNG converter can already create a full sized JPEG using it's default settings to do so and that JPEG can quickly and easily be extracted! You just need the right (free) tools to do so: DNG converter and IJFW from Mr. Tapes. 
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
Oh, the JPEG is untagged! So Assign sRGB and off you go. 
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
The request in this thread is to wrap a JPG into a DNG. Yes, and at the end, I will be ectracting a JPG again, but this time a preview with the XMP edits applied.

I'm using this technique since years in LRTimelapse to extract low resolution previews from RAW+XMP data. The only thing that doesn't work, is using this trick on JPGs. Because the DNG Converter does not allow JPGs to be wrapped to DNG and therefore I cannot extract the developed preview for those files.

So again - this was the one and only purpose of my request in this thread and I'm happy to repeat it once more:

@Adobe, please give us the option to wrap JPGs into DNGs the same way like it's already possible in Lightroom. I know, this usage not the originalted purpose of the DNG converter, but it's a fast and reliable way to get developed previews.
The timelapse community using LRTimelapse is ten thousands of users - most of them Lightroom users as well. So we have a huge common user base and LRTimelapse is driving lots of new users to Lightroom as well, since it's the market leading softwar for time lapse editing.

@Andrew: may I ask you to open up another thread for things that don't belong to my topic, thanks.
(Edited)
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
The request in this thread is to wrap a JPG into a DNG. Yes, and at the end, I will be ectracting a JPG again, but this time a preview with the XMP edits applied.
All possible. 

Adobe, please give us the option to wrap JPGs into DNGs the same way like it's already possible in Lightroom.
Not going to happen; no need too. No more than you'll find a Print command in this product like you find in LR. You want to wrap a JPEG into a DNG; use ACR or LR. Or another product (I believe some non Adobe products can do this). 
but it's a fast and reliable way to get developed previews.
The developed JPEG previews are IN the DNG FROM LR/ACR.
The DNG converter isn't a developer. It's a data format converter.
There's nothing it does, other than create a JPEG preview that deals with rendering the raw data. So how can it produce developed previews other than what it currently does? 

You have developed DNGs, you can extract the JPEG that matches it OR export a JPEG. 
You don't have developed DNGs, you just created them in the free DNG converter, nothing has been developed expect a JPEG preview which you could extract at this time. Or just use the right tool designed for the job: LR or ACR. 

The idea that the DNG Converter has to embed an existing, separate and rendered JPEG into a DNG alone, makes zero sense.
The idea you need to extract some kind of JPEG from a DNG, rendered by the DNG Converter as a preview OR edited as you could and would in ACR/LR already exists in those tools. It's pointless to do that anywhere else IF possible. 

That a large group doesn’t understand or accept these facts doesn't change the facts. 
Photo of Gunther Wegner

Gunther Wegner

  • 33 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
LR and ACR cannot be batch operated to do so.
I'm not going to discuss this topic any further with you, since you don't seem to understand my point - and honestly - you don't need to also. My intention opening this thread was to reach someone at Adobe.
Photo of john beardsworth

john beardsworth

  • 1230 Posts
  • 319 Reply Likes
LR can be batch operated to do so. Pretty sure ACR could be too, via PS/Br/PSE.
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 818 Posts
  • 163 Reply Likes
Indeed John! You beat me to the punch. 

Gunther, this really is a lost cause after 3 years, we've told you why.

This reminds me of one of my favorite Bruce Fraser quotes:
You can do all sorts of things that are fiendishly clever, then fall in love with them because they're fiendishly clever, while overlooking the fact that they take a great deal more work to obtain results that stupid people get in half the time. As someone who has created a lot of fiendishly clever but ultimately useless techniques in his day, I'd say this sounds like an example.

You are absolutely correct about this, I fully admit:
since you don't seem to understand my point - and honestly - you don't need to also
Are you certain Adobe doesn't seem to understand your point too. 
Photo of Gunnar Engel

Gunnar Engel

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Nice technical battle between experts. Unfortuneately a little off track in the meantime. I am a dumb customer. The question is not if I need a special feature. I just want it. I am the customer. I pay for all this. And I want a certain feature. It helps me doing things the way I like. 
@Adobe please add this feature !


The secret of the darkness is........ the light !

gun
Photo of msdobrescu

msdobrescu

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Yeah! Me and a bunch of dreamers are customers and we ask this and that, like having Photoshop under Linux. Who cares? Not Adobe. Doesn't matter we pay.
Still, what is the gain?
Photo of David Converse

David Converse

  • 742 Posts
  • 220 Reply Likes
DNG is an open format. Why not pay a developer or start an Open Source project to create this tool?
Photo of chris tucker

chris tucker

  • 4 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Here we go again. The person requesting this for a large group of photographers is a developer who has created the gold standard software for timelapse production. Where is Adobe?
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1702 Posts
  • 565 Reply Likes
> Where is Adobe?>

On vacation.

 And I understand you wanting Adobe to undertake the development of this, but we've all wanted Adobe to develop this or that for us, and if we really want it in a timely fashion, with the features we want, we often need to find a 3rd party developer willing to do it for a very reasonable price. Why? Well, because they specialize in that. They're not busy trying to keep several hundred (and more) features working and squashing the inevitable bugs that arise when they add or alter just about anything to an enormous app.

One of the things you pay Adobe to be is an app that plays well with other apps—Adobe's  apps provide a way for lots of different 3rd party developers to make a living providing specialized features for those who need those features. Believe it or not, there are several image editing apps out there who either don't support 3rd party extensions, scripts, and plug-ins, or who do a particularly bad job of it.

Further, the relationship between Adobe and 3rd party developers has to be at least a bit mutual—Adobe doesn't have to provide absolutely every feature known to man at a highly professional level even if 70% of the features are never used by most of the customers, and 3rd party developers don't get their lunch stolen by Adobe the minute someone here says "I want this, and I want Adobe to be the provider."

It's not that  a lot of people here don't understand your asking , and many are even voting for it. We all do some asking and some voting. But you seem very unwilling to look into other sources for something you seem to think is vital enough, Adobe should have done it already. Ask away, but if this is for a large group of photographers from a developer who has created the gold stand for any type of software, perhaps a proper and official proposal to Adobe management ought to be considered. That might speed things up.

Here it's just part of a wish list a mile long from every type of customer. Enough votes, it might make it to the top of the list, but patience is usually required to wait for features that don't broadly apply to most users.
Photo of msdobrescu

msdobrescu

  • 2 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
Sorry to be the Devil's advocate here, but remember the premises: "Lightroom is capable to convert JPGs into DNG. The DNG Converter unfortunately currently is not.". Seemingly, it is not about some new space travel or new brain surgery technique, it's just about adding some existing feature (e.g. already implemented) to an existing tool. A tool that had it and is more than related to DNG itself! A tool that has a more than 300MB installer for one format!
Photo of Cristen Gillespie

Cristen Gillespie

  • 1702 Posts
  • 565 Reply Likes
Well, you never know. If it's quick and easy enough, they might surprise us. If it's really critical to your workflow, though, it might be easier on you to get someone to write a script or an extension, or add on to the open source DNG converter itself, than get angry and frustrated because Adobe takes so long to get around to some of these things. There are a lot of "these things" for Adobe to get around to.
Photo of Reggie Bass

Reggie Bass

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Got my vote!
Photo of Silvano AP

Silvano AP

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
please add TIFF to DNG too. Lightroom can do it, but not DNG Converter.
Photo of Cang Ming Chen

Cang Ming Chen

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I would add that it would be even cooler if DNG Converter could convert Tiff files into DNG.
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 787 Posts
  • 153 Reply Likes
There is NO reason anyone needs to convert a TIFF to DND which itself IS a variant of TIFF! None.
Photo of Tom Haines

Tom Haines

  • 2 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
What is DND?
Photo of Andrew Rodney

Andrew Rodney

  • 787 Posts
  • 153 Reply Likes
DNG, typo from my iPhone. Sorry.
Again, DNG and TIFF are incredibly similar;  DNG is based on TIFF, both of which Adobe owns and controls. There isn't anything a DNG offers a TIFF doesn't in terms of rendered image data. It's like opening up a TIFF and then using the  Save As command and saving it as a TIFF again! When DNG first appeared, it could only store raw data hence it's name. Then Adobe allowed JPEG and other rendered data to be placed into this container which only served to confuse a lot of people about the format as we've seen here. And that's why, after the request was made THREE years ago, nothing has happened. Nor will it. 
So yeah, be useful if this entire post disappeared.