Why editing software need to be updated for Z8?

[csn]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

 

[AstigmaticOwl]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

Lightroom was ready on day 1 for the Z8. At least, for NEF files. I don't know about HEIF .

 

[csn]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

Lightroom was ready on day 1 for the Z8. At least, for NEF files. I don't know about HEIF .

Yea, that's great. But my question is, why do they even need to bother?! It's the same processor, same sensor. Should produce the same files ...

 

[allanimal]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

Lightroom was ready on day 1 for the Z8. At least, for NEF files. I don't know about HEIF .

Yea, that's great. But my question is, why do they even need to bother?! It's the same processor, same sensor. Should produce the same files ...

at the very least, the camera model in the exif is different

but we don’t know what else Nikon has changed in the raw data or exif of the NEF file

in my early days with the z6ii, we could change the camera model to z6 (as could z7ii users change to z7) using exiftool and everything seemed to work

 

[csn]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

Lightroom was ready on day 1 for the Z8. At least, for NEF files. I don't know about HEIF .

Yea, that's great. But my question is, why do they even need to bother?! It's the same processor, same sensor. Should produce the same files ...

at the very least, the camera model in the exif is different

This is a single line item in the exif. It shouldn't require creating a whole new file type!

but we don’t know what else Nikon has changed in the raw data or exif of the NEF file

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the Z9 and Z8 are internal twins, i.e., same sensor, same processor, etc. That is, the Z8 is a Z9 sans vertical grip. Therefore, it makes no sense for the Z8 to have an entirely new file system.

 

[AstigmaticOwl]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

Lightroom was ready on day 1 for the Z8. At least, for NEF files. I don't know about HEIF .

Yea, that's great. But my question is, why do they even need to bother?! It's the same processor, same sensor. Should produce the same files ...

at the very least, the camera model in the exif is different

This is a single line item in the exif. It shouldn't require creating a whole new file type!

but we don’t know what else Nikon has changed in the raw data or exif of the NEF file

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the Z9 and Z8 are internal twins, i.e., same sensor, same processor, etc. That is, the Z8 is a Z9 sans vertical grip. Therefore, it makes no sense for the Z8 to have an entirely new file system.

At the very least the images will have Z8 rather than Z9 buried in them. Now why some software needs months to handle, I can't say. Possibly the announcement and release just hit them at the wrong time for their release cycle. It is also possible they felt the need to get their hands on a production camera so they could confirm that the files are otherwise the same.

 

[Tim Bury]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

Lightroom was ready on day 1 for the Z8. At least, for NEF files. I don't know about HEIF .

Yea, that's great. But my question is, why do they even need to bother?! It's the same processor, same sensor. Should produce the same files ...

at the very least, the camera model in the exif is different

This is a single line item in the exif. It shouldn't require creating a whole new file type!

but we don’t know what else Nikon has changed in the raw data or exif of the NEF file

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the Z9 and Z8 are internal twins, i.e., same sensor, same processor, etc. That is, the Z8 is a Z9 sans vertical grip. Therefore, it makes no sense for the Z8 to have an entirely new file system.

I would think the same, but it may still need to be a project, and needs validation. I'm not in software development, so I am only guessing if Nikon has not directly confirmed its all the same, and even if they claim it is, they may want to do their due diligence and check thoroughly before they claim their software is compatible.

I'm curious now and may get exif tool later and try changing the camera model to Z9 to see what happens. Assuming that's the only place in the file a raw editor looks, from an earlier comment it sounds like changing in exif tool will work, if in fact the file structures are the same.

 

[jfriend00]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

First, the RAW images are labelled as Z8 images, not Z9 images.

Second, the software that existed before the Z8 existed did not know that something labelled Z8 would work fine with the Z9 processing.

Third, because unknown, future models "may" need different processing, RAW makers default to NOT processing things they don't know about.

Fourth, the fact the DxO is taking until July to support the Z8 is just the timing of their release process vs. when they got a Z8 they could evaluate. Both LightRoom and Capture One have already released support for the Z8. So, this is just DxO being a little slow.

Fifth, for a new camera that works just fine with the processing of some other camera, they usual work-arounds are to either convert to DNG (using a DNG converter that knows the new camera) and process the DNG or manually edit the RAW file to change it to a Z9 file (yes this is possible) so the RAW engine will just process it as it would a Z9.

--
John

 

[areallygrumpyoldsod]

As other have noted most tools work with the Z8 files -- but the one wrinkle is HLG Tone Mode which uses BT.2020 (or REC.2020 if you prefer) as the colour spaces -- AND yes I am speaking about Still images. Lets just call these HLG Raw files from here on.++

All the tools I use and refer to below are configured to utilise ProPhoto RGB as their working space.

NX Studio 1.4.0 (NXS) does a good job as a raw processor -- which comes in useful if you shoot Lossless RAW in HLG. When an HLG Raw files is identified NXS switches into High Dynamic Range profiles. [Under portrait enhancement tools - NXS also indicates ability to apply skin softening and portrait impression balance. The good NEWS is that one can instruct NXS to use Prophoto RGB as its working space and to export files at 16-bit TIFF in Prophoto RGB - so there are limited losses when moving over to another tool to complete editing and processing outputs.

Adobe -- LRC/PS/ACR -- will work with all files and file types -- but it is not clear that LRC/ACR recognise the full scope of HLG RAW files as a result the images are "less" than those processed in NXS. I hope that Adobe are able to provide a flag or metadata indicator that recognises the colour space is Rec-2020 and that the range of the tools in LCR/ACR are enhanced to make full use of the wider gamut of data.

Capture One 23 Pro (C1) -- works with Z8 LOssless RAW files and appears to do a "grand" job with HLG RAW files (better than Adobe, but it is unclear how well C1 works with R.2020 colour space). However, C1's masking tools are seriously lagging behind LRC/ACR and this is a severe impediment to efficient working, the this tool MUST address soon. Sorry old paint on mask without subject masking is done now.

DxO Pure Raw 3 and PhotoLab 6 - simply will not process Lossless Raw files from the Z8 YET -- the DxO website indicates an update is expected in July 2023 which will include Z8 support. [again one wonders how DxO will address the HLR RAW file "opportunity"]

I have posted an initial blog on processing HLF Raw files, which will be updated as I complete my testing

--
areallygrumpyoldsod
Nikon and Hasselblad shooter -- wildlife and and -- https://www.andymillerphoto.co.uk/ https://www.flickr.com/photos/ajm057/

 

[csn]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

First, the RAW images are labelled as Z8 images, not Z9 images.

Doch!

Second ,...

Third, ...

Fourth, ...

Fifth, ...

A digital camera is an embedded system. Basically, a small computer built to perform a specific task, i.e., record images. So with that in mind, when we have two, essentially identical systems, i.e., same circuit board, same image sensor and processor, and both running close to identical firmware, I would expect them to utilize the same file system and produce the same binary output. That some parameters change internally, like model number, etc., should be irrelevant.

Given those two systems, an image processing software that can interpret files produced by one system should be able to interpret files produced by the second system. Or, at least, that would be my expectation. Of course, it is always possible to monkey around with the system such that this won't be the case.

 

[mosswings]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

First, the RAW images are labelled as Z8 images, not Z9 images.

Doch!

Second ,...

Third, ...

Fourth, ...

Fifth, ...

A digital camera is an embedded system. Basically, a small computer built to perform a specific task, i.e., record images. So with that in mind, when we have two, essentially identical systems, i.e., same circuit board, same image sensor and processor, and both running close to identical firmware, I would expect them to utilize the same file system and produce the same binary output. That some parameters change internally, like model number, etc., should be irrelevant.

Given those two systems, an image processing software that can interpret files produced by one system should be able to interpret files produced by the second system. Or, at least, that would be my expectation. Of course, it is always possible to monkey around with the system such that this won't be the case.

Yes, and it's been done before - images from new versions of cameras have been postprocessed by hacking the EXIF file. But this assumes that indeed the RAW files are identical, and doesn't always work.
You appear to be arguing from the perspective of a Nikon insider (not that you are one - we don't know that) and are assuming that 3rd parties would have information about the nature of files for far-future camera releases which would enable them to precode for a whole line of cameras. That's HIGHLY unlikely. Even partnering 3rd parties wouldn't have this sort of technical info given to them until a camera is finalized and first production runs have begun. Then they get to decide when they can release a postprocessing product that conforms to their quality standards. The postprocessing folks are doomed to a life of reacting.
The EXIF contents are the gatekeeper for the general public. Even though the files may be essentially the same, there are usually new features or updates to existing features that may be unique to that camera. So the camera model EXIF tag tells the postprocessing program how to use what it's got under the hood.
Hindsight is 20-20. But that's useless as a deductive tool when a company is zealous about keeping its products' details secret until they're ready for release.

 

[flashpixx]

As other have noted most tools work with the Z8 files -- but the one wrinkle is HLG Tone Mode which uses BT.2020 (or REC.2020 if you prefer) as the colour spaces -- AND yes I am speaking about Still images. Lets just call these HLG Raw files from here on.++

All the tools I use and refer to below are configured to utilise ProPhoto RGB as their working space.

[snip]

I have posted an initial blog on processing HLF Raw files, which will be updated as I complete my testing

Thanks Andy, you're work is appreciated

 

[tundracamper]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

First, the RAW images are labelled as Z8 images, not Z9 images.

Doch!

Second ,...

Third, ...

Fourth, ...

Fifth, ...

A digital camera is an embedded system. Basically, a small computer built to perform a specific task, i.e., record images. So with that in mind, when we have two, essentially identical systems, i.e., same circuit board, same image sensor and processor, and both running close to identical firmware, I would expect them to utilize the same file system and produce the same binary output. That some parameters change internally, like model number, etc., should be irrelevant.

Given those two systems, an image processing software that can interpret files produced by one system should be able to interpret files produced by the second system. Or, at least, that would be my expectation. Of course, it is always possible to monkey around with the system such that this won't be the case.

And so what? How does the software know this is a Z9 file and not a Z7ii file? Well, there is a little line of text in the file that says “Z9” to tell the software what the file type is. Now, the code sees a file with the text “Z8.” That code has never been given instructions on what to do when it sees a “Z8” because the Z8 did not exist when the code was last updated. It would have just as much issue with a Z10 or any other currently undefined image type. So, what does it do? Nothing. If you want, go change the EXIF to say Z9 to see if it works. The software is too stupid to know you are trying to fool it and it will apply the Z9 codec to that file - or crash if the codec won’t work on that file.

Software is not smart enough to know the Z8 is identical to a Z9. It is just a bunch of program lines following very specific set of instructions. It is not smart enough to go outside of all the preset parameters. You should be mad at the developers, not the software. They are the ones that update the code with the one new parameter. This is why there is always a Nikon software update just before a new camera comes out. They have the advantage of knowing what is coming and can make those updates in advance. Not sure why you find this so hard to understand.

 

[LukeP_Photo]

I don't know if the OP got the email today as well, but DxO just put out an update for PL6 that includes full support for the Z8. I downloaded it and tried it. It works for lossless and HE raw files. It also downloaded the optics modules for the Z8 and 24-70 f/2.8 and 50 f/1.2 combos as well which were the lenses used.

 

[ggbutcher]

There are all sorts of unique-isms to be accounted for, even for supposedly-identical cameras. One simple one not already mentioned is the border masking of the sensor, those margins could easily be different fur to structural differences of the cameras.

All that aside, in order to accommodate cameras' differences software developers key such on the make/model reported in the metadata. Even if every other factor between two cameras were identical, they'd have to add that make/model to their internal list just to get their software to apply the correct parameters.

 

[michaeladawson]

What don't you get? It's plainly obvious. The .NEF file is labeled internally in the file EXIF that it is a Z8 file. How in hell is a software program supposed to know what to do with a file labeled as Z8 when none has existed before?

If you use an EXIF editor to change the camera tag in the file from Z8 to Z9 the odds are it will open and process just fine.

 

[csn]

I don't know if the OP got the email today as well, but DxO just put out an update for PL6 that includes full support for the Z8. I downloaded it and tried it. It works for lossless and HE raw files. It also downloaded the optics modules for the Z8 and 24-70 f/2.8 and 50 f/1.2 combos as well which were the lenses used.

Yes!!! Thanks, Luke, for the heads up. And thank you DxO for releasing Z8 update early! Just in time for me for a (family) birthday shoot :-D

 

[CAP2904]

Fourth, the fact the DxO is taking until July to support the Z8 is just the timing of their release process vs. when they got a Z8 they could evaluate. Both LightRoom and Capture One have already released support for the Z8. So, this is just DxO being a little slow.

Pleased to see that DXO now supports Z8 which means I can get on with some image processing.

 

[Fullframer]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

Thats why you don't buy all new cameras the first day they come out, esp. if a paid photo shoot. Might not be able to process the RAW files at first for the customer. Didn't have that problem in the film days, lol. I think Photoshop was ready for the Z8 on day 1?

 

[sirhawkeye64]

I'm kinda puzzled by why image editing software need to be updated in order to process Z8 files?

Given that the guts of the Z8 are essentially the same as that of the Z9, shouldn't they be able to handle both files as one and the same?

For example, I use DxO PL6, which supports Z9 RAW but will have to wait till July (of this year) to be able to precess my Z8 files with it. Makes no sense to me.

Lightroom was ready on day 1 for the Z8. At least, for NEF files. I don't know about HEIF .

Yea, that's great. But my question is, why do they even need to bother?! It's the same processor, same sensor. Should produce the same files ...

at the very least, the camera model in the exif is different

This is a single line item in the exif. It shouldn't require creating a whole new file type!

One possibility is If Nikon tweaked the compression algorithm that could cause differences, and LR may need to know about such changes to the algorithm so it can decompress the files properly. Even since they would be from the same sensor and processor, the compression algorithms can differ slightly.

but we don’t know what else Nikon has changed in the raw data or exif of the NEF file

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that the Z9 and Z8 are internal twins, i.e., same sensor, same processor, etc. That is, the Z8 is a Z9 sans vertical grip. Therefore, it makes no sense for the Z8 to have an entirely new file system.