Your “work around” was of no benefit to me either. Niether did it solve the problem. So you are excused for not understanding the problem.
1 Like
Your are scanning a regular image format, RGB data. As far as I know - even before being on this forum - no one (including the makers of Vuescan!) are recommending scanning to DNG.
DNG is just not a format that’s often used with a plain RGB image.
If you want to open your scanned images in DxO, you received answers. It can be (easily) done.
Otherwise, please make a normal feature-request topic (or I even believe there is on already) and make a vote on it. It’s no use trying to repeat your point.
DNG files are often used for ‘raw input data from imaging devices’, like photo cameras and yes, scanners. But the type of data coming from photo cameras is very different to what a scanner produces. Photolab doesn’t understand (properly) DNG files that come from devices that they don’t support.
Because DxO also - and notoriously so - doesn’t attempt to open raw files from cameras in doesn’t support. But since your data isn’t a raw file at all, you just need to extract the RGB payload out of it and into a TIFF file. Like I said, you might even not have to convert, just renaming might be enough!
I’m still not clear on why you say "I can’t convert 14.000 files, process them and convert them back’. Why would you want to convert back? You don’t ever modify the archived material I assume. If you do, you might as well convert it into a suitable format 
.
Imagine if DxO Photolab read your DNG files perfectly fine, what do you want to do with it?? Because you’re still exporting to something like a TIFF / JPEG file then, and what are you going to do with that? Not ‘convert it back to DNG and archive an edited file’ I assume…
In the mean time, my DxO PL6 seems to open linear DNG files just fine (but they are exports made by DxO PL6 itself, so maybe they accept it then?). And I can edit my scans just fine in the format they are in.
So, maybe less ‘demanding’ and more ‘humble’… if you want a solution.
If you do not want a solution, that’s perfectly fine… but then stop complaining about it.
2 Likes
Essentially, as has been said before, DNG files are not always “RAW” files, they are often just TIFF files in a DNG wrapper.
See this discussion…
Dear Joanna,
for me the discussion looks like all the discussion here. A lot of conjecture, self-interpretation and a lot of coulda, maybe, possibly … 
I’ve tried to read the document https://www.kronometric.org/phot/processing/DNG/dng_spec_1.4.0.0.pdf but it’s too much stuff at the moment because we have craftsmen in the house who make a lot of noise and concentration is not possible.
There is one part that says
“This section describes the DNG format. As an extension of the TIFF 6.0 format, DNG should follow all the formatting rules for TIFF 6.0. For more information, refer to the TIFF 6.0 specification.”
For me it sounds like "…every company developing software to work with DNG and following the rules, must be able to create and read DNG files for and from other companies are also following the rules.
I still feel a bit left alone with the interpretation and the technical pitfalls of what is supposed to make the whole theme so difficult in DXO.
And I don’t need any further scientific papers, because I don’t have the time or inclination for that, just as I don’t have the time or inclination for the 101 pages of the PDF.
I just want the crap to work, just like in the other programs.
Last dictation before departure 
1 Like
Not at all they are stored and used and transfered as DNG files not Tiff or JPG.
Also the Nikon film/slide scanner has a raw output.
1 Like
Perhaps you could help me out and take me through your steps?
How do your workflow look like today without PhotoLab?
How would you want the workflow to look like involving PhotoLab?
For myself I started to scan slides from my friend and me wit Plustek Opticfilm135i and Vuescan in DNG. Tried to open It in DXO and got a failure message. I contacted Mr. Hamrick asking him if something is wrong in software or my settings, and got the answer that Vuescan creates “standard” DNG and I have to contact DXO, what I have done. At this moment I learned fist that there are Linear and ??? DNG. From this time I’m calling for a implementation of reading DNG other software can read also for DXO. That’s also a blame for smartphone DNG.
1 Like
Many 100s of thousands of images in DNG scaned from origional files, others from various digital cameras of many makes. Cataouged in various DAMs. (I am using LR wich reads the all files) I can adjust these files in lightroom or Photshop but not PL.
In these archves of 100s of thousands of DNGs from museums, archives and collections around the world there are times when you want to renovate/clean/repiar them which si something PL would be useful for.
As Dxo is asking me for more mony for PL6
If they want money from me I want proper DNG support for the Nikon Film Scanners (that are still widely used) which effectvly means support for VueScan DNG .
1 Like
Are you saving an edited version in parallel to the original DNG?
As PL is a parametric editor it will not touch the original and you will get a sidecar plus an exported file which need to be ingested in the DAM ones again in relation stacked/grouped to the original.
Raw doesn’t mean raw as in photo camera Raw . That’s what were trying to explain.
Raw in a scanner just means 'with zero processing ’ , so also no color correction / color space conversion/ gamma adjustment.
That data is no different to a normal 16bit tiff .
And the DNG is just the tiff renamed to DNG with extra headers added (no, really ).
Ok, park that.
Imagine you COULD open them. What are you going to do with them in dxo photolab ?
Because … it’s not like 'edits can be saved to a DNG file without altering the original raw data '.
Lightroom can write it’s editing settings into the file as xmp tags. But that are Lightroom edits , which you can’t do anything with except in Lightroom .
As those are Adobe software programs , and DNG is an Adobe invention and file format.
You are missing the point.
The start point is 100s of thousands of DNG files in multiple museums that already exist produced over many years from multiple sources including various scanners. I will get some images from “somewhere”. Might be in house or external but they will be in DNG that I need to renovate/repair etc,. At the moment it is a random lottery if PL will open them or not.
When edited/repaired we will use them, add them to our archive (both versions)as DNG and probably return a repaired version in DNG to the originator.
The question is does DxO want to be part of this or not. At the moment it seems not.
1 Like
I’m not missing anything.
I asked kindly how you worked today and how you wished to work with PL.
That’s all.
1 Like
Maybe the same I do in LR or Affinity Photo 
Well… Those two handle DNG very, very differently.
As in, Affinity Photo is like Photolab. You can open DNG , apply edits, and export it to another file .
Lightroom can write the editing parameters to the xmp metadata inside the file, and maybe update the preview jpg inside.
So one of them alters the DNG (which you will not want if it’s archive material i guess ), others can read it and then nothing else.
Anyway, I’m still thinking the topic starter is expecting a workflow that a) sounds like a bad idea b) can only be provided by Adobe tools .
Anyway , there is a trial to try out if things in PL6 do what is wanted.
- If it does , tadaah.
- If it does not , this topic has no use case besides someone complaining why some software isn’t doing exactly what he/she wants .
Anyway , this topic outlived its use.
1 Like
Joanna, thank you for the provided link – and reading a bit, I found another one with more details to ‘fill in’. That way I got ‘a touch of understanding’, what VueScan’s own RAW-format was invented (is used) for.
Today I also use Epson’s software to scan, which does the casual ‘office’ work as well supports high quality flatbed scans. [ For slides I use my D750, a macro lens & DIY copy stand. ]
Yes, Lightroom can update the DNG-file, with both changes, metadata and the embedded JPEG, as the photographer wanted it to be - far from every other software can do the same.
Still, I’m fine if Photolab just can open all the DNG-files (even the ones lacking profile) and even RAW that lacks profile (read: are too new to have got a profile yet). Just open up, let us in and don’t stop us from using any temporary profile we chose to use while waiting for the proper profile to get released. (that interface is already open today which is fine)
Normally I think it will be perfectly fine to use the profile of the previous version of a certain camera model - like in my case when I used the profile of Sony A7 III instead of the non-present A7 IV profile I was waiting for. The Nikon-people has done exactly the same when they were waiting for the profiles to Z9. I think they used the Z7 profile temporarily instead.
2 Likes
100% Agree.
Happy if it flashes up a “No Profile” warning and/or an option to apply one.
3 Likes
Just so! Nothing more needed!
Stenis, yours is a very sad, but understandable, post. I want to thank you for so many worthwhile posts here and wish you good luck with C1. The lack of interest shown/expressed by DXO is disheartening and surprising.
In a similar vein I have just subscribed to the Adobe Photography Plan but will continue using PL as a Developer, at least for a while.
I bought PL6 to support DXO even though there was little new that I wanted in it. Because of the issues with it and what feels like lack of support I am continuing to use PL5. Before I can buy a future version of it there will need to be some dramatically useful (for me of course) improvements.
2 Likes