The DNG spec presents the basic file structure and mandatory included bits. That seems to work just fine for you, so there's nothing wrong with the DNG file fundamentals. In outputting the same file to ACR 4.6 vs ACR 7.1 spec, there are fundamental differences in the DNG (first and foremost being that ACR 4.6 spec creates DNG 1.1 spec files, ACR 7.1 spec creates DNG 1.3 spec files).
Edits made with LR are parameters for Camera Raw to apply, and so are dependent upon the instructions that whatever version of Camera Raw is reading the file can understand. I don't believe that any version of ACR compatible with PS CS3 can read mask and brush adjustments; mask and brush adjustments were new in LR 2. LR2 equates to ACR v5 … PS CS3 equates to ACR v4 generation. All of the LR instructions are embedded when you compare the file data output with EXIFtool, including mask and brush adjustments, set to 4.6 compatibility. What this means is that if you output the file for 4.6 compatibility and then open it with ACR v5.x, the mask and brush adjustments will be there. If you use EXIFtool to examine a DNG file output from LR, you'll see the key-value pairs for all the adjustments easily. For instance, an excerpt from the test file I output showing tone curve and adjustment brush parameters: … ToneCurve: 0, 0, 32, 22, 64, 56, 128, 128, 192, 196, 255, 255 ToneCurveRed: 0, 0, 255, 255 ToneCurveGreen: 0, 0, 255, 255 ToneCurveBlue: 0, 0, 255, 255 ToneCurvePV2012: 0, 0, 255, 255 ToneCurvePV2012Red: 0, 0, 255, 255 ToneCurvePV2012Green: 0, 0, 255, 255 ToneCurvePV2012Blue: 0, 0, 255, 255 PaintCorrectionWhat: Correction PaintCorrectionAmount: 1.000000 PaintCorrectionActive: true PaintCorrectionExposure: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionContrast: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionClarity: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionSharpness: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionBrightness: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionHue: 50.000000 PaintCorrectionSaturation: 1.000000 PaintCorrectionExposure2012: 0.288861 PaintCorrectionContrast2012: 0.350252 PaintCorrectionHighlights2012: -0.229637 PaintCorrectionShadows2012: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionClarity2012: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionLuminanceNoise: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionMoire: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionDefringe: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionTemperature: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionTint: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionMaskWhat: Mask/Paint PaintCorrectionMaskValue: 0.684848 PaintCorrectionMaskRadius: 0.362328 PaintCorrectionMaskFlow: 0.772920 PaintCorrectionMaskCenterWeight: 0.000000 PaintCorrectionMaskDabs: d 0.723232 1.103833 … Install EXIFtool and start looking at your DNG exports … But I think you'll find that everything is working just as it is designed to. You need a newer version of Photoshop CSx so you can use a more recent version of Camera Raw for best compatibility. Godfrey > On Dec 17, 2014, at 10:53 PM, Igor PDML-StR <[email protected]> wrote: > > I may not have written it clearly: I chose DNG format version to be 4.6 > because that's the version of Camera Raw that is with CS3 (it was the last > version of Camera Raw for CS3). > So, the logic is simple: if I am saving things into a DNG v. 4.6. it should > be opened in Camera Raw 4.6 without any loss. > (And these version has nothing to do with LR 4 or 5 per se.) > > Godfrey, as for the edits: almost all edits are present. > It's only the local mask/brush adjustments that are not preserved. > So, either, as you said, 4.6 DNG/Camera Raw does not support those local > adjustments, or LR doesn't write them to the file. > > When you are suggesting to check what is saved with Exiftool: > Are those local adjustments saved as readable instructions (similar to those > in a PostScript format)? -- 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.
