Here is the scenario.

I have a card full of images, in the interest of time efficiency do I,

1. Let Lightroom import the files, converting them to DNG files as it goes.

2. Drag them to the desktop as CR2 files, then import to Lightroom.

3. Drag them to desktop, convert with DNG Convertor, then import into Lightroom.

Somewhere in there that is probably a stupid question. In my defense, it is late here and I am tired! :-)

I have been converting all my historical files to DNG since there is a space saving, and no sidecar files. Anyone else see the benefit of this course of action?

Have a great weekend.

Hugh

I use option 2, option one seems to be a lot slower. I work in RAW, convert to JPEG on export. I do not ever convert to DNG, and I'm not seeing any sidecar files.....I've unchecked the "Automatically write changes into XMP" box in the preferences section. This saves the changes to the library database instead. My thought was that as long as the database was backed up regularly, I shouldn't need to preserve that data elsewhere. Now you've got me wondering if that's really a smart idea or if I should be doing this differently?

Hmmmm....hopefully Swan or another LR expert will chime in on this part of the debate.

I am by no means a LR expert, but here is my .02.....

I never import straight off a card - WAAAAAAAAY to slow, especially if you have several cards. Download the files to your computer - not your desktop - and keep them organized in your own file structure that makes sense. I don't have lightroom copy files to its place, as it wants to put them in the My Pictures folder. Btter to keep them all on an external HD for safety. When you import, just have llightroom keep the files where they are.

I don't use the DNG - I keep them as the RAW file.

I'd love to hear from Swan also. If you havent done so, go to http://www.newschoolphoto.com.

Mark,

you said...Download the files to your computer - not your desktop.


When I said desktop, I meant the desktop of my mac. The files are on my computer, just curious as to the best method to get them there.

I watched some Camera Raw movies by Deke McClelland, and he was really singing the praises of DNG, reckoned it would probably become a universal format.

Now there seems to be some benefits. File size is one. About a 20% saving. And then there is the lack os sidecar files, with any changes being attached directly to the DNG, but without changing the original. (?)

Hey, he tells it MUCH better than me. If anyone wants to see the movie, let me know. All I know is it saved me a ton of space running archived stuff through DNG Convertor. I assume the folks at Adobe know their stuff.

Comments?

Hugh