The Nuke mechanism for finding Deep files works by extension at the moment, so it will be hard if they're not called something like .dexr or .dsxr or something different from .exr (I think, but of course the Foundry folks here can correct me)
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 12:25 AM, Christian Bloch <blo...@blochi.com> wrote: > Completely agree. > > As somebody who was watching EXR usage grow in the photography field, and > actively pushing for it, I think a standardized secondary extension will be > very helpful. Otherwise it runs into the danger of turning into a minefield > like TIF. Fine when it's optional, but it should not grow wild. > > DXR and SXR sound logical to me, but your point about the audible > similarity and possible miscommunications is a good one. It's just that I > wouldn't know anything better. ODZ just sounds like an oddball. I've > already forgotten what it stands for… The good part about the *XR notation > is, that I can stumble over a forgotten file like that in 5 years and will > remember that it's a flavor of EXR, and if I happen to have no VFX software > here I can rename it and have a peek in a (thankfully already) huge amount > of programs. > > Blochi > > > On Jul 19, 2012, at 10:07 PM, Peter Hillman wrote: > > > Now's the chance to define what that is, so we only end with one > alternate extension. The argument about if and where that alternative > should be used is a different discussion, isn't it? > > > _______________________________________________ > Openexr-devel mailing list > Openexr-devel@nongnu.org > https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel > -- I think this situation absolutely requires that a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part. And we're just the guys to do it.
_______________________________________________ Openexr-devel mailing list Openexr-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/openexr-devel
