on 29/9/04 9:32 am, matthew ward wrote:

> 
> On 29 Sep 2004, at 07:26, Martin Orpen wrote:
> 
>> I'm presuming that Adobe have just thrown their weight behind
>> hijacking the
>> TIFF data structure by renaming it DNG.
> 
> I understand that Adobe own TIFF.

Your understanding is correct.

But owning an industry standard for which you don't get paid usage fees is
probably something that the suits at Adobe find uncomfortable.

Remember that these are the people who earned a fortune from us paying a fat
fee every time we bought a product that used PostScript. Actually, scratch
that sentence - I've never met a photographer who'd been prepared to buy a
RIP so you're probably unaware of that <big grin>

Decisions about changing the standard are handed over to an advisory group
of industry experts, so there's not much scope there either if you want to
get in a bit of corporate branding.

Better to invent a new *standard* which walks like a TIFF and quacks like a
TIFF but is actually a DNG. Nobody is going to put up with another
proprietary format, so they have to stress the "open" bit.

But the important thing is that it will be Adobe's DNG format. Whereas TIFF
was created by Aldus and is such an "open" standard that it's been
*recreated*, used and abused by every camera manufacturer who can be
bothered to employ a programmer for a day.

Even the name Digital *Negative* makes me smile - like negatives have got
anything to do with CCDs. They could have used "Digital Gum Bichromate" and
shortened it to DUM or something?

>From now on I'm using Adobe's new DUM standard for all of my archiving :-)

-- 
Martin Orpen
Idea Digital Imaging Ltd -- The Image Specialists
http://www.idea-digital.com


===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE

Reply via email to