Having many friends who once worked for Corel and having worked with Corel in the past, I think the right term is "once" was a big company. Corel is pretty much a shadow of its former self. Then again the old CEO of Corel left much to be desired.
--
[snip]
its not the best USER experience, I agree.
[snip]
What IS the cost? Do you know, or are you guessing?
dcraw (a C source file) is completely free and many say that their algorithms are very good, actually.
--Sorry for the harsh title but I'm so fed up with adobe... They have
photoshop at a stupid price in Europe, and then have Elements at a
decent price but... it is the same price of Paintshop Pro X which
is enormously superior to Elements.
And then there's the famous upgrade policy of adobe.
And now they buy the company which has the, in my opinion, best raw
converter. As so, I wont probably be able to get the premium
version unless I buy Photoshop so... bye bye rawshooter.
I don't have that inside info - I don't work on camera firmware - but I have spent years on embedded systems doing firmware for hardware devices. so its not a foreign concept to me..
if they have extra flash (code) space AND a beefy cpu AND time slots in the system to process these things and not hurt any other feature, great! but I somehow doubt that every vendor has such luxuries.
that's a good point.
having 2 encoders that are 100% functionally identical seems like wasted code space, to me. if I was a project manager for such a product, I would argue AGAINST having 2. eventually, MAYBE try to migrate the vendor specific one to a vendor neutral one. but try not to have TWO encoders in there.
You have to love the last line of the press release:
They don't have to be big...all they have to do is put out their own software to allow users to convert RAW files. Oh, they already do. Not exactly a monopoly then, is it?
Early IBM machines were either decimal or binary. Binary Coded Decimal (BCD) encoding allow Interchange (I) of data between these systems. Then it was Extended (E) to a full 8 bits, hence Extended Binary Coded Decimal Interchange Code (EBCDIC).
Nonsense. 7 bit (or even 8-bit) ASCII can fit inside 8 bit EBCDIC, there is no hardware reason beyond decimal/binary compatibility to pick one over the other. As far as computers go, bits are bits, the hardware could care less what the bits represent as text.
I don't expect many to support it either, but not because it is difficult. Rather, it is one more way to try to lock people into a particular vendor. Kind of like how different floppy drive formats, LAN protocols, file formats, etc nudged people to pick Mac or PC, but not both.
[snip]
The Ricoh is really a point & shoot! Does it rely on those? There is little difference between (say) DNG and NEF. You can run a NEF file through the "dng_validate.exe" program from the DNG SDK and get few error messages.
No. Adobe have published a global royalty-free license for anyone to use DNG and supply products based on it. You don't even have to notify them.
There are more that 115 non-Adobe products that support DNG in some way. 3 cameras and 4 digital backs from 4 suppliers use it as their native raw format.
They CAN be de facto standards. Eg. TIFF is a de facto standard - and owned by Adobe.
Adobe just needed to scrounge up some pocket change for this acquisition. There may have been a slight belch as pixmantec was swallowed whole.
[snip]
[snip]
