Bob Croxford wrote:
Dear Richard
I have lived long enough to have seen formats come and go. The instamatic cartridge and the Kodak disk are just two. I am also glad not to have to deal with 5 part .dcs files anymore.
The only thing that interests me is the 'quality' of the file. If the .DNG is going to mean that C1 fails and we are left with PS ACR then I am looking at a drop in quality. Until I see a proper review of a DNG file processed in C1 to the same standard as before I am not convinced. The compression worries me. As the saying goes; If its too good to be true it is too good to be true. The 1ds already compresses RAW files to a very manageable size.
The worries about obsolesence are what are called 'Baroque Worries'. In other words they are not real until they happen. With the introduction of OSX we are looking at a period of OS stability not seen since DOS, an OS I still use on a daily basis.
Bob Croxford
The way I see is: the DNG is just another way to describe the data output by a camera, just as much as the original RAW file. I believe we can compare with the capability of, say, three programs that are able to open .bmp, .psd and.tif files. It does not matter what each program can make to the files, as long as they are lossless and can carry all the data they are capable to. If - and when - all RAW converters become able to convert a DNG file, we will keep on doing the same thing to our files, regardless of in which format they were stored.
My 2 reals ;-)
Rodolpho Pajuaba
===============================================================
GO TO http://www.prodig.org for ~ GUIDELINES ~ un/SUBSCRIBING ~ ITEMS for SALE
