--- bud kuenzli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > adding to my other comment about my fear of formats > and future > compatibility, now that Adobe has created their OWN > "raw" format, > it's just a question of time before they try to > strong-arm canon, > nikon and such to adopt THEIR format. At least > that's what I'm > worried about.
The "format" of RAW is dictated by the sensor physics, geometry and masking used. I don't think that RAW and DNG are competing here. DNG cannot be specific to any sensor. The only way Adobe can force Canon/Nikon is if they use a sensor which captures data the way DNG format is: ie they have exactly the same (interchangable ?) sensors ! I don't see that happening. Far for being competitors, according to Adobe's own page, the DNG is just meant as a way to archive those RAW files *after* converting them to a standardized "DNG format" - perhaps a converter for each camera body. It is just another step in the workflow: http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/main.html A bigger question is what information will be lost while converting from say, a CR2 to DNG ? > We'll see how long .cr2 and the rest > are supported. It is possible that the CR2 was a result in improvemnet in the sensor physics/geometry rather than another format just for the heck of it. - Harman __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
