I haven't contributed to the list for a while, but I don't think this point has been raised.
If you use one of the non-destructive editors, such as Lightroom, your edits aren't written to the PEFs or the DNGs. In Lightroom the changes and much of the metadata is kept in the Lightroom catalog. If you want those changes stored with the file (so other programs can be aware of them) you'll need to change a setting in the preferences. Once you make that decision, the data is stored differently with PEFs and DNGs. Since the PEF file is proprietary, the data must be stored in a second "sidecar" file. This will have the same name as the original PEF, but have the extension of XMP. If you do anything with your files outside of Lightroom you'll need to manage these two files yourself. Since the DNG definition is public, the edit data is written back to the DNG file. So, you only have one file to manage. Early Lightroom books recommended that you don't make this change because the additional write slowed the editing process. I've always thought that was poor advice for most people. Newer books recognize that hardware is much faster and usually recommend changing this setting as one of the first setup steps. In my opinion the since the whole point of using a DNG is to help future proof your files, it only makes since to store the edits and metadata in the DNG instead of locking it up in the Lightroom Catalog. I the last couple of decades I've changed my primary editing and organization programs at least a couple of times, and often use other programs to supplement Lightroom. I'd rather keep the data up to date in each DNG as it changes than add a big export step to some future migration. And yes, to answer the original question, I delete the PEFs as soon as I've verified the DNGs have been verified. GS George Sinos -------------------- www.GeorgesPhotos.net www.GeorgeSinos.com On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 8:03 AM, Mark C <[email protected]> wrote: > When I started shooting in DNG format a couple cmaeras ago I convertered all > of my old PEF's to DNG's and dumped the PEF's. It is a small savings of > drive space per file, but across lots of files it adds up. > > Mark > > > On 3/14/2014 7:40 PM, John wrote: >> >> I'm doing a *LOT* of computer work here lately, what with the new Mac >> mini, rescuing old files off of my mother's old computers & getting >> ready to add another NAS to my home network. >> >> Among other things, in line with my attempts to declutter my life, I'm >> contemplating revamping my photo storage and backups with the aim of >> reducing unnecessary duplication in those backups. I know I should keep >> a backup here and another off site, but I've got so many backups that I >> can't be sure which files are adequately backed up and which files are >> excessively, even OCD backups. >> >> At the beginning of 2013 I switched from PEF to DNG for my RAW file >> format. I have PEF files going back several years before that, with the >> *ist-D, the K10D and the K20D. >> >> I'm wondering if I should use Adobe's DNG converter on all those old PEF >> files, and IF I do should I still keep the PEF files? >> >> I would be amenable to receiving reasoned arguments (yes, I *know* it's >> the PDML) pro & con on the subject. >> >> 1. Should I convert all the old PEF files to DNG? >> 2. Should I keep backup copies of all those old PEF files, in addition >> to the two backups (on & off site) I intend to make for the DNG files? >> 3. Some of the *ist-D files are .TIF files - can I, should I convert >> those to DNG as well? >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
