Could Adobe make a RAW format?

[Uwe_Steinmueller]

> they can keep their own interpolation (and many other) algorithms secret.

But in many cases the manufacturers don't have the best interpolation.

Uwe

[RobertEdwards]

Dennis_Walker wrote:

[ QUOTE ]

If there were translators from the proprietary formats to a SRF, then software could be made to use the SRF and it would only take a translation step (e.g. during transfer from camera disk to computer) to provide the benefits (e.g. being able to open a RAW file many years in the future).

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Dennis,

That's exactly what I had in mind - a translator - and you write it much more succinctly!

Adobe already know how to interpret the proprietary camera raw file for use in ARC. So I figure rather than save as a 16 bit tiff make a new file format that can still be adjusted in ARC (or C1DSLR, Bibble, etc) that retains all the raw format benefits without the current headaches and worries.

-- Robert.

[RobertEdwards]

Thomas_Knoll wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, it is feasible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well the idea is not only feasible but do-able with Adobe's new DNG format.

-- Robert.

[Paul_Gardner]

The augument that the camera manufactures should be able to keep the format secret is a very spiececes one. The process of writing the format and how it is done can be propritory, BUT the format itself should be open. Once the shutter is opened the image belongs to us, it no longer belongs to the manufacture. If I was an attorney or had the money I would definitly file a lawsuit against the manufactures. Most of the other manufactures of consumer goods understand that. What if GM or Ford said that any repairs have to be done by them as the workings of (say a transmission for example) was a secret. And further you must buy their brand of gasoline and oil to make the engine work.
Most of the people who want secrets are only trying to CYA and are afraid someone will slow down their greed.

[RobertEdwards]

The other annoying thing about camera manufacturer's proprietary raw formats is abuse of the maker notes standard in EXIF. It was not intended to store general camera specifications, nevertheless some manufacturers insist on hiding important information like lens, ISO, flash, etc, in there.

Some raw converters, including Adobe Camera Raw, still can't read all the EXIF data. To be clear I'm not blaming Adobe. Currently I use Breeze Browser to copy EXIF to ACR converted files to restore the lost data. I hope Adobe's DNG converter can find more EXIF than previous versions of ACR - and camera manufacturers start using the correct EXIF fields.

-- Robert.