DNG as RAW

[sadja]

This may be a dumb question, but why doesn't BB recognize DNGs as RAWs (as does LR)?

[DavidB]

This is one of those issues that all depends on your point of view.

Adobe, which invented DNG, would like it to be regarded both as a RAW file format and as the archival output of choice for RAW data. Judging by the way they ignore it, all the major manufacturers of cameras that can save RAW data want no such thing.

Faced with this issue, BB Pro takes its typical pragmatic approach, and treats as RAW only data that has been directly output by the camera, and which has not been subject to an intermediate conversion, as DNG files (with very few exceptions) have. Perhaps more importantly, there are significant differences between RAW files (as a class), and DNG files:

RAW formats are proprietary, and not publicly documented by the originators, whereas DNG is a published standard, albeit one that Adobe, in effect, controls;
XMP metadata (including IPTC data) cannot be embedded in RAW files, but is embedded in DNG files.
These differences do, I believe, mean that RAW and DNG files need to be treated somewhat differently. It is notable that support for DNG in RAW converters other than those by Adobe is limited; for instance, Capture One supports DNG, but does not provide camera optimisation for DNG files. In other words, Capture One is treating a DNG files as a RAW file from which data has already been lost (even though the data is probably still in the file).

My take on this is that the Breeze approach reflects the real world, and the Adobe stance is more a product of its (in this respect, so far unsuccessful) marketing agenda. But, as I said, it all depends on your point of view.

David