Hi all, I have been using my Mini 4 pro for a few weeks now and I am noticing some differences between DNG and JPG files that I'd like some advice with. I have migrated from DSLRs to drones, as I lost interest, but see new possibilities with this aspect of photography. Whilst I enjoy making little movies, my primary drive is to create good quality images and to that end I need a bit of advice. The drone creates 2 files one HiRes, 1 low. The colour and light/contrast between the 2 is quite noticeable and I am wondering whether this is to do with settings in the drone or the limitations of the lens.The first image is the jpg, as it came off the microSD card and presents even contrast light and colour, whilst second the image (again right out of the drone with no post) has a really noticeable blue hue and halo effect with uneven exposure, colour, contrast and light distrubution, making it impossble to adjust evenly without further ruining the image. The metadata is the same for both obviously.
Its really disappointing as there is no way I can enlarge any of these images until I have resolved this issue. Any advice would be gratefully received.

exif data

Your post is vague and confused.
The drone creates 2 files one HiRes, 1 low.

You talk about a lo-res image and a high res image but the two images you've posted have identical resolution (4032 x 2268)?


The colour and light/contrast between the 2 is quite noticeable and I am wondering whether this is to do with settings in the drone or the limitations of the lens.The first image is the jpg, as it came off the microSD card and presents even contrast light and colour, whilst second the image (again right out of the drone with no post) has a really noticeable blue hue and halo effect with uneven exposure, colour, contrast and light distrubution, making it impossble to adjust evenly without further ruining the image.
It seems that you aren't familiar with dng (raw) image files and the second image you talk about is the dng file converted to a jpg in Affinity Photo.
It's normal that dng files look flat and they require a degree of processing by you to bring out the best in them.
The jpg file is pre-processed by the camera.
For many photographers, the jpg file is all that's needed, but the dng file will allow greater editing options.


Its really disappointing as there is no way I can enlarge any of these images until I have resolved this issue. Any advice would be gratefully received.
If you aren't familiar with editing dng files, perhaps you don't need them at all.
You can still edit jpg files and get great results.

Labroides Posted at 1-4 09:31
Your post is vague and confused.
The drone creates 2 files one HiRes, 1 low.

Hi Labroides, many thanks for your reply. I am familiar with post processing with raw files. That's not the  issue. What I am concerned about is the Vignetting/halo effect in the Raw file, and not the jpg. Like yourself I prefer to work with Raw files. I used to use Photoshop for my Nikon DSLRs, but this is not something I have had an issue with before. But, I have now discovered why! I recently started using Affinity 2, just as good as Photoshop IMO, but a fraction of the price for a permanent contract. The Raw convertor in Affinity 2 defaults to Serif Labs. I have now changed it, as I use a Mac,, to Apple Core. The difference is quite stark and will make post processing much easier.

Is the sky banding normal on DNG? is it just missing a colour space that's easily fixed?
The sky looks like someone dropped a stone in still water

djiuser_hO1hotPBLcbx Posted at 1-5 09:10
Is the sky banding normal on DNG? is it just missing a colour space that's easily fixed?
The sky looks like someone dropped a stone in still water

Hi, no it's not on the raw or jpg, so I guess its just an aberration of uploading a low res image. But, as for the issue I was posting about, I have now resolved that. I've discovered that Affinity 2, which I recently bought to replace Photoshop, uses a default raw convertor called Serif Labs. I am a Mac user and it is recommended that Mac users use Apple Core, the other option. I then rendered  the same image through that convertor and the image has come out the way I would expect requiring minimal post processing.

Nikonitis Posted at 1-5 05:57
Hi Labroides, many thanks for your reply. I am familiar with post processing with raw files. That's not the  issue. What I am concerned about is the Vignetting/halo effect in the Raw file, and not the jpg. Like yourself I prefer to work with Raw files. I used to use Photoshop for my Nikon DSLRs, but this is not something I have had an issue with before. But, I have now discovered why! I recently started using Affinity 2, just as good as Photoshop IMO, but a fraction of the price for a permanent contract. The Raw convertor in Affinity 2 defaults to Serif Labs. I have now changed it, as I use a Mac,, to Apple Core. The difference is quite stark and will make post processing much easier.
[view_image]
[view_image]

I am familiar with post processing with raw files. That's not the  issue.
It's still difficult tounderstand what your issue is.
You mention a lo-res image and a hi-res image, but posr two with identical resolution.

What I am concerned about is the Vignetting/halo effect in the Raw file, and not the jpg
Affinity doesn't use the correction factors that DJI have put in the dng file
This is why you are getting vignetting.

Like yourself I prefer to work with Raw files.
I work with jpg files rather than dng.

I used to use Photoshop for my Nikon DSLRs, but this is not something I have had an issue with before.
Go back to Photoshop and your issue will probably go away.

Labroides Posted at 1-5 11:46
I am familiar with post processing with raw files. That's not the  issue.
It's still difficult tounderstand what your issue is.
You mention a lo-res image and a hi-res image, but posr two with identical resolution.

Affinity doesn't use the correction factors that DJI have put in the dng file

What correction factors does DJI put into a DNG file?  DNG and RAW formats only include the unprocessed data from the image sensor and metadata that contains information about the hardware and shooting settings.   Post processing software such as Photoshop need a camera/lens profile to apply adjustments based on the camera/lens information read from the RAW file.   As far as I know, RAW format standards do not include a "correction factor".

Occams Razor Posted at 1-5 18:18
Affinity doesn't use the correction factors that DJI have put in the dng file

What correction factors does DJI put into a DNG file?  DNG and RAW formats only include the unprocessed data from the image sensor and metadata that contains information about the hardware and shooting settings.   Post processing software such as Photoshop need a camera/lens profile to apply adjustments based on the camera/lens information read from the RAW file.   As far as I know, RAW format standards do not include a "correction factor".

Complaints about vignetting are common from users of other software, but the probem doesn't exist for users of Photoshop or Lightroom.

I am using Luminar Neo. Great software and easier to use than Affinity Photo (and provide even more options).  It is also very good when handling RAW files.

Occams Razor Posted at 1-5 18:18
Affinity doesn't use the correction factors that DJI have put in the dng file

What correction factors does DJI put into a DNG file?  DNG and RAW formats only include the unprocessed data from the image sensor and metadata that contains information about the hardware and shooting settings.   Post processing software such as Photoshop need a camera/lens profile to apply adjustments based on the camera/lens information read from the RAW file.   As far as I know, RAW format standards do not include a "correction factor".

There's quite a few corrections in the dng file...particularly "opcode 3" that has vignette and colour corrections. Generally, dng is an adobe format  that a lot software can't read completely  even though it's open source. I guess it's a matter of catchup as new versions of the dng format come out...


That said,I use Raw Therapee when I find the DJI jpegs a bit too sharp and contrasty. The newest version of RawTherappee is much improved reading the DJI dngs when you find the tweaks, and a profile can be saved to get within the ballpark if you are trying to use the dngs' embedded jpeg as a starting point.

Edit added: It's a lot  of fuss for a flying dashcam (albeit a good one!)  so I don't bother mostly but fyi you can even find Adobe Mini2 and Mini3 "dcp" files (colour profiles) and load them into RT-a bit of work but an option.

Labroides Posted at 1-5 22:05
Complaints about vignetting are common from users of other software, but the probem doesn't exist for users of Photoshop or Lightroom.

I did not realize that as I primarily use Adobe programs for DJI RAW files.

nazgull Posted at 1-6 06:40
There's quite a few corrections in the dng file...particularly "opcode 3" that has vignette and colour corrections. Generally, dng is an adobe format  that a lot software can't read completely  even though it's open source. I guess it's a matter of catchup as new versions of the dng format come out...

Thanks for the response and information.   I primarily use PS/LR but I'm going to test a couple of other RAW editors that I have.

I have a Mini 4 Pro as well (with the most recent firmware update) and primarily shoot stills (jpg+RAW). My experience has been that the RAW files are both not clear and are significantly overexposed while the JPGs look fine. I'm talking not even close. It's very strange as I was not expecting this at all. Any ideas why this might be?

I post process using Photoshop 2025.

that's odd,  Mine are always very drab... it'd be tremendously interesting (to me, anyways) if the camera was correcting a blown-out dng to a likeable jpeg.

  I don't have photoshop but you might double-check whatever settings you have in photoshop to make sure you are seeing the dng as "Neutral", and FULL size..that is, without any tweaks whatsoever.

  If it's still odd, as a quick experiment I would try opening the raw/dng file in a simple viewer like "xnview"*....Just be sure to tweak THEIR settings so they show the dng FULL SIZE-otherwise they will display the low-res thumbnail embedded in the dng that will be a close match to your full-sized jpeg.
best-of-all, You could maybe upload+link a dng example if the puzzle persists.

* or irfanview, or even the much-more-powerful rawtherapee,darktable etc etc.among many other good, free apps.

nazgull Posted at 1-9 05:55
that's odd,  Mine are always very drab... it'd be tremendously interesting (to me, anyways) if the camera was correcting a blown-out dng to a likeable jpeg.

  I don't have photoshop but you might double-check whatever settings you have in photoshop to make sure you are seeing the dng as "Neutral", and FULL size..that is, without any tweaks whatsoever.

I agree with you, it's definitely odd. I've attached two files to illustrate. The first one is the JPG version and the second is what the RAW file looks like. I converted the second one to JPG in order to be able to upload it but you'll easily see the difference between what I'm getting in JPG and in RAW. Have a look.

hmm. That's certainly never what I get. Have you tried xnview or  whatever? My idea around this is that another app  will confirm the raw  file really  looks like that without photoshop post-processing...Here's  what I get- the raw,vignette and all. and the default jpeg  These of  course,  are much reduced in size. and apologies for repitition. I only see two pictures until I post it. WYSIWYG is not a concept that works here in my browser.

JimLeslie99 Posted at 1-9 09:36
I agree with you, it's definitely odd. I've attached two files to illustrate. The first one is the JPG version and the second is what the RAW file looks like. I converted the second one to JPG in order to be able to upload it but you'll easily see the difference between what I'm getting in JPG and in RAW. Have a look.

[view_image]

The conversion to jpeg usually requires some fine tuning. Depending on the software you're using, the out of the box conversion can be good or not so good. In your case, it seems that the jpeg is overexposed. You need to tweak the exposure, white point, black point, shadows and highlights parameters to obtain a result similar to the native jpeg.
And please remember that RAW images need always to be sharpened. Also in this case, depending on the software you're using this can be automatically applied or not. In you case the converted image is less sharp than the native jpeg.

fgange57 Posted at 1-6 02:58
I am using Luminar Neo. Great software and easier to use than Affinity Photo (and provide even more options).  It is also very good when handling RAW files.

I agree ! I've both Affinity and Luminar Neo licensed, but since months I'm not using Affinity almost anymore. For lazy users (as I'm ..,), Luminar Neo is the best option.

nazgull Posted at 1-6 06:40
There's quite a few corrections in the dng file...particularly "opcode 3" that has vignette and colour corrections. Generally, dng is an adobe format  that a lot software can't read completely  even though it's open source. I guess it's a matter of catchup as new versions of the dng format come out...

I've tried opening one of the dng file in Adobe DNG converter, with which Adobe says it is compatible, using the latest version, but all folder files are greyed out, so no files are recognised. I've had a look at Darktable, Mac doesn't recognise the program and Therapee produces much the same results as the Serif Labs on Affinity 2, with vignetting and blue cast over the image.

Nikonitis Posted at 1-10 03:26
I've tried opening one of the dng file in Adobe DNG converter, with which Adobe says it is compatible, using the latest version, but all folder files are greyed out, so no files are recognised. I've had a look at Darktable, Mac doesn't recognise the program and Therapee produces much the same results as the Serif Labs on Affinity 2, with vignetting and blue cast over the image.

The SerifLab method in Affinity 2 allows you to remove the border shadowing during the development process. It's just matter of checking the right option and fine tuning the slider.

Nikonitis Posted at 1-10 03:26
I've tried opening one of the dng file in Adobe DNG converter, with which Adobe says it is compatible, using the latest version, but all folder files are greyed out, so no files are recognised. I've had a look at Darktable, Mac doesn't recognise the program and Therapee produces much the same results as the Serif Labs on Affinity 2, with vignetting and blue cast over the image.

hI, Nikontis. The adobe dng converter is used to convert other raw files TO dng, so it won't do a thing with your dnng files....

  The very first complication tweaking with raw/dng is finding the software that does what you want and that you like to use.

I'm on linux guy so I  can't speak to RawTherapee or others on Macs, but I can say that there's a lot to learn navigating these more complicated programs....
Simpler, you can try just tweaking the drone's jpegs  in many, many less convoluted softwares, but do save all originals as copies somewhere. If you are worried about lossiness, make a copy of the drone's jpeg as a tiff or png and edit them-they are lossless.

The DNG issue is more than just Vignetting , there is a colour shift towards the borers too along with the darkening - both the JPGs and Photoshop/Lightroom fix this to a large degree but if you use Capture one or other converters its very noticable . you can see it here in a C1 developed DNG from today - goes green the further you get from the centre (I thought my sensor was faulty)  , isn`t an issue with the JPGs .

First DNG from Capture one and second the Out of drone camera JPG version

Shooting RAW is pretty essential to get the most from the Mini 3 Standard and Mini 4 Pro as there are no NR or Sharpness adjustments available for stills and there is too much of both in the JPGs

Adam-T Posted at 1-16 05:36
The DNG issue is more than just Vignetting , there is a colour shift towards the borers too along with the darkening - both the JPGs and Photoshop/Lightroom fix this to a large degree but if you use Capture one or other converters its very noticable . you can see it here in a C1 developed DNG from today - goes green the further you get from the centre (I thought my sensor was faulty)  , isn`t an issue with the JPGs .

First DNG from Capture one and second the Out of drone camera JPG version

Yes, I think you are right-there are colour corrections in the dng file too.

as raw as it gets? without baked in white balance and all the rest.

JPEG images are always more appealing to the eye straight out of camera but they don't contain as much latitude in the shadows and highlights.
If you take the DNG into Photoshop/Lightroom or your favourite editing program you will be able to get much more out of the DNG than the JPEG - revealing details in the highlights and shadows and also more ability to tweak the white balance etc.

Pixcels Posted at 1-16 08:00
JPEG images are always more appealing to the eye straight out of camera but they don't contain as much latitude in the shadows and highlights.
If you take the DNG into Photoshop/Lightroom or your favourite editing program you will be able to get much more out of the DNG than the JPEG - revealing details in the highlights and shadows and also more ability to tweak the white balance etc.

Also the JPEG algorithms are pretty clever too
My iphone pix always look immediately better than my Nikon pix - until I have had a chance to work on the RAW files.

nazgull Posted at 1-16 07:47
[view_image]
as raw as it gets? without baked in white balance and all the rest.

That looks a bit grim - what happened ?

djiuser_hO1hotPBLcbx Posted at 1-5 09:10
Is the sky banding normal on DNG? is it just missing a colour space that's easily fixed?
The sky looks like someone dropped a stone in still water

Yes - don't like that digital ramping in the sky.

Pixcels Posted at 1-16 08:09
That looks a bit grim - what happened ?

it's fine. it's merely another starting point.

Pixcels Posted at 1-16 08:15
Yes - don't like that digital ramping in the sky.

I am reluctant to immediately blame the camera/sensor (they do carry the Hasselblad logo) but perhaps the JEPG algorithm is sophisticated enough to have made allowances for a lens that alway shoots wide open and none of those clever things happen to the DNG - they rely upon clever post processing by end users.
Once you have got the hang of the adjustments it maybe useful to create a'preset' in your editing program for treating your DNGs - then use that as your first adjustment and proceed from there.

nazgull Posted at 1-16 08:17
it's fine. it's merely another starting point.

Got a lot of pushing and pulling to do there ! - look forward to seeing the end result.

Not sure if this is any help but have a look at this conversation in the DJI forum
https://forum.dji.com/forum.php? ... p;extra=#pid3525749

nazgull Posted at 1-16 07:47
[view_image]
as raw as it gets? without baked in white balance and all the rest.

I had a play with that , there`s no colour information in the developed image shown but it made a nice sepia or B&W

Adam-T Posted at 1-16 09:21
I had a play with that , there`s no colour information in the developed image shown but it made a nice sepia or B&W

Hi Adam...yes sepia and BW is about it -it's just that green is used instead...and No, there's no exif info-it's just another much-reduced jpeg of the dng example  i put in an earlier post ... Mainly, the difference in this, is that  the embedded white balance has been turned off to show something even "rawer"- without any colour information displayed.


On the other extreme, from examples up-thread, it looks like adobe shows a perfect copy of the jpeg as a starting point when opening a  dng. Naturally  since dng is their format.  But for people without an adobe product, there's a hill to climb. And for adobe users, there might be a lot of "backing up" if you wanted something much different (but I wouldn't know)

nazgull Posted at 1-16 15:05
Hi Adam...yes sepia and BW is about it -it's just that green is used instead...and No, there's no exif info-it's just another much-reduced jpeg of the dng example  i put in an earlier post ... Mainly, the difference in this, is that  the embedded white balance has been turned off to show something even "rawer"- without any colour information displayed.

This would explain why an expensive converter like Capture one can correct the (probably almost fisheye natively) lens automatically as they have a profile from DJI but not the border colour shifts which would seem to be an Adobe thing . there is only a generic DNG profile in C1 which is fine for general WB etc but not for weird colour shifts of a specific product, it`s not serious on most images, mainly ones in sunlight with walls etc in them . I use Capture one for work with my cameras as I find the workflow for many images far easier than Adobe and it pulls amazing detail without any enhance features . what I need to do is make an action in photoshop to remove the ciolour shift . if I`m using 48Mp mode I use photoshop anyway to convert as the enhance details really does an amazing job to clean and pull out detail from those files, I end up with a decent 20Mp image and the quality is similar to one from a 20Mp 1" sensor Sony like an RX100 Mk5 (cleaner at ISO100 than a Canon G7X etc !!)  

Example of 20Mp from a 48Mp RAW developed in ACR using Enhance details Example - I find this a sweet spot for the 48Mp RAW mode, its more work but on shots like this gets close to if not matches the 1" 20Mp sensor drones at ISO100 at least

yes...that's a nice picture. The DJI minis do a good job with their little cameras!
  ...if anyone's  curious about the colour shift/vignette there's an application to see it. ..

"DNG Opcodes Editor" It runs in Windows OS. Load a grid and import a dng file and it shows the effects somewhat.

Personally, the jpegs  tweaked directly in the drone's camera settings are  usually fine with me but since there's so much about how wonderful raw is,  discussion is curiousity more than anything.

nazgull Posted at 1-17 07:22
yes...that's a nice picture. The DJI minis do a good job with their little cameras!
  ...if anyone's  curious about the colour shift/vignette there's an application to see it. ..
[view_image]

Very interesting how the camera vignettes, thanks for that
as for RAW - I took both 48Mp and 12Mp RAWs from of that shot above, using Adobe camera raw and Enhance details. there is a very real advantage to 48Mp - at ISO100 when you don`t need lots of DR anyway but you do get highlight and shadow recovery even from 48Mp files.

screen grab of crops both 12Mp and 48Mp from the Mini3/4 camera at 100%