DSLRUsers.com

Funny, I just read this and my first thought was, I have to share it! Nikon, Nikon, Nikon.....do they realize that if the encryption has been broken in a month that it is worthless anyways? How long until someone fixes the Adobe Raw plugin to read the whitebalance (already done I'm sure). What then, go after the photographers? For what, editing their own photos.

Hey Nikon, is anyone awake over there????????????

If they continue this trend it will just push users to different brands. I don''t have any use for a camera that takes photos that the MFG won't let me have the right to access. Canon is starting to look good.....

Andy

Agreed.

It's little things like this that make you feel not quite as good about purchasing and going with a certain company. I hope that Nikon can wake up and realize that as far as making sales, their clients have to feel good about their buying decision. It's much easier to keep current clientele than to poach new ones. I don't think I'll ever use Capture because I don't really know if it's worth it and I'm know PS well enough now. If Nikon thinks that they can get someone like me to switch over while remaining loyal they have another thing coming.

exactly. I have been in photoshop for over 10 years now. Whats easier, learning new software or trading in a camera.....

A

Hi All,

I know: this is not a big favour from Nikon to treat their loyalty customers but what can we do to get Nikon seeing the pros & cons in doing this.

We just wait to see what the outcome is and the reaction from Adobe.
At the end, both parties (Nikon/ Adobe/ Bible etc..) will share, absorb the cost and passing to us.

We're the consumer and we'll pay for it if we need or require.

It's the same story of the price for petrol/ fuel over here, 1 litre of PULP is AU$1.20, if the price is up to AU$1.50 or $2.00/ litre, we will have to pay for it to get our car on the road, it touches our nerves, but nothing we can do.

Here's where I sent a nastygram about this issue and the continuing issue with the non-standard ISO EXIF nonsense with the d70. I got an automated response verifying receipt of the email.

This came from the d100 forum on dpreview.

support@nikontech.com

Attn: Digital tech manager.

I've also heard of this issues months now and assuming, now it's time for Adobe to start their game:

"The fact that the Auto WB info of the D2X is encrypted in Nikon's .nef files has been know for months now. Eric Hyman from BibbleLabs mentioned it loud and clear, and rightfully boasted about his ability to break the encryption in Bibble 4.2.

Am I the only one to be surprised that Adobe's announcement comes out just hours before the release of 2 new Nikon DSLR bodies?"

Birddog114 wrote:I've also heard of this issues months now and assuming, now it's time for Adobe to start their game:

"The fact that the Auto WB info of the D2X is encrypted in Nikon's .nef files has been know for months now. Eric Hyman from BibbleLabs mentioned it loud and clear, and rightfully boasted about his ability to break the encryption in Bibble 4.2.

Am I the only one to be surprised that Adobe's announcement comes out just hours before the release of 2 new Nikon DSLR bodies?"

I'm no Adobe fan. I hate the Adobe activation crap and have no intention of upgrading to CS2. But, in this instance, I think they're doing us a favor by pressuring Nikon to stop with the proprietary nonsense.

I own and use capture 4, but it's a dog, by just about any comparison that I've seen. It's one of the reasons I shoot JPG... If Nikon made capture more viable, more people would buy it. Using the file format in an attempt to force people to use it is another PITA, just like having to use Nikon Transfer to move the d70 ISO and other info from non-standard places that it is stored now. That even wouldn't be all that bad, except it still isn't put in the proper place for other EXIF readers to find it....

KerryPierce wrote:Here's where I sent a nastygram about this issue and the continuing issue with the non-standard ISO EXIF nonsense with the d70. I got an automated response verifying receipt of the email.

This came from the d100 forum on dpreview.

support@nikontech.com

Attn: Digital tech manager.

Kerry,
IMHO, this is Adobe game to get all the manufacturers to agree or approve the .DNG and become one standard format for RAW files in Adobe Systems.

Here're few thoughts from other sites:

"Adobe isn't some white knight here people. They want everyone to convert to DNG as a defacto standard so they can reap the rewards for decades just like they have with Acrobat. It is business. Nothing more, nothing less. The sky is not falling."

and:
"If Adobe didn't make a big stink about it being Nikon's fault, every reviewer would be harping on how lame ACR is for not fully supporting the D2x. No need to look for a second gunman on the grassy knoll."

KerryPierce wrote:

Birddog114 wrote:I've also heard of this issues months now and assuming, now it's time for Adobe to start their game:

"The fact that the Auto WB info of the D2X is encrypted in Nikon's .nef files has been know for months now. Eric Hyman from BibbleLabs mentioned it loud and clear, and rightfully boasted about his ability to break the encryption in Bibble 4.2.

Am I the only one to be surprised that Adobe's announcement comes out just hours before the release of 2 new Nikon DSLR bodies?"

I'm no Adobe fan. I hate the Adobe activation crap and have no intention of upgrading to CS2. But, in this instance, I think they're doing us a favor by pressuring Nikon to stop with the proprietary nonsense.

I own and use capture 4, but it's a dog, by just about any comparison that I've seen. It's one of the reasons I shoot JPG... If Nikon made capture more viable, more people would buy it. Using the file format in an attempt to force people to use it is another PITA, just like having to use Nikon Transfer to move the d70 ISO and other info from non-standard places that it is stored now. That even wouldn't be all that bad, except it still isn't put in the proper place for other EXIF readers to find it....

Kerry,
Again IMHO:
It is a well organized attack by one software vendor (Adobe) against another competing vendor (Nikon) who happened to take a not too smart decision going against the fow of openess.

KerryPierce wrote:Here's where I sent a nastygram about this issue and the continuing issue with the non-standard ISO EXIF nonsense with the d70. I got an automated response verifying receipt of the email.

This came from the d100 forum on dpreview.

support@nikontech.com

Attn: Digital tech manager.

Thankyou Kerry, Email going out today

Birddog114 wrote:IMHO, this is Adobe game to get all the manufacturers to agree or approve the .DNG and become one standard format for RAW files in Adobe Systems.

That may well be true, but is a separate issue, IMO. It doesn't alter the fact that Nikon need not submit to the DNG format by simply following the other standards and not encrypting their NEFs.

Adobe bites for a lot of reasons, but they'd not be able to point a finger at Nikon, if it weren't for the encryption. If Nikon simply ignored DNG, Adobe would still be forced to update ACR, for each new Nikon camera, because of user demand. The encryption opened the door for Adobe, which might prove to be a good thing, in the end. Fussing around with stupid little things like this, that hurts their user base, doesn't make sense to me....

Yeah, I guess it is possible that this is being spun by adobe. The fact is that they're both acting upon corporate interest--I expect nothing less--except Nikon of all people should be sensitive of their consumers' needs. Perhaps they will come out with something that explains their position soon. Until then it looks like they are losing ground. The fact that probably 70% of their users rely on CS should be a pretty big indicator that to better serve their clientele they need to steamline their relationship. Adobe is in a different market. They market to graphic artists, designers etc as well as photographers. They are out trying to suck up as much market as possible and brand loyalty isn't as a necessity.

MHD wrote:Thankyou Kerry, Email going out today

Cool beans! I hope you included your disgust with the non-standard placement of the d70 ISO EXIF info.

Yes, exactly! that why Adobe has their excuses in their new release withour ACR.
And we'll have to pay if we need it at the end as optional.

This kind of thing from Nikon is what leads to cracks floating around on the net - and there will be a crack for WB in PSCS, you can bet on it..

(Example - I have purchased several versions of MS Flight Simulator over the years. The latest requires disk 1 to be in the drive when you are using the program, a damn nuisance at least. It took 5 minutes to find a No CD crack. I use it.)

The people who make these poor decisions as Nikon has in this instance create far more problems than I think they realise - treating your cusomers badly has never been a strong marketing ploy.

GregB,
Adobe will be heading the same way as Microsoft, annual license fees for using ACR
And Nikon will introduces the NC ver. 5 no cost bundle with the new digital cameras

Birddog114 wrote:GregB,
Adobe will be heading the same way as Microsoft, annual license fees for using ACR
And Nikon will introduces the NC ver. 5 no cost bundle with the new digital cameras

If Nikon included Capture with their cameras at minimal upgrade cost I guess I might understand the protecting of their property. As it is they employ sinister tactics in extracting money from clientele.

Birddog114 wrote:Kerry,
Again IMHO:
It is a well organized attack by one software vendor (Adobe) against another competing vendor (Nikon) who happened to take a not too smart decision going against the fow of openess.

Ahh, but Birdy it is not an attack from Adobe. They just stated they will not support Nikon Raw for fear of being attacked. The attacks are coming straight from the consumers. As stated, the encryption was broken quite easily. Why would Nikon put lame duck encryption in its format? Obviously not for security reasons. The correlation has to be made that it is to limit others programs and therfore software companies by virtue of copyright infringement. Unfortunately, the only ones they will end up limiting are their loyal (not for long) customers. Either way, Bibble is looking to get themselves sued, Adobe is sitting on the sidelines, and Nikon is playing in the freeway. Nobody will win on this one....

Andy

dooda,
I have just a simple question for you:
If you have a nice photo and it's with your copyright, will you let me use it freely to manipulate it or use it in commercial advertising without paying you a fees or your approval?

IMHO, that how ADOBE and NIKON are in the game.
Perhaps, Nikon is seeking a share in Adobe or third party software developer bot none of them pay.

Andy,

Next annoucement from Adobe:

"You require to pay an additional annual fees if you want to have the upgrade ACR"

Or get a cracked version on the web for free.

Birddog114 wrote:dooda,
I have just a simple question for you:
If you have a nice photo and it's with your copyright, will you let me use it freely to manipulate it or use it in commercial advertising without paying you a fees or your approval?

IMHO, that how ADOBE and NIKON are in the game.
Perhaps, Nikon is seeking a share in Adobe or third party software developer bot none of them pay.

The problem here is, Nikon and Adobe are limiting what I can do with MY photo. If I want to edit in PSCS should I not be able to? I bought a camera to take pictures, not have dictated to me what I can and can't do with them. Whats to stop Nikon from completely encrypting every photo unless you pay a monthly service fee to have it decrypted by their software?? I know it is far fetched (they would go out of business over night) but that doesn't change the fact that they are limiting the end users abilities to process.

Hypo: I am a pro photog with 100k invested in Nikon gear. I process my images in PSCS because my editors will ony accept that format. Now, I must sell my Nkon equipment abd replace it or quit my job and seek work elsewhere. How is this ethical????

I think I just took a step towards Canon...where will it go, where will it end, either way Nikon definately crossed a line here.

Andy

Andy,
Yes, I agreed all your expressions but come back to the old day of MS and today licensing system from them. People have to pay for their usage at the end.
It'll be heading that way in all Camera's manufacturers if this is the case.
And I'm sure Adobe will learn and go thru this way soon.

Thank god for open source...

Birddog114 wrote:Andy,

Next annoucement from Adobe:

"You require to pay an additional annual fees if you want to have the upgrade ACR"

Or get a cracked version on the web for free.

What is to prevent Nikon from doing the same thing? With Adobe, I can find alternative, competing software to edit my photos. If Nikon holds my camera hostage, that's not something I can easily get around. More importantly, I shouldn't have to fuss with that to begin with. I bought a camera. The software to make the camera work best for me, shouldn't be an issue for Nikon to worry about. If they want to compete for my software dollars, that's a different issue that they are also not doing very well at, IMO....

I do not think that Adobe will go down the course of charging for ACR.

What you have to remember is that Nikon is not the only manufacturer and Adobe released ACR to cover more than just Nikon. BTW - Adobe must be getting rather big with the buying of Macromedia

Kerry,

Nikon may want a share in Adobe Sytems, same as Canon or Milnolta or Fujitsu or other, if Nikon get this ones over Adobe, and perhaps Adobe doesn't want to pay for their rights to work, develop the upgraded ACR bundle in their new PSCS2.
Who knows? It's corporate strategies and marketing, one day we will learn and I don't think Nikon is stupidly doing what they're doing.

By the end of the day, we're suffering

Birddog114 wrote:Kerry,

Nikon may want a share in Adobe Sytems, same as Canon or Milnolta or Fujitsu or other, if Nikon get this ones over Adobe, and perhaps Adobe doesn't want to pay for their rights to work, develop the upgraded ACR bundle in their new PSCS2.
Who knows? It's corporate strategies and marketing, one day we will learn and I don't think Nikon is stupidly doing what they're doing.

By the end of the day, we're suffering

Dunno. I don't pretend to understand corporate stuff. I do know that if they want me to buy a d2x and/or a new d70, they're going to have to dump this stupidity. Not because the issue itself is a really huge deal, but because it bodes ill for the future, meaning more nonsense to come down the road.

Sony tried the same nonsense with their refusal to support CF in favor of their proprietary memory sticks. In the end, they lost a lot of customers and still ended up supporting CF. How stupid is that?

so is it just the WB info that is encrypted, leaving the rest of the RAW data available?

So does this just mean that we will not get an initial guess at the WB put into the raw conversion (as in we will have to tweak all images)

Kerry is sooooo right - Sony are innovators but generally losers:

BETA so much better than VHS - but who won!
MINIDISK - bought mine in the UK years before they did major advertising in Australia only to be overtaken by MP3

and the list goes on. . .

MHD wrote:so is it just the WB info that is encrypted, leaving the rest of the RAW data available?

So does this just mean that we will not get an initial guess at the WB put into the raw conversion (as in we will have to tweak all images)

 AFAIK, that's correct. ACR won't read the "as shot" WB info, so each image will require your tweak. Dunno if that can be done in batch, but it's still a needless hassle.... ACR already ignores a lot of the other "as shot" image tags, which is one of the reasons I don't like it. Fussing with each image to mimick camera settings that I intentionally set, such as preset WB, is not appealing to me. On the odd happening that I do things right with the camera, I don't want to have to fuss with it all over again...

MHD wrote:so is it just the WB info that is encrypted, leaving the rest of the RAW data available?

So does this just mean that we will not get an initial guess at the WB put into the raw conversion (as in we will have to tweak all images)

MHD,
1/ Yes, just the WB is encrypted
2/ Yes, it's correct

Kerry,
I've got your rant! but sit back and relax, blue sky will turn up after the storm

Is there anyone going to jumpship about this issue and want to get rid of your Nikon gears, please PM me

We have rain and storm today but it'll be beautiful tomorrow as said

and if you plan to sell them cheap PM me!!!

(or you can just give them to me)

MHD wrote:and if you plan to sell them cheap PM me!!!

(or you can just give them to me)

MHD,

Can I suggest something:

You and me will form up a venture "Jumpship Consortium" especially use for anyone who wants to jumpship and discard their Nikon gears cos this issue against their wills.

Birddog114 wrote:Kerry,
I've got your rant! but sit back and relax, blue sky will turn up after the storm

I sincerely hope you're right. I'll wait and see what they do.

If they fix this, I'll continue with my plans to buy the d2x and another d70, but I'm not going to spend that kind of money until I know where they're headed. If they don't fix it, well I left Sony for pulling a similar kind of stupidity. That's why I am shooting a d70 and not a Sony 828.

Don't get your hopes up though. I'm not gonna sell for cheap...

Kerry,
You can't part and leave us behind cos just one small issue and I don't think it's a long strategy from Nikon.
You said: "Hony" or "Sony"?

Birddog114 wrote:Kerry,
You can't part and leave us behind cos just one small issue and I don't think it's a long strategy from Nikon.

I know it seems like a small issue, but I'm contemplating spending some serious ( to me ) money with Nikon. I'm concerned about the attitude being displayed here and I sincerely hope that it's just a blunder and not a long term strategy toward proprietary stuff and ignoring the user base.

You said: "Hony" or "Sony"?

heh, they are certainly capable of some bonehead stuff, but they did 2 things that I absolutely loved. First would be the Nightshot InfraRed mode and 2nd would be the swiveling lens. I still have and use my 717, which has been converted to full IR. Being able to shoot IR, hand held, is simply too cool and a ton of fun.

That's the issue that drove me away from them. The 707 & 717 models had an artificial shutter speed limitation of 1/60s in the IR mode and IR was disabled completely in manual modes. Lots of users, including me, asked them to remove the manual mode IR restrictions or at least a more reasonable higher SS limit, such as 1/125 or 1/250. Sony not only ignored that, they reduced the artificial SS limit to 1/30s on the 828. phooey, that was enough for me.

One other point here. Bibble Labs have RELEASED an updated version of Bibble that decodes (cracks) the WB encryption. If Nikon is going to use DCMA to sue, then Bibble will force their hand.

I reckon Nikon are dumb, but I think Adobe are being disingenuous. What if they weren't ready to release the updated ACR and said so. They'd cop flak. Maybe Nikon gave them the excuse they needed to not ship it without having to say they weren't ready. Who knows.

Guess this will be good for Bibble sales BTW I have tried, but didn't like Bibble for my workflow so this is certainly no push to switch to that product. In fact I quite like NC and use it more than PSCS - go figure

This is certainly a hot topic around the forums at the moment. I wonder if it's an ingenious marketing ploy between Nikon & Adobe ? They say that there is no such thing as bad publicity ?!? everyone seems to be talking about PSCS2, ACR and the D2X.....

I personally don't think Nikon would go down the road of forcing their customers to pay annual fees in order to use their cameras. This would be certain suicide for the company, and would only push their customers towards their competitors products...which isn't sound business practice.

In the end, after all the huff & puff settles, I'm sure we will all be bragging about our latest & greatest Nikons for years to come.....

....and if I'm wrong, we can always become Canon converts & bag the hell out of Nikon (which isn't anything new).

I know one priest in local church and will ask him one for free

Just noticed there's another thread here on this topi: http://www.d70users.net/viewtopic.php?t=4858&highlight=

Wow, I didn't realize the rest of you would get as upset about this as I am (in either direction).

To me, it's this simple:

1) i go out and blow 10k on nikon gear

2) I blow another large wad of cash on CS (widely respected by most everyone as the best all-around PP app)

3) I get home, snap my first shots, and CAN'T EVEN VIEW THEM

4) I develop a drinking habit


God for bid I use some alternative OS that Nikon doesn't offer software for and I may as well kiss RAW on Nikon goodbye altogether. This kind of thing has the folks that never switched to digital laughing and pointing all over again.

Nikon is not going to produce a better PP app than adobe. I've been using photoshop since the 3.x days. Nikon should either:

a) offer nikon capture for free with less features
b) buy adobe
c) offer a BETTER raw plugin for CS for a SMALL fee

I won't 'go canon' if Nikon sticks to their guns here, but I will sidestep them and just apply whatever cracks I need to to get my 'fair use' out of the products I buy. They'll reduce any chance of me spending money on their software to ZERO.


-Rich

NetMagi wrote:
I won't 'go canon' if Nikon sticks to their guns here, but I will sidestep them and just apply whatever cracks I need to to get my 'fair use' out of the products I buy. They'll reduce any chance of me spending money on their software to ZERO.


-Rich

I imagine that's what most of us would do.....though I don't see it coming to that.

The irony is:

I bought Nikon because they have the better product and build. I don't buy capture because it isn't better product. Nikon, instead of competing with quality product, compete with lame ass encryption. What a pansy ass move on their part. They should be spanked and sent to their room...wait, no...I should be spanked and sent to my room, Nikon should just be sued or something.

KerryPierce wrote:Here's where I sent a nastygram about this issue and the continuing issue with the non-standard ISO EXIF nonsense with the d70. I got an automated response verifying receipt of the email.

This came from the d100 forum on dpreview.

support@nikontech.com

Attn: Digital tech manager.

I'm digging this thread back up because I think every single one of us who uses the Photoshop Camera Raw plugin (or plans to in the future) should send Nikon an eMail to the address above and let them know how we feel about this White Balance encryption crap. (I don't know a better word for it that isn't more profane.) Wow, this is big type!

I was going to buy a D70s body as a backup, now if I buy an extra body I guess it will have to be a D70 instead. Then again, there will probably be a bootleg PS Raw Plugin soon. Hell, I don't know what I'm gonna do now! What are your thoughts or suggestions?

SoCal Steve wrote:I'm digging this thread back up because I think every single one of us who uses the Photoshop Camera Raw plugin (or plans to in the future) should send Nikon an eMail to the address above and let them know how we feel about this White Balance encryption crap. (I don't know a better word for it that isn't more profane.) Wow, this is big type!

I was going to buy a D70s body as a backup, now if I buy an extra body I guess it will have to be a D70 instead. Then again, there will probably be a bootleg PS Raw Plugin soon. Hell, I don't know what I'm gonna do now! What are your thoughts or suggestions?

Actually, the issue is much more of a problem than just with ACR. It will affect every piece of software that currently works with d70 nef files, for both viewing, converting and editing.

Some of the programs will update and decrypt the files or use the Nikon SDK. Others will simply not utilize the "as shot" white balance, which is what ACR is supposedly going to do. Others won't support the format at all. I wouldn't count on a bootleg ACR that will decrypt the file, but I suppose that it's possible. Bibble seems to be the best alternative at the moment, according to what I've read.

One of the biggest problems with this will be that the NEF will no longer be a relatively safe way to archive, because there's no guarantee that anyone will care about these NEFs 3, 4, or 5 years from now. That would mean dual archiving, with both NEF & TIF, if you're smart. Of course, that means a lot more storage and hassles to keep track.

There are many ways to work around the issue, but, in the end, it's nothing but a needless PITA...