DSLRUsers.com

http://www.openraw.org/

These guys are a new organisation about deciphering RAW info and making it freely available (thanks, now I feel ok to buy a D2X )

Thanks for the link Glen - looks like the kind of site we need to make a comment on.

Going OT, followed the link to Bill Biggarts final exposures. Man how unlucky was that guy. Captures the first tower so close to it falling. Then captures all the survivers. Then is at an underpass when the second collapses and gets totalled.

Back OT great to see the big companies being stood up to, be interesting to see how far they get

Chris

All the issues raised in openraw site are basically addressed (or attempted to be) by .DNG format, announced back in Feb was it?! If you read between the lines, most of the issues are basically based on the controversy over Nikon's decision to encrypt WB data on their newer cameras - although no names are specifically mentioned.

Onyx wrote:All the issues raised in openraw site are basically addressed (or attempted to be) by .DNG format, announced back in Feb was it?! If you read between the lines, most of the issues are basically based on the controversy over Nikon's decision to encrypt WB data on their newer cameras - although no names are specifically mentioned.

Onyx.

You're right, but in the back of my mind I keep wondering whether Adobe see DNG as the new pdf or postscript cash cow. They have a history of establishing/developing standards that only they know 100% of then making money by leveraging that. Leaves me about as cautious as I am when Micro$loth do the same. [Of course Nikon or any other camera manufacturer developing a custom raw format is doing the same thing - still doesn't make me trust Adobe)

I should read the front page of D70.net more offen......... and I will....

bp

Onyx wrote:All the issues raised in openraw site are basically addressed (or attempted to be) by .DNG format, announced back in Feb was it?! If you read between the lines, most of the issues are basically based on the controversy over Nikon's decision to encrypt WB data on their newer cameras - although no names are specifically mentioned.

While I'm adamantly opposed to Nikon's encryption nonsense, I'm not a DNG supporter. The biggest problem with DNG, so I've read from the guys supposedly in the know, is that it uses a compression scheme that is not compatible with Nikon's current compression. Not a big deal in itself, but DNG's compression is heavily in favor of Canon's compression, which is apparently hardwired in their cameras. That is surely offensive to Nikon...

I don't profess to know which scheme is better or if the differences are meaningful or trivial. I'm looking at it from the standpoint of other camera makers and can easily see why they'd reject it out of hand. Nobody is going to want to copy Canon's compression.

Seems to me that for DNG to work, it would have to fully support several compression schemes and give a lot of latitude for individual maker concerns in other areas as well.

A common format would be great, I suppose, but just having open documentation on the raw data, would serve the same purpose without requiring that a maker submit to what might be seen as a subordinate role. Until the makers see a tangible benefit from a standard raw format, the open format is probably the best the consumer could hope for.