This one time, at band camp, "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IMO, it's an important issue, and the survey, regardless of the bias, > may/could be a starting point for deeper and more valid discussions, as > well as a possible impetus for changes.
I agree that is is most important, the DNG of Adobe is cause for concern as manufacturers line up (Hasselblad, Leica, Ricoh, and Samsung) to have thier camera have the DNG format native to thier bodies. Along with this software manufactures will need to support DNG also. But its an open standard so what is the problem? well, the license from Adobe stipulates.. "Adobe may revoke the rights granted above to any individual or organizational licensee in the event that such licensee or its affiliates brings any patent action against Adobe or its affiliates related to the reading or writing of files that comply with the DNG Specification." How is that open?? If the format is not under the GPL and the source code not available, then it is next to worthless as a universal format. I have never tried converting from DNG to PEF or other RAW formats, so I cannot say what sort of losses that may incur. Adobe is a large commercial entity, call me synical but these sort of dangling carrots leave me somewhat suspicious. If it were truely an open format, why not open source it? discuss Kevin -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
