How do you export to LR, dng or tiff, jpeg, etc?

I would like to know what most users that shoot RAW choose as output when exporting to LR and why?

I am trying to learn what works best.

Thanks in advance

I export as 16-bit TIFF, AdobeRGB (it would be nice if DxO offered ProPhoto as an option). I don’t use DNG because my understanding is that it’s not really a DNG, but just a TIFF in a DNG wrapper, and because I sometimes want to retouch the TIFF in Photoshop. After all that, I may then apply a few adjustments to the TIFF in Lightroom if needed (such as split toning).

Hello @Drdul,

  • But it’s possible:


Just select the option Custom and you will be able to export with ProPhoto or any other ICC.

Svetlana G.

It’s a lineair DNG. among other things Demosiacfilter and colorprofile is applied.
causing problems with noisereduction after that point.

So, OXiDant, are you saying is better for ME to export as a tiff or jpeg?
Taking in consideration that in my case I make several adjustments with LR.

Thanks for the knowledge.

i experimented with DNG to an other Raw converter application and a pro for DNG is more open WB,
But i found the DNG too unstable in its other things.
edit: to clarify, because it is not defined in color and corrections as such that a other rawcapable app is applying its own corrections again Wb camera setting or suchas optics. which can result in different color, lightness and contrast, which forces you to do this correction again.

So unless you use PL only for opticscorrection and denoising, and want to do rest somewere else, i suggest process as much as possible in raw in PL and export in 16bit tiff.


Thanks for your help!

1 Like

Thanks for the reply, Svetlana. I’m on a Mac, and there isn’t a ProPhoto ICC profile available in /System/Library/ColorSync/Profiles, or anywhere else that I can find. It would be easier if PhotoLab came with ProPhoto as one of the built-in, non-custom profiles.

Export format depends on what you want to do with the output.

  1. I use JPEG if the results is intended for a screen, Lr is only there to catalog the output
  2. I use 16 bit TIFF if I only use DPL for optical and perspective corrections as well as WB and maybe some. Tiff brings colours to Lr consistently.
  3. I use DNG in the same case as in 2) but I often get ruined colours in Lr then. Reds are in danger and even when they display well in DPL, exported DNGs can exhibit fairly strong colour shifts. Check out

My leading system is Lightroom. And I do most things in it except for special cases where DPL can a) make things easier or b) better.

For those who don’t have a Prophoto ICC profile installed on their system, Prophoto ICC profiles are available from these sites :
(this page also offers a few Prophoto variants)
(don’t mind the ROMM RGB name, it’s Prophoto)


Thanks! I grabbed the ProPhoto.icc profile from the first link. I moved it into my Library/ColorSync/Profiles/Recommended folder (I’m on a Mac), where I discovered that I already had a ProPhoto.icm profile (the .icm extension is why I didn’t find it originally). According to The Google, there’s no difference between a .icc and …icm profile, so now I have two ProPhoto profiles to try (apparently .icm has historically been associated with Windows, and I have no idea why it’s the only one of several dozen profiles on my Mac that has an .icm extension).

To follow up on my previous post, I tested exporting an image from PL to LR as a 16-bit TIFF three times; as AdobeRGB, with the ProPhoto.icm profile that was already on my Mac, and with the ProPhoto.icc profile in the first link @Pat91 provided above. All three looked identical in LR, and I also opened them in PS, and all three had the same colours.

Interestingly, the ProPhoto.icm profile that came with my Mac is reported by PS as “ProPhoto RGB,” the same as when I open an image in PS directly from LR. The ProPhoto.icc profile that @Pat91 linked to is reported as “ProPhoto” without the added “RGB.” I’m not sure if it makes a difference, but it helps to identify which profile was used.

One more follow-up post. I noticed that the “Recommended” folder in Library/ColorSync/Profiles is an alias. The source folder is Library/Application Support/Adobe/Color/Profiles/Recommended, so it appears that the ProPhoto.icm profile (and a bunch of others) are installed by Adobe, and don’t come with the Mac as I had assumed.

1 Like

I was looking for the Prophoto Profile too and on MacOS High Sierra 10.13 and Sierra 10.12 I found it here:
Macintosh HD > System > Library > ColorSync > Profiles

:point_right:t3: Maybe DXO could add the Prophoto profile by default in the list in the future ?

Great advice… thank you I will try … I only have experience with photolab4 as an editor, as it is my first ever editing program … I usually denoise and and highlights, ect ect … mess around with nik … is there any glaring effect that LR has that PL does not ? I am mainly into Bird photography… forgive my ignorance lol … I see advertisements for presets for Lightroom… some of them look really cool would you recommend me giving that a try like after I am done with photo lab 4 send it over to Lightroom as a TIFF and maybe either download some presets or if they already have someone lightroom try them?

Hello William,

Do i understand correct that you are not a experienced user? Or is plv4 the first dxo application? Or are you mainly jpeg editor?

Let me answer your main question.
This advice is 2 years old and in the meantime there is a new DNG format.
RawDNG, which keeps the full data of the rawfile and does apply only denoise and optical correction. So then if you open this in LR you have still full colorspace and acces of the original rawfile.
Then again if you do more then just that i prefere a tiff then.
Less colorshifts.

About LR,if don’t have LR don’t just buy it for preset’s.

With PL you can do nearly anything. No need for LR.
Presets are just a bunch of edit actions which are safed to aply in one go.
If you know how to remake them then it’s a great speed up function. If you don’t know, it’s better to go step by step to learn the appliaction.

Best way to get the most out dxo pl is the elite version and filmpack elite.
Then you have contrast control in high, mid, and shadow tonality. And fine contrast.
(non sharpening microcontrast.)
Ver good for feathers.



1 Like (1,1 Ko)

1 Like

Hi Peter ! Thank you !! … I tried the fine contrast you suggested! Omg … what a difference it makes … I thought micro contrast was good … I will buy the And we just for the contrast… The presets are great too… well some introduce more noise than others? Cuz I know when I export to Nik some of those presets introduce a lot of noise even when I use deep prime before exporting… I’m not complaining … I just want to make sure I’m not doing something out of order … thanks again for the tips !:blush:

Ok so you have Nik also?
If you are using deeprime a little less heavy then you would to get rid of noise and fiddle with clearview plus, (kind of intelligent microcontrast slider) to set a base and finish the details with a touch of fine contrast get wring the last detail out of it. You can do two things.
1 use detail extractor filter of Nik to “suck” it all out by exporting as 16bit tiff out dxopl,
All dxopl power is in that tiff file.
2 then run define2 of nik after the return out nik detail extractor to see if the noise can be even less visible.

Clearviewplus (use between 15 and 30 mostly) is also available in local adjustments which i often use to control sharpening of each sector of the image.

Try out micro contrast slider extreme strong and clearview plus extreme strong
Master and virtual copy to insure you have the same settings except micro and clearview.
Export to jpeg and compare them closely. This helps to choose in the feature.
Clearviewplus and finecontrast slider together are king.