Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: DNG Settings  (Read 21977 times)

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11311
    • Echophoto
Re: DNG Settings
« Reply #40 on: July 03, 2014, 12:23:34 am »

Well, DNG is a published standard, nothing to do with Adobe CC. So I don't feel you have a point.

Personally, I feel a well documented standard is a good thing.

Best regards
Erik

good logic - Adobe converts only what they know about, so no extra knowledge or safety are added.

PS: what do you think about Adobe CC - are you feel good about being hostage to your ability to pay in the future ?

Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20673
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: DNG Settings
« Reply #41 on: July 03, 2014, 09:50:44 am »

Well, DNG is a published standard, nothing to do with Adobe CC. So I don't feel you have a point.
Apparently we havn't had enough Adobe blood letting around here so the comment implies we need to 'go there' again. We don't. It's the new "Mac vs. Windows", "Nikon vs. Canon" trolling questions that just clog up the forums. 
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

Vladimirovich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1311
Re: DNG Settings
« Reply #42 on: July 03, 2014, 11:19:36 am »

Well, DNG is a published standard, nothing to do with Adobe CC. So I don't feel you have a point.

the point was about being able to access something and not about documented standard... being a published standard didn't prevent Adobe from not saving something (just because somebody there was thinking that the data was not useful - then they changed their mind w/o much fanfare) or from using documented fields to save undocumented BLOBs

Personally, I feel a well documented standard is a good thing.

very true... and so is the preservation of the data which Adobe didn't do (previously) - so backup of the original raws the way they were created by camera's firmware is the right thing to do - it is a different question from using DNG in your workflow (after you save the originals) or from manufacturers documenting their data in whatever format of raw they choose to use.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2014, 11:22:16 am by Vladimirovich »
Logged

Vladimirovich

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1311
Re: DNG Settings
« Reply #43 on: July 03, 2014, 11:26:59 am »

What it doesn't know, we can't use and that data could be stored for something that does. The bottom line is, the conversion provides us the raw data necessary to render it.

1) today, 2) by Adobe software... you always forget to add that fine print  ;)

because there are software solutions that can use that data... using masked to light data to fix banding was demonstrated for example for Pentax cameras... now of course Adobe preserve that... but they used to delete it before... so that's the point.

All the other bits are capable of being stored

there is a difference between "capable of being stored" and actually storing as Adobe perfectly demonstrated

and of questionable usefulness.

 ;D
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20673
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: DNG Settings
« Reply #44 on: July 03, 2014, 11:29:30 am »

very true... and so is the preservation of the data which Adobe didn't do (previously) - so backup of the original raws the way they were created by camera's firmware is the right thing to do - it is a different question from using DNG in your workflow (after you save the originals) or from manufacturers documenting their data in whatever format of raw they choose to use.
Sure they did. Embed the raw in the DNG if you're so concerned with proprietary data that's basically useless outside any product that doesn't understand that data. Save off the raw as a separate archive. And again, there are provisions in DNG via private tags to put all this basically useless proprietary metadata into the package.
Bottom line: I don't, and many, many users do not have any need or desire to use the camera manufacturer's raw converter. And as such we have no use for proprietary data only it could use. I've been an ACR and LR user from prior to their release. I have at least two other raw converters that support DNG just like the Adobe products, just in case Adobe goes belly up and I can't use their raw converter. All I care about is accessing the DNG raw data in the raw processor(s) of my choice and there's nothing standing in the way of doing that simply by converting to DNG.
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 20673
  • Andrew Rodney
    • http://www.digitaldog.net/
Re: DNG Settings
« Reply #45 on: July 03, 2014, 11:32:09 am »

1) today, 2) by Adobe software... you always forget to add that fine print  ;)
No, as I stated while you were incorrectly typing that above, I have at least two other raw converters that will accept the DNG's I've been using for years without any issues whatsoever.
Quote
because there are software solutions that can use that data... using masked to light data to fix banding was demonstrated for example for Pentax cameras... now of course Adobe preserve that... but they used to delete it before... so that's the point.
I don't use Pentex, I don't care about light data banding fixes, they don't apply. The converters I use don't support that either. Do you shoot with Pentext?
Logged
http://www.digitaldog.net/
Author "Color Management for Photographers".
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up