I for one get on Canon's case about once a month about their propritory formats. Keep sending them emails. They may go in the delete bucket for now, but sooner or later they will get the message.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
It seems to me the first step is to get Canon to provide a detailed spec of its RAW file structure.
My guess is, having done standards in the telecom area, that Canon's view is that they can deliver the best RAW image from a hardware/firmware/software platform it totally controls.
Fine, that may even be a reasonable thing for Canon to believe.
If they publish the file structure, then Adobe, and potentially others, can provide a "universal digital netative" file structure (DNG) for those of us how want to ensure that our RAW images outlive Canon's hardware/firmware/software lifecycle.
Convincing Canon to abandon a successful business model is climbing a very steep slope.
If Nikon announced today that it is converting its RAW file structure to DNG would we all be willing to abandon Canon for Nikon? If not there is little incentive for Canon to change business models.
One Man's View
David
PS Three BIG cheers for Adobe taking the steps to offer us an alternative.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
> My guess is, having done standards in the telecom area, that Canon's view is that they can deliver the best RAW image from a hardware/firmware/software platform it totally controls.
That would be a safe bet to believe so.
> If Nikon announced today that it is converting its RAW file structure to DNG would we all be willing to abandon Canon for Nikon? If not there is little incentive for Canon to change business models.
No, we wouldn't, because there is no "open" format for lenses. I can't use my 70-200/2.8L on a Nikon or Fuji body, for example. However, I could switch to a Kodak body if they announced DNG support. Fundamentally you are correct, however, in that we won't switch just because of DNG. The incentive becomes in Canon adopting the standard to shut all their customers up. [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Bill,
It seems to me that we, as photographers, need to come to a consensus regarding what we really want.
When I started doing commercial photography in '69 the default B&W was Tri-X and for Tranys we used E-Chrome or K-Chrome.
All the camera manufacturers accepted that film came in a specific size and built the cameras to accommodate those specs. Over the years the camera manufacturers have obsoleted lenses and bodies by adding capabilities, beginning with in camera metering, etc.
Now, with digital, the camera includes the light capturing medium. So, what I want is a means to get that data into a format that I know will endure and that I control, just like I did my neg and tranys 35 yers ago.
I applaude Adobe for doing that with DNG. For me, it is much more important to encourage Canon, Nikon, et al to provide a clean, organized method for Adobe to use to add camera aspecific RAW files to the DNG convertor.
Having it on my computer is like having an automated processing line.
The one truth about companies that namufacture products for sale; if people quit buying it does what ever is necessary to regain the lost market share or it goes out of business.
Our wallets will do much more to persuade Canon thatn our emails.
One Man's View
David
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
[ QUOTE ]
It seems to me that we, as photographers, need to come to a consensus regarding what we really want. When I started doing commercial photography in '69 the default B&W was Tri-X and for Tranys we used E-Chrome or K-Chrome.
[/ QUOTE ]
David,
That's a really good point. For better or worse years ago Kodak controlled our processing standards - E6, C41, RA4, etc. Now with digital maybe it's Adobe's turn.
I love the acronyms all these camera raw formats use:
orf (awful)
pef (fart)
raf (bit rough)
mrf (moo)
nef (enough)
crw (cry)
tif (began to say tiff but oops that already exists and might cause conflict, ah who cares)
And finally dng (ding) - alarm bell for camera manufacturers.
-- Robert.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Converting a couple of folders to DNG I saved between 10-40% disk space. That's fine but for now, none of the file browser can see the images. Until the format is adopted by other software developers, I see no issue in using it.
White Balance so easy, even our 5 year old can do it.- Melissa Strickland
Funny thing is that is exactly the problem with raw camera formats! And that is one area DNG would address. DNG is only what, one week old? Give the software developers a little time and they can add support for DNG if they choose. At least DNG is supplied with freely available open source information, unlike camera company raw formats.
Some image browsers/asset managers that have, or will add DNG support:
Linear Mode
