Seems Lightroom is to be the main beneficienary of RSP's guts. Most of us haven't played with this yet but the reviews are good and workflow is completely different from the Bridge/ACR/PS paradigm. There's reason to be hopeful (guardedly so, of course).
Well, unless you live and work on a sustainance farm, our ability to house and feed ourselves, not to mention earn money to buy toys, all stems from the way business works. In other words, can't throw the baby completely out with the bathwater here.Only sometimes??I hate the way business works sometimes
Dave
I bet thats the thinking behind it. Corel lag a bit in the RAW dept, but PSP is a damn good product at a fine price...if they can nail the RAW thing PS is in for a hard time anyway...
And there's the rub
in a way, I support the companies doing their own raw format.Of course all this would be a moot point if camera manufacturers
standardised their RAW files...
Yeah, I understand what your saying, but for the consumer it can still be confusing and a mild irritation.in a way, I support the companies doing their own raw format.Of course all this would be a moot point if camera manufacturers
standardised their RAW files...
the idea is that raw is a THIN pass thru of the essential info
stored in that sensor. how that vendor pulls data out and writes
to a file is HIS business. if he (the company) finds that its
faster or takes less code to encode this way or that way, that's
probably a well-made tech decision.
should everyone have used EBCDIC (old ibm encoding) just because
IBM said so? ebcdic was done based on hardware reasons (as I
understand that historical character format) and there were gains
in efficiency to encode and use that.
on other machines, ascii was faster and more 'native' to the hardware.
in the same way, I do NOT expect many to support DNG on the camera.
that's probably a very awkward format for hardware vendors to have
to encode to. I bet there is no silicon support, today, for that
format. and its not cost-effective to add 2 encode formats when 1
does all the vendor needs.
as long as you can, on your host (pc) convert to dng, adding dng to
cameras makes less than no sense to me.
NOW, if someone comes up with a very small chip that will encode it
AND make that chip free for all to use, THEN there might be dng
support in cameras. I am not waiting for THAT even to happen, of
course..
--
Bryan (pics only: http://www.flickr.com/photos/linux-works )
(pics and more: http://www.netstuff.org ) ~
Personally, as a user of RawShooter Premium, I consider this to be very bad news. One of the things I particularly like about RawShooter is that it is compact in terms of memory usage, fast to load, fast to operate, has a nice clean and uncluttered user interface, does not try to take-over your machine, and has all the tools I want without masses of bloatware - in short, RawShooter is the very antithesis of Adobe Photoshop (and indeed all Adobe products).
