I'm missing a point here. It seems there are DNGs and DNGs. Another non standardization where precisely it was supposed to be a stable standard ?
You would think that wouldn't you? Not so much. Also most DNG workflows tend to throw away a lot of camera-specific data sets like black calibration files which make a big difference for some kinds of images.
This DNG is a mess. Is it really worth and makes sense?
In the wild west early days of digital photography the only software that could open any given raw file was the manufacturer's software. Now almost all raw files can be open by at least
three different pieces of software and VERY few formats are dropped as that software receives revisions.
The chances are very very diminished (compared to the early days of digital when the chance was very real) that you won't be able to open any raw from today with a few minutes worth of effort in the future.
The only 100% guaranteed future compatible file is a TIFF (mainly because it takes only minutes to write a program that can read/understand a TIFF with complete accuracy).
Doug Peterson (e-mail Me)
Head of Technical Services, Capture Integration
Phase One Partner of the Year
Leaf, Leica, Cambo, Arca Swiss, Canon, Apple, Profoto, Broncolor, Eizo & More
National: 877.217.9870 | Cell: 740.707.2183Newsletter
| RSS FeedBuy Capture One at 10% off