Call for DNG support from camera manufacturers Locked

Started Nov 8, 2008 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
Barry Pearson
Barry Pearson Veteran Member • Posts: 8,723
Re: Won't matter ...

echelon2004 wrote:

How is the metadata containing the information about the cfa being
added?

Added to what?

Is it by;

a - a converter being able to read the native format or is it
b - a super DNG product by adobe or non-adobe company?

If you are asking about how the extra metadata gets into DNG files, the answers are:

(i) a DNG converter (from another file format) supplied by Adobe or another company or person.

(ii) inserted from the start by a camera, for example my Pentax K10D or one of several other cameras.

If you are talking about how a raw converter gets hold of the extra metadata when reading a DNG file, the answers are:

(iii) from the DNG file itself, which works whether or not the raw converter knows about the camera model.

(iv) optionally, if the raw converter already knows about that camera model, from its own knowledge of the camera. Silkypix can read from the DNG, as (iii), but also offers option (iv) if it knows about the camera model:
http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/dng/variety.htm#methods

I don't really care WHEN in the chain the native format is being
read, native raw must be read and understood, at which time it would
be easy to just add support for the native raw format for de
mosaicing. The DNG format(s) itself is creating a situation when DNG
is needed. We get rid of DNG - no more silly "let's put this file in
a bag and pretend it's something else"

This thread is about cameras optionally outputing DNG directly. In that case, there isn't another native raw file that must be read - DNG itself is (optionally) the native raw file. That simplifies things.

DNG files CAN be understood by raw converters that don't understand native raw files, or when the DNG file IS the native raw file.

Even if raw converters eventually get around to understanding the native raw files, there is typically a period after the launch of a camera when they don't, during which they would be able to understand a DNG for the camera.

And understanding the DNG doesn't require an upgrade to the product, while understanding another native raw file format needs an upgrade to the product.

But apart from the one person in this thread that wanted to use
aperture to convert files from some Olympus camera, I have never even
heard of someone having any use for DNG woth adding a time consuming
step in a workflow. It takes time. What exactly are the benefits?
Mind enlighten us, what are the benefits for a working professional?

A survey in North America in December 2005 revealed: "According to a recent InfoTrends study with 1,754 professional photographers, over 18 percent of photographers use DNG as part of their imaging workflow".

I don't have later figures, but I have no reason to expect the proportion to have reduced. Their reasons will typically include one or more of those on this page:
http://www.barrypearson.co.uk/articles/dng/benefits.htm

Whether particular photographers can get any benefit from DNG depends on their workflow and the tools they use. (The situation gradually improves over time). Not everyone can get immediate benefit yet, or enough benefit to counter any perceived disadvantages. So any photographer who sees no current personal benefit in using DNG, and assumes therefore that there are no benefits to any other photographers, is wrong!

 Barry Pearson's gear list:Barry Pearson's gear list
Panasonic LX100 Ricoh GR III Pentax K-7 Pentax K-3 II Pentax K-1 II +25 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow