Call for DNG support from camera manufacturers Locked

Started Nov 8, 2008 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
cityphotographer Senior Member • Posts: 2,510
the question is

who's going to support it for free and over the years like it is now with the manufacturer's software? Adobe? and a bunch of amateurs today in the business and tomorrow who knows? Which means that is Adobe the one in charge.

guys, please let's talk "open" about this: it's not like we should pretend that there are no special interests in this whole raw and DNG thing.

if I lose the ability to rely on the manufacturer to keep the software available no matter what then I'd seriously re-consider this whole digital thing to run my business.

eric chan is right about the kodak, in fact I sold my 14n immediately and just because the manufacturer left the building: think about how serious the software support from the manufacturer is!

By then I didn't care if Adobe had the ACR running: what I needed was photodesk and the attentions at kodak's because if anything happens I need to rely on the manufacturer (who else?)

the moment DNG will be supported (officially) by the manufacturers then I'll gladly re-open my heart, but for now I only see Adobe interested and few others , and that's not enough (for me).

eric chan should convince Adobe to lift the ACR link to the PS mandatory upgrade for the new cameras and then I'll change my mind about the "good intentions" about a new raw standard. If not then Adobe can continue to pursue the current marketing plan which is understandable, but a "free" standard under their wings may not be really credible (to me).

this won't change my admiration for Adobe. But Adobe is far from being some "benevolent" organization. Why should they?

in fact they already use the very same raws to increase their sales. Rightly. They are in this for the money and they have zero responsibilities to maintain a support line like the manufacturers have. (by Law in many cases) to make myself clear the D2x owners had to upgrade their version of photoshop in order to open the NEF's and the 5DII owners will have to do the same. If not they won't be able to open the raws at all (with their adobe software). AT ALL!

so much for pursuing a free standard!

Therefore a standard must be fully supported by the manufacturer (like it is now), in my opinion, not just by Adobe or any other private and third party firm. And for obvious reasons.

In any case if Canon will replace their raw standard and adopt the DNG without the support referring to adobe for it then I'll buy a Sony.

oh well.. I'm gonna buy a Sony anyway, but that's not the point! eheh

ted w dillard wrote:

"but I must confess to being surprised by the level of animosity
being shown towards DNG."

Thanks for saying that, Eric. Honestly I'm completely astounded by
that in this and other discussions elsewhere. I do, as well,
appreciate the discussion... and have learned a few things, but...

I, for one, having had some limited experience working with camera
makers, have a lot more animosity towards them for stubbornly
resisting this effort, and I blame nothing more than the arrogance
and ego of the engineering teams, backed up by the marketing. I
think they are doing Photography, the industry, and themselves a
grave disservice. I think Adobe should be applauded for what they've
done on this, in spite of the camera companies' resistance.

The other thing that just baffles me is the response, "you'll never
get Nikon and Canon to pay attention". Well, first, how can you say
that? The last petition was 4 years ago and got 10,000 signatures.
How can you tell me that part of the reason Nikon and Canon are still
at the table, talking, and Pentax and Leica (and others) offer DNG is
not, at least in part, because of that? Secondly, there is one sure
thing that they pay attention to- sales. If these companies have
data that suggests people will make the purchase decision influenced
by this, then you can bet you're going to see it as an option. AND
the marketing guys will figure a way to make it sound like it was
their idea first.

And besides that, what does it cost to sign the thing, whether you
feel it's pointless and naive, or not? Please. That's no reason to
not support the petition.

To me, this is like going to an automaker and saying, hey, we know,
with a slight modification you can make a car that will not only run
on gas, but alcohol, grass clippings and Willie Nelson's used
french-fry oil, just in case the Middle East decides to fall into the
sea. If you make that car, I'd be interested in buying it.

How simple is that?

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