Call for DNG support from camera manufacturers Locked

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

in case you couldn't understand my post then you can read it again

do you know who owns the copyrights of the dng (and specifications)?

Jeff Schewe wrote:

cityphotographer wrote:

now the best part (it involves you, and users like you promoting the
adobe's standard). Please read carefully:

what did Adobe do?

instead of trying to reason (with money,. most likely) they made a bet:

the bet: you (Nikon) wanna see how I bypass your stupid code with the
help of the users (who then have to pay me for whatever I do and say)

and Nikon said: no.. they are not stupid, they know that you'll ask
them money, and money ...

adobe: watch me, all I have to do is to get few of them on my side
and then promote my standard instead of yours.

Nikon : and then they'll have to buy your stuff or else? nah.. they
are not that stupid. You won't even make it to the door of the bank.

and Adobe is still trying, hard.

The cryptic way you write makes it difficult to comment on line by
line, so sorry about the lengthy quote...

The fairy tale you are spinning regarding Nikon's white balance
encryption and Adobe's refusal to decode it is simply that...a fairy
tale and not at all representative of the facts. The Nikon White
Balance data in the D2x (as well as the D50) was indeed encrypted
because Nikon couldn't figure out how to store their new and far more
extensive white balance data formulation in the tags they had used
before (the private maker notes). So, in order to ensure that the
camera could communicate with their software (which Nikon sells btw)
they encrypted the data and decrypted it in the software.

What Nikon didn't realize (because it was never their intent to hide
the data) was that in the US, we have something called the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act and the people working on decoding the
encrypted white balance data were, by contract precluded form doing
any decryption. So, the then newly released version of Camera Raw
(2.0 in PS CS2) did NOT include the new Nikon cameras...

Nikon was actually rather sorry about the whole episode and to
address the situation, released a special mini-SDK for the purposes
of decoding the white balance data. Seems Nikon didn't INTEND to
encrypt the data to prevent others form accessing it, but it was the
only way the newly reformulated white balance calculations could be
stored and passed on to their software. Nikon never guessed that
Adobe (and others) would view that as an anti-theft measure and
refuse to decode the data. See, it's another case where having a
standard would have HELPED the photographers...

The net result is that Nikon and Canon (and a few others) try to get
final production model cameras to Adobe for testing on a regular
basis...but there's always a lag.

As far as your understanding of the Nikon White Balance
encryption...well, SciFi or fairy tail is what I would call YOUR
version of the events...if you ant to talk facts, not fairly tales,
fine...let's do so but so far, about all I get from you is the
feeling you walk around all day wearing tin foil over your head to
keep the CIA from scanning your brain.

Ironically, the accidental white balance encryption would not have
been an issue if Nikon had been using DNG as a file format since DNG
has a bit more robust private maker note capability. The Nikon
failure actually points out the fact that Nikon's file format
capabilities are something south of optimal, ya know? Kinda helps
prove my point.

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