Using the DNG converter solves the problem -- if a solution is what you want here, vs. an opportunity to vent at Adobe.
Personally, I can't bring myself to upgrade to Lightroom 2 -- just not enough of a difference for what I do from 1.4 -- so am using the DNG converter for my 50D files.
As Bob initially pointed out, this isn't an issue whatsoever. You simply convert to DNG and use the older Adobe Raw products.
Next, I've also got a new 5DMII, not a single issue, on a Mac with LR 2.2. These are much bigger documents than my 5D so no, its not as fast. But runs fine on a machine that's built for this task (I've got 10 gigs of ram, LR is a 64 bit app which really helps).
There's never an issue with Adobe forcing you to upgrade their Raw processing engine if you don't want to, thanks to DNG.
The BLAME should go to Canon, not Adobe. If they, and Nikon, and others would get off this proprietary Raw format dance they do with every new camera, and instead support DNG, this would be a non issue the day the camera hit the market. You should be complimenting Adobe on providing an open Raw standard and doing a heck of a lot of hard work, decoding the proprietary Raw format every time a new camera comes out. IF the big camera companies would stick to an open Raw format (even with proprietary tags for their converters), every photographer (and Adobe) would be far better of.
__________________ Andrew Rodney
Author "Color Management for Photographers" http://www.digitaldog.net
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
The BLAME should go to Canon, not Adobe. If they, and Nikon, and others would get off this proprietary Raw format dance they do with every new camera, and instead support DNG, this would be a non issue the day the camera hit the market. You should be complimenting Adobe on providing an open Raw standard and doing a heck of a lot of hard work, decoding the proprietary Raw format every time a new camera comes out. IF the big camera companies would stick to an open Raw format (even with proprietary tags for their converters), every photographer (and Adobe) would be far better of.
AGREED - 100%
Because of this, every software company has to spend gobs of time & money getting their software to work with each new camera. I use Express Digital for production and the same fight goes on in their forum with every new model release. People get fed up with buying new software releases (me too) but pay the big bucks for new cameras that actually create the problem. Sometimes it's months waiting for an update for a new camera to work. I sympathize with you, it's very frustrating.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Because of this, every software company has to spend gobs of time & money getting their software to work with each new camera.
Right, everyone outside of the camera manufacturer suffers. Bibble, Raw Developer, C1, you name it. If out of the camera came a non proprietary Raw format (DNG), the manufactures could still place proprietary rendering instructions or metadata that could only be accessed from their software, prove that this is useful and attempt (for whatever reason), to convince customers to use the camera supplied software. I wonder, after dropping $2700 on my 5DMII why Canon feels its to their benefit to have me only use their software. They got my money, I got a nice camera but a file format that's holding me hostage.
If anyone in this thread is a hero, its Adobe for supplying DNG as an option.
__________________ Andrew Rodney
Author "Color Management for Photographers" http://www.digitaldog.net
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
I also have no beef with Adobe over camera manufacturer Rawfiles.
But given that there is little sign of a wholesale movement towards DNG by those manufacturers, I think the real unsung hero is Dave Coffin.
Who is Dave Coffin? He's the guy who has created open source software that decodes raw formats, and yes, the 5DII is supported in the current version. The software is called dcraw
Now most of us don't use open source software to decode our raw images, but we just might be surprised to find out that Dave's work may and has been freely used in commercial software and that even if it isn't used directly, it can be used as a guide to decoding the various formats.
Here's what Dave says about that:
Quote:
Dcraw has made it far easier for developers to support a wide range of digital cameras in their applications. They can call dcraw from a graphical interface, paste pieces of dcraw.c into their code, or just use dcraw.c as the documentation that camera makers refuse to provide
Thanks Dave!
Mike
__________________ Mike Adelaide
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Early last year, I decided to pick up a 40d as backup to my main body, and after I ordered it I remembered that the raw format was different than my Mk2N. So I ended up using the DNG converter from Adobe for a while, and it worked like a champ. I would echo the DNG suggestion of those here who have pointed out that it's a good solution.
I was using CS2 at the time, and shortly thereafter I downloaded the free CS3 trial to check it out. I was so impressed with the upgraded ACR in CS3 that I went ahead and purchased the upgrade. I really liked the improvements to Camera Raw, especially the improved sharpening. Previously, I never applied sharpening in raw conversion because it produced too many artifacts. It was nice to see that get fixed because applying some sharpening in the conversion is a time saver.
But right now I personally see no compelling reason to purchase the CS4 upgrade. Based on what I've heard (which is not too much) I get the impression that CS4 is probably not as big an upgrade as CS3 was at the time.
Linear Mode
