I see in the new DNG format specifications, Adobe has added a lossy compression option. For the life of me, I'm not sure I understand this thinking. With the cost of memory storage still plummeting, is it really that urgent to save storage space by having a lossy DNG file format? Perhaps so. Perhaps I'm just not accumulating images like others are — maybe wedding photographers and such. I guess I always thought the purpose of the DNG format was to have a universally accessible RAW file that preserved everything the camera recorded without compromise. If I wanted a lossy format to compress file storage space requirements, why wouldn't we just use JPG?
Obviously, I'm missing something here. I use DNG in all my workflow variations, but the full, uncompressed variation for universal compatibility. For any of you who think a compressed, lossy DNG is a useable idea and one you'll embrace, please share your thinking. Curious minds want to know!