I know, but it allows not to white balance the RAW file? and it allows not to convert to an output colour profile?
My ACR doesn't.
Select a RAW.
Open RAW in ACR.
Click the Save button.
Select DNG as the output format.
Check the linear option.
The file is saved as a demosaiced linear RGB, no white balancing. The conversion settings you choose (white balance, etc) are not applied to the data, only stored as metadata tags. The only thing done to the RAW data is that it is scaled 0-65535 regardless of the number of bits/sample from the camera, and each Bayer RAW pixel value has two interpolated values added to it to create an RGB pixel value. You still have total flexibility to white balance as you choose, color processing is identical to the original RAW, you can select whatever output color space ACR supports. If you compare a conversion of the linear DNG to a conversion of the original RAW with the same settings, they will match exactly.
Which is why I don't buy the whole "WB and CA correction must be done before demosaic" argument. If that was true, the conversion of the linear DNG would have color artifacts and other problems not found in the direct RAW conversion. But don't take my word for it; I have two DNG files created from the same original RAW. The first link is to the normal, non-demosaiced DNG. The second link is to the demosaiced linear RGB DNG version of the same RAW. Open them both in ACR, and do a side-by-side comparison converting both with the same settings. The results will be identical, at least if you use the same version of ACR used to convert the linear DNG. (I'm still running CS2.)http://www.visual-vacations.com/images/200..._0004-Bayer.dnghttp://www.visual-vacations.com/images/200...0004-LinRGB.dng
For downloading convenience, it may be better to download only the Bayer DNG and convert your own linear version for comparison purposes. Or use one of your own RAWs and skip the download thing altogether.