On mercredi, sep 29, 2004, at 13:14 Europe/Paris, Douglas Burns wrote:
Am I the only one who is at a complete loss as to what the point Martin
Orpen is trying to make. I can't work out why he appears to be so negative
about the whole issue.
No, you're not alone. Photographers have been fretting about the archival risks involved in manufacture's RAW formats for ages - along comes something with the potential to solve that problem, and we get a load of negative feedback...
Building DNG upon the TIFF structure seems fortuitous for everyone else rather than an attempt by Adobe to regain control of the TIFF format.
As for laughing at the name; the comparison between a digital RAW and conventional negative has been made many times. It is helpful in introducing the concept of what a RAW files is within the wide variety of file formats. I assume Adobe have adopted Digital Negative for the same reason they chose 'Filters' as a name within Photoshop. If it raises a smile, so what? It's far from DUMb.
Regards, William Davies.
=============================================================== GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
