Hecate wrote:
[snip]
LOL! Actually, I think the rationale goes like this – smaller manufacturers who need every reason they can think of to get people to buy their cameras will eventually include it. Expect to see Leica, Olympus and Pentax on that list. Nikon and Canon who don’t need Adobe’s "validation" to sell cameras (look at how Nikon have closed off their White Balance to Adobe for ACR) will carry on regardless. They know that they produce the cameras most people want and so aren’t interested. For them, the more proprietary the better. Remember, profit is what counts and if they can make more money with proprietary solutions they will.
I think the above is a reasonable analysis, at least for the next few years. Some qualifications:
1. "… if they can make more money with proprietary solutions …"
The main way (perhaps the only way?) they can make more money with proprietary solutions is to coerce their users into buying their own software. Encrypting part of the raw file, which Nikon did with the D2X raw file, is an example. Since DNG is free to use, the only COST is "the learning curve" – it would cost extra effort for the first camera, simply to learn about it and develop new common firmware, but after that it should become cheaper.
2. "Nikon and Canon who don’t need Adobe’s "validation" to sell cameras".
True, but look at the posts from people who want to use Photoshop to access the raw files of their latest camera. We’ve seen this with the D2X, and the 350D, and the D70s, and now the D50. Nikon and Canon are getting away with it, but they are irritating some of their users in the process. The D2X WB encryption debate probably came as a shock to Nikon, who appear to have lost control of the dialogue worldwide for a while.
3. Some people think DNG will only become important when camera makers adopt it. In fact, they are probably the least important companies! After all, Adobe will keep updating the DNG Converter, so people can convert to DNG right off the memory card, as I do and probably many others do.
What is likely to happen is that the other products used by photographers and users of photographs will steadily increase their use of DNG. Raw converters, photo-editors, viewers, asset management systems, etc, are gradually increasing their use of DNG. There are probably more than 35 non-Adobe products at the moment than can read and/or write DNG.
Those product-makers would probably prefer not to develop new releases for cameras other than Canon & Nikon. They will probably do so, but perhaps slowly. So the other camera makers will gradually switch to DNG, as you say. Once lots of products support DNG, we will have an interesting situation. A camera from one of those minority makers that uses DNG will instantly be supported. But one from Canon or Nikon will take time to be supported! When Leica released its DMR back using DNG, it was ALREADY supported by all users of Photoshop CS & ACR 2.4, with no delay. (Leica shipped Photoshop Elements 3 with the DMR back, instead of developing their own software). My guess is that the new Hasselblads will also be supported without an delay. But we have people posting that Photoshop CS2 (not just CS!) doesn’t support the D50!
Nikon and Canon could reduce the delay by giving Adobe and the others the specification of the raw formats for their new cameras in advance. I’m sure this would work. Adobe aren’t trying the screw the camera makers. But will Nikon and Canon do this?
Nikon appear to want to coerce their users to buy their own software. But I don’t think Canon do. How long will it be before Canon realise that using a proprietary raw format has no commercial benefit whatsoever, but in fact causes delays for their users?
—
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/ http://www.birdsandanimals.info/