Call for DNG support from camera manufacturers Locked

Started Nov 8, 2008 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
cityphotographer Senior Member • Posts: 2,510
Re: Won't matter ...

Jeff Schewe wrote:

Then you misunderstand what having a native DNG format would offer.
If a camera shot a DNG format, and a raw converter supported DNG,
then the raw converter would support a new camera that shot DNG
without any work on the part of the raw converter. Ya see, that's the
purpose of a standardized raw file format...less of the drama about
new camera support.

you now have the opportunity to practice what you preach: if you are genuine and really believe in what you just said and not paid by adobe then you can do it right now: convert all your raws to DNG and then enjoy all the non-Adobe applications, amateurish therefore unstable/unreliable and professionals (paying for it).

If for you DNG is that good and powerful then you should do it right now. And be proud. After all if it was that good then why do you need to convince others about how good is it? If it's good then we'd all use it. But we don't. guess why?

did you do that? convert all your raws to DNG ?

I did, once and I can't believe that I fell for that idiotic procedure.

If the digital photo industry started adopting a standardized raw
file format that was documented, then long term conservation and
preservation would be greatly enhanced. With more an more new
undocumented formats coming along, the likelihood that future support
will be eliminated grows–so the more undocumented formats, the
greater the risk to the industry.

and what do I care? I have the software for free from the manufacturer. Year after year the software is there and still free. With DNG I have the software from Adobe and others not reliable enough to make me feel good about it in the long run.

our interests? much better now, the way it is now.

Adobe's interests? DNG, of course. I'm not inventing this, they do push for it. That ALONE should explain: and by itself, naturally.

The camera makers would not loose anything by adopting DNG
with the possible exception of being free to create technically poor
formats.

they'd give to Adobe more power.

Adopting DNG would actually HELP
those people who seem predisposed to hate Adobe because it would
provide opportunities to use NON-Adobe software.

so you do it: adopt DNG: you can do it right now.

I (for one) don't hate Adobe at all. They are very good in what they do. Photoshop is the best software there is.

But because I (for one again) am not stupid and care about my stuff I can't let Adobe to be in charge of the raws because when they will be they'll do exactly what they are doing now: mandatory upgrades to use the raws on new cameras.

If you are a photographer, it would behoove you to actually know and
understand what the issues are. The industry, as it stands today is
NOT in the best interests of photographers...a standardized and fully
documented raw file format is–regardless of what you may think of
Adobe.

DNG is an Adobe thing. And Adobe can't defend our interests (by definition) because we are the Customers and they sell to us. Our interests go into two opposite directions.

scenario: it's a free software world. Adobe needs to make money, every day. Guess what's their target? Not the manufacturers, us!

when I sell a picture I sell a picture. imagine if I find the way to sell the upgrades to the picture every year or so... LOL we don't do that because we can't. Adobe can and in fact does that.

kids

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