DCR files and the new Adobe DNG format

[Quentin_Bargate]

I was wondering if Kodak have made their views of Adobe's new DNG raw format known? If they supported the format, then presumably Photodesk might gain the ability to convert DNF files.

The idea of an open, common, raw format is excellent, in my view.

Quentin

[WHWolberg]

Kodak is part of the PASS group that is developing a probably competing product. Bill

[Quentin_Bargate]

Hmmm, doesn't having two "open" formats rather defeat the whole object?

Actually reading the PASS group's mission statement, they seem to be aiming at a more general equipment and standards base. Adobe DNG could become part of that. There is nothing about a DNG equivalent I could discern from the PASS group's PR blurb. And DNG is here and now...

Quentin

[Kevin_Allen]

What would stop Adobe from charging in the future for this format, I can see an expensive upgrade path being added to Photoshop. I presume once I have converted to png the file has to stay as a png if it's to stay RAW. Also I understand that png are smaller files than DCR, so what gets lost.
The situation looks worse today than it did yesterday, two archive formats is worse than none if you back the wrong one. If Adobe decide that their raw plugin will only in the future work with png, you are stuffed if you want to use PD with your Kodak.
I like the idea of a consortium deciding what would be a standard format, rather than one company with all the patents, but knowing the amount photographers world wide have come to depend on Photoshop and the lure of a free plugin, advantage Adobe.
Kevin.

[BobBrown]

There is nothing in the works today for Photo Desk to support DNG. We will be releasing V4.3 soon and it will not have DNG support.

There are no plans to change the raw format written by Kodak Professional DCS digital cameras and backs either.

[Paul_Gardner]

Very short sighted! How you get the imaqe into the format is your call. Once the shutter opens the image belongs to me. Now you are holding my imgage captive to your desire instead of mine. Someday the worm will turn. The format needs to be open. Get with the standards. This fight has gone on in many other industries whom have finaly seen the light.

We need some more gadflys in the camera industry!!!

I've played briefly with the DNG format, not sure of benefits of DNG. When converting, you do have the option of saving original as is, so now maybe there is the best of 2 worlds? Maybe someone with the technical aspect can compare and give tech advantages or disadvantages? I see very little difference with ACR 2.2 and DNG ACR 2.3, If PD will give me Saturation control and vignetting possibilities, I'll not look no further for any other RAW processing. So far in my real world comparisons, sometimes ACR is better, sometimes PD. I have yet to figure out the why, my 14n seems to sometimes be a little oversaturated, even playing with the LOOKS Profiles gives this. Wedding Look too saturated, Portrait Look not enough. My only concern is my workflow, somehow I've got to get the production of, to be faster, I'm close but still working to much overtime! One thing for sure, if you don't like the Kodak system now, just wait it always gets better!