Sticky 

DNG Support

Fearlith 6:11am, 22 June 2007
Hi!

I know the issue of supporting DNG (and / or other raw file types) has come up before. This post is a remainder of the fact that flickr has users who would like to storage their original DNG files together with the JPGs. I hope this issue will be adressed. I personally would be willing to pay more in order to get DNG support.

Thanks!
Kris
crazyinthenight 12 years ago
Hi. Never regarded flickr as a kind of storage media. Why would one upload the original raw files?

crazyinthenight
admin
dopiaza 12 years ago
Never regarded flickr as a kind of storage media.

Well, that was the primary reason I, for one, signed up in the first place.

Why would one upload the original raw files?

To share them with other users? Off-site backup?

I'd welcome the support of DNG, but I don't actually see it happening...
enchanted home [deleted] 12 years ago
Hmm, I'm wondering what the workflow would be like for uploads? Hopefully we'd see plugins for Lightroom and Aperture (Lightroom apparently doesn't have an SDK just yet, as per the folks at PictureCode who make Noise Ninja).

Lately I'm using Lightroom which stores files as the original DNG/RAW files + deltas -- this makes the originals recoverable.

In this case, you could possibly back up your Lightroom DB to something like Amazon's S3 for remote storage.

But yeah, that's a cool idea.

Yahoo probably has more (guessing) servers than Amazon, and could do something like this fairly easily.

I personally would be willing to pay more in order to get DNG support.

I think I would too, if there was a Lightroom plugin and it wasn't much more trouble.

The other thing I want is an increase in the JPG upload size limit -- as occasionally I end up with files that are above 10 MB not due to resolution but just because they have a lot of data and (on purpose) minimal compression -- being able to keep those "originals" without having the Uploader need to resize them would be useful too.
Fearlith 12 years ago
I actually already use Amazon's S3 but it would be nice to get all the functionality of flickr (like thumbs and comments) and then be able to download the raw file for high quality prints, edits etc.
enchanted home [deleted] Posted 12 years ago. Edited by enchanted home (member) 12 years ago
I almost mentioned S3 -- it's a neat idea. I wish it wasn't all WebDAV based and such, but it's a neat idea :)

and then be able to download the raw file for high quality prints, edits etc.

Saving the sidecar "current raw interpretation settings" with the raw file would be good for that too. Thinking back, that may be a bit more complicated than one might like -- i.e. Lightroom also supports storing clone spot points and so on, so you wouldn't have exactly what was needed for recreation.

Still, better than not having it :)

What S3 clients are you using?
Wooble 12 years ago
I'm wondering exactly how something like this would work... Would you need to upload both the RAW file and your post-processed jpeg and just have them stored together in some way that will let you get the RAW file back from Flickr even though the jpeg is always what gets displayed, or do you want Flickr to apply some sort of default postprocessing to every uploaded RAW file in creating the viewable jpegs? Considering we don't even have the most basic online photo editing tools available here, I'm going to assume no one's expecting RAW support to come with advanced online postprocessing to turn the RAW files into something viewable.
Fearlith Posted 12 years ago. Edited by Fearlith (member) 12 years ago
What S3 clients are you using?
JungleDisk seems to be the most stable / free.

no one's expecting RAW support to come with advanced online postprocessing

As far as I know this is still something to be innovated. It would be way cool but still years off due to various issues such as bandwidth, browser memory limitations, lack on an API, etc. For me it would be fine to have the JPG displayed and get the DNG as a download.

For JPGs Picnik now has a usable flickr-integrated flex-based tool but still I prefer Photoshop when I'm not traveling without a laptop.
benrobertsabq Posted 12 years ago. Edited by benrobertsabq (member) 12 years ago
It's a cool idea, but I get the impression Flickr isn't designed as a backup site, although people have varying opinions on whether it should be used as one.

I get what you mean about having everything in one place. It might be neat to have a capability to treat the RAW/DNG as an "attachment" to the jpeg, kinda like you suggest. With its own layer of permissions separate from who can download the jpeg.

That'd give you all your data together in a linked form but only have Flickr need to worry about manging/displaying the jpeg, and the larger data overhead of having a lot of DNG/RAW files attached.

Maybe I'd suggest this as an extra feature and charge a minimal overhead for it to cover the extra resource usage.
admin
dopiaza 12 years ago
It's a cool idea, but I get the impression Flickr isn't designed as a backup site, although people have varying opinions on whether it should be used as one.

Part of the original sales pitch for Flickr was indeed that it was a place to store your original images safely (indeed, that was one of the benefits of a pro account). I just took a quick look and couldn't find that claim being made now, so perhaps they're playing that down these days.
admin
FlyButtafly 12 years ago
I just looked around too; and if I'm not mistaken, it used to be on the About page, but I didn't find mention of storage anywhere now, either. Hrm.
Fearlith 12 years ago
After diggin around a bit I've found that ImageMagick actually supports DNG. This means thumbs from DNG files are technically quite possible although the quality didn't seem to be too nice. All sorts of color corrections should still be done by hand in Lightroom or similar.
benrobertsabq 12 years ago
Kris Haamer Would you (or do you already) really use online editing or display tools for DNG though? How many other people would or currently do? (Asking honestly, not being a wise guy.)

We could always have Flickr automatically postprocess according to the default settings for the DNG image file at upload, but it seems like a lot of overhead?

dopiaza and FlyButtafly The sales pitch and the reality are sometimes two different things. Having data online certainly provides a backup (sort of) by default.

But if Flickr were designed as a backup site in addition to all the other cool things Flickr does it should have a nice clean way built in for me to get all my data back down again. Since backup implies a need to restore someday.

Right now I have to use something like Flickrdown or another 3rd party means to get data back if I lose the originals. That's what I meant by Flickr not being designed as a backup site, in that it has no features to support backup/restore, it just has a copy of your images.
Fearlith 12 years ago
Ben, I was talking about future technology. Someone looking to innovate could use ImageMagick to create a web application for DNG processing today. Nonetheless it would be too slow and cumbersome. In a few years with increases in bandwidth and processing power that may no longer be the case.

As I've said: what would be usable today on flickr is to have the DNG as a sidecart with the JPG.
enchanted home [deleted] Posted 12 years ago. Edited by enchanted home (member) 12 years ago
I'm going to assume no one's expecting RAW support to come with advanced online postprocessing to turn the RAW files into something viewable.

I'd just want backup, not viewing. Lightroom kills for that (viewing). Plus different apps do interpret RAW slightly differently.

Even if Flickr wasn't supposed to be (or isn't) a backup medium, that seems a great way to expand the business -- to me -- anyway.

Though it's true I could just use S3 on my Lightroom DB.
basZero 9 years ago
Dear Flickr: Please let us store our DNG files on your site! It would be perfect to have all important images synched, including keywords and all other metadata.

I would also pay more than the regular Pro account pricetag for this additional feature.
Martynas Jurksaitis Posted 9 years ago. Edited by Martynas Jurksaitis (member) 9 years ago
Lately, I am looking for on-line photo storage, where I could back-up my DNG files. Flickr would be ideal for that! Even if I would need to upload DNG and a JPG, JPG would be only a preview ...
DNG support is needed!
I would pay extra for DNG upload
Kris Haamer 8 years ago
Any news on supporting this?

A few years have passed and now at least my connection is fast enough to upload DNG files to Flickr.

(I used to be "Fearlith")
parmstro_uk 6 years ago
Having recently been "upgraded" from flickr pro to an account with lots of storage, I would now like to upload my original DNGs.
I know people have commented that this is not worth it on Flickr as people can't look at them, but 1)that's not the point, I use jpegs for those I want to be seen, but I want to store the originals on Flickr as another level of backup and a means of sharing with friends and family and 2)you can look at them with Picasa anyway if you don't have e.g. CS6 or Lightroom.
MOD
clickykbd 6 years ago
+1
I agree that raw file "carrier" storage is a topic worth re-considering now that flickr boasts a full terrabyte for each free account. Flickr has very much done an about face on the storage topic.
Groups Beta