Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Canon Digital Rebel XT, RAW files, and Photoshop

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
May 19, 2005 10:13:31 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Ok, I'm getting a headache trying to figure out the most streamlined
workflow with the current Adobe products that I have. I much prefer using
Adobe's Camera Raw Plug-in over Digital Photo Professional because of the
integrated workflow and more user friendly interface. I've been using
Elements 3.0 but a little while ago I received Photoshop CS as a birthday
gift and have been using that as my primary editing app.

From what I understand given my camera model and Photoshop versions this
what I can do (with the first being my current workflow):

1. RAW -> DPP -> TIFF -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG
2. RAW -> Elements 3.0 with Camera Raw 3.1 -> PSD or JPG
3. RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Elements 3.0 with Camera Raw 3.1 -> PSD or
JPG

I can't do the following, right?:

RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG

I guess I can go back to using Elements 3.0 and option 2 above but Elements
crashes about 20 times more often than CS on my Mac (10 times a day for
Elements rather than 1 every 2 days for CS), that's a big reason I asked for
CS in the first place. And then I could use CS for features not included
with Elements when I need them.

Thanks,
Greg
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 4:31:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:
> "Jeremy Nixon" <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote in message
> news:118qfmug4q9er37@corp.supernews.com...
> > G.T. <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I can't do the following, right?:
> > >
> > > RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG
> >
> > You should be able to, yes.
>
> Thanks, that got me to re-read Adobe's site. It looks like I can use
DNG
> Version 3.1 to convert Rebel XT RAW files to DNG, and then the Camera
Raw
> Plugin from CS to read them.

Is that similar to the 350D? I have personally used the 3.1 DNG
Converter to convert 350D CR2 files and D2X NEF files into DNG, then
process those in ACR 2.4 (Camera Raw plug-in) under CS.

(I did this as an experiment, so I can't comment on the image quality
compared with using the cameras' own software).

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 5:35:26 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> I can't do the following, right?:
>
> RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG

You should be able to, yes.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Related resources
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 5:35:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Jeremy Nixon" <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote in message
news:118qfmug4q9er37@corp.supernews.com...
> G.T. <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
> > I can't do the following, right?:
> >
> > RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG
>
> You should be able to, yes.
>

Thanks, that got me to re-read Adobe's site. It looks like I can use DNG
Version 3.1 to convert Rebel XT RAW files to DNG, and then the Camera Raw
Plugin from CS to read them.

Greg
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 9:57:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:
> On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:13:31 -0700, "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I can't do the following, right?:
> >
> >RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG
>
> Yes, you can do that. But as long as you have the right plug-in you
> should also be able to go:
>
> RAW->Photoshop CS->whatever you want to save it as.
[snip]

Photoshop CS uses ACR 2.x, not 3.x. And ACR 2.x doesn't support the
350D (Rebel XT). And there won't be an ACR 2.5.

That is why the only way to stay with CS & ACR 2.x is to convert the
350D Raw files to DNG first. But ... I've tried the route, and it
works, (and it works for the D2X as well). (The DNG versions for the
350D are about 6% or 7% smaller than the CR2 files, presumably because
of better lossless compression).

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 10:10:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:13:31 -0700, "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

>I can't do the following, right?:
>
>RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG


Yes, you can do that. But as long as you have the right plug-in you
should also be able to go:

RAW->Photoshop CS->whatever you want to save it as.

This is my workflow right now with both .NEF files and .RAF files from
my Nikon and Fuji cameras. I am looking forward to CS2 and it's
ability to batch process raw files.
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 1:22:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Barry Pearson" <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1116574308.347480.74210@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> G.T. wrote:
> > "Jeremy Nixon" <jeremy@exit109.com> wrote in message
> > news:118qfmug4q9er37@corp.supernews.com...
> > > G.T. <getnews1@dslextreme.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I can't do the following, right?:
> > > >
> > > > RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG
> > >
> > > You should be able to, yes.
> >
> > Thanks, that got me to re-read Adobe's site. It looks like I can use
> DNG
> > Version 3.1 to convert Rebel XT RAW files to DNG, and then the Camera
> Raw
> > Plugin from CS to read them.
>
> Is that similar to the 350D?

Yes, it's the Digital Rebel XT in the USA, the 350D Digital or Digital Kiss
N elsewhere.

> I have personally used the 3.1 DNG
> Converter to convert 350D CR2 files and D2X NEF files into DNG, then
> process those in ACR 2.4 (Camera Raw plug-in) under CS.
>
> (I did this as an experiment, so I can't comment on the image quality
> compared with using the cameras' own software).
>

Cool, thanks for the info.

Greg
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 1:24:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"McLeod" <cerveza@xplornet.com> wrote in message
news:nkdr81pjbdfmjidae57fqpqmoifttvaob3@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:13:31 -0700, "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I can't do the following, right?:
> >
> >RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG
>
>
> Yes, you can do that. But as long as you have the right plug-in you
> should also be able to go:
>
> RAW->Photoshop CS->whatever you want to save it as.
>

Nope, not possible with the Rebel XT and later, and CS. It's got to be
Elements 3.0 or CS 2; or convert to a format supported by CS 2.

Greg
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 1:29:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 6krjk$80l$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> G.T. wrote:
>
> > Ok, I'm getting a headache trying to figure out the most streamlined
> > workflow with the current Adobe products that I have. I much prefer
using
> > Adobe's Camera Raw Plug-in over Digital Photo Professional because of
the
> > integrated workflow and more user friendly interface. I've been using
> > Elements 3.0 but a little while ago I received Photoshop CS as a
birthday
> > gift and have been using that as my primary editing app.
> >
> > From what I understand given my camera model and Photoshop versions this
> > what I can do (with the first being my current workflow):
> >
> > 1. RAW -> DPP -> TIFF -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG
> > 2. RAW -> Elements 3.0 with Camera Raw 3.1 -> PSD or JPG
> > 3. RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Elements 3.0 with Camera Raw 3.1 ->
PSD or
> > JPG
> >
> > I can't do the following, right?:
> >
> > RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG
>
> Import from camera or card into PS from RAW. Optionally create a DNG
> version for archive. (though, for me, the camera RAW is a good archive
> format).
>

As mentioned in other responses CS only supports ACR 2.4, ACR 2.4 doesn't
support the Rebel XT. So it depends on which version of PS you're talking
about. My currently available Photoshops are Elements 3.0 and CS. I would
prefer to use CS and will not upgrade to CS 2 just to get better workflow.

Greg
May 20, 2005 4:58:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Barry Pearson" <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1116574308.347480.74210@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Is that similar to the 350D?

Canon Rebel XT is the US name for the Canon 350D

Canon Rebel = Canon 300D

Gawd knows why they didnt use the same name Worldwide :o /
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 4:58:29 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <IYOdnSosaoFITRDfRVnyuA@giganews.com>, Gizmo
<Gizmo@home.now> wrote:

> "Barry Pearson" <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1116574308.347480.74210@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Is that similar to the 350D?
>
> Canon Rebel XT is the US name for the Canon 350D
>
> Canon Rebel = Canon 300D
>
> Gawd knows why they didnt use the same name Worldwide :o /

The Nissan Maxima and Nissan Bluebird say "hi." <G>
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 4:58:30 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Steve Cutchen" <maxfaq@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:200520050758287808%maxfaq@earthlink.net...
> In article <IYOdnSosaoFITRDfRVnyuA@giganews.com>, Gizmo
> <Gizmo@home.now> wrote:
>
> > "Barry Pearson" <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote in message
> > news:1116574308.347480.74210@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > >
> > > Is that similar to the 350D?
> >
> > Canon Rebel XT is the US name for the Canon 350D
> >
> > Canon Rebel = Canon 300D
> >
> > Gawd knows why they didnt use the same name Worldwide :o /
>
> The Nissan Maxima and Nissan Bluebird say "hi." <G>

Ha, I drove a Bluebird in NZ.

Greg
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 6:16:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jeremy Nixon wrote:
> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
> >> (Mind you, I agree that it's a rather poor support decision not
> >> to upgrade the plugin for a product as recent as Photoshop CS)
> >
> > It's part of the evil plot to promote DNG.
>
> My God, you're right! Instead of forcing us to pay for the CS2
upgrade,
> they give us a free program we can use instead, thus furthering their
evil
> corporate goal of ... um... oh.

Chuckle!

(Actually, their "evil corporate goal" is probably "to accelerate the
use of Raw photography worldwide". I see NO other goal that is
compatible with what Adobe are doing with DNG).

> Actually, it does a good job of pointing out that if the camera
makers
> would generate DNG in the first place, we wouldn't have to worry
about
> software updates like this at all.

Bravo! Who is part of the problem? Who is part of the solution?

And can we conclude from this that Adobe's business plan doesn't
include forcing people to upgrade simply because their cameras are not
supported by old versions of Camera Raw?

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 9:40:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

In article <nkdr81pjbdfmjidae57fqpqmoifttvaob3@4ax.com>,
McLeod <cerveza@xplornet.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 19 May 2005 18:13:31 -0700, "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I can't do the following, right?:
>>
>>RAW -> DNG converter -> DNG -> Photoshop CS -> PSD or JPG
>
>
>Yes, you can do that. But as long as you have the right plug-in you
>should also be able to go:
>
>RAW->Photoshop CS->whatever you want to save it as.

Except that there is no Adobe plugin for CS that can read XT Raw files,
and there will not be one - for that, yo need to upgrade to CS2.
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 9:40:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

John Francis wrote:

> You can use DNG in the same number of steps:
>
> CameraRaw -> DNG Converter 3.x -> DNG -> CS
>
> This is the workaround workflow that Adobe recommend for CS owners,
> which also lets you get at the full power of the Adobe Camera Raw
> software, rather than the limited functionality accessible in E3.
>
> (Mind you, I agree that it's a rather poor support decision not
> to upgrade the plugin for a product as recent as Photoshop CS)

It's part of the evil plot to promote DNG.



--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 9:40:17 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 20 May 2005 18:06:43 +0000 (UTC), johnf@panix.com (John
Francis) wrote:

>This is the workaround workflow that Adobe recommend for CS owners,
>which also lets you get at the full power of the Adobe Camera Raw
>software, rather than the limited functionality accessible in E3.
>
>(Mind you, I agree that it's a rather poor support decision not
>to upgrade the plugin for a product as recent as Photoshop CS)

Does Canon's RAW format change with every camera release?

For all of Adobe's griping about Nikon changing their NEF files the
fact that the camera manufacturers are updating their raw files seems
to be giving people one of the main reasons they have to buy CS2 or
convert to DNG. Adobe's whining and crying at the start of the month
seems a little less sincere now.
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 9:40:18 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 6l9pr$848$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> John Francis wrote:
>
> > You can use DNG in the same number of steps:
> >
> > CameraRaw -> DNG Converter 3.x -> DNG -> CS
> >
> > This is the workaround workflow that Adobe recommend for CS owners,
> > which also lets you get at the full power of the Adobe Camera Raw
> > software, rather than the limited functionality accessible in E3.
> >
> > (Mind you, I agree that it's a rather poor support decision not
> > to upgrade the plugin for a product as recent as Photoshop CS)
>
> It's part of the evil plot to promote DNG.
>

And to force upgrades to CS 2.

Greg
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 10:13:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:

> For all of Adobe's griping about Nikon changing their NEF files the
> fact that the camera manufacturers are updating their raw files seems
> to be giving people one of the main reasons they have to buy CS2 or
> convert to DNG. Adobe's whining and crying at the start of the month
> seems a little less sincere now.

Nikon's justification for encrypting white balance data in NEF files is
only to force the purchase of Nikon's Image Capture software. Nikon
have conveniently forgotten that the captured image belongs to the
photographer, not Nikon.

I agree that Adobe's not providing RAW conversion for the RebXT in CS is
nothing short of forcing an upgrade to CS2 or adoption of DNG. And for
those who don't upgrade CS now, it's a near certainty they will at a
later date.

As http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/StrategyLetterV.... astutely
points out, complementary marketing is the name of the game. And
commoditizing the complements is part of the strategy. PDF today. DNG
tomorrow.

Of course Adobe want DNG to be an open format for all to use as they
please. It creates a commodity that makes the entire Adobe suite of
image software that much stronger.

Adobe might gripe about Nikon. But its Nikon's customers who should be
doing the major griping against Nikon.

To date, Konica-Minolta (and as far as a I know Canon, Pentax, Olympus)
haven't hijacked the phtographers images, but that day may come.

In the wings, there are programs like dcraw that are open source and
publicaly available ... and the designer seems content to hack open
encrypted formats.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 11:13:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>> (Mind you, I agree that it's a rather poor support decision not
>> to upgrade the plugin for a product as recent as Photoshop CS)
>
> It's part of the evil plot to promote DNG.

My God, you're right! Instead of forcing us to pay for the CS2 upgrade,
they give us a free program we can use instead, thus furthering their evil
corporate goal of ... um... oh.

Actually, it does a good job of pointing out that if the camera makers
would generate DNG in the first place, we wouldn't have to worry about
software updates like this at all.

--
Jeremy | jeremy@exit109.com
Anonymous
May 20, 2005 11:13:13 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Jeremy Nixon wrote:

> Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>>(Mind you, I agree that it's a rather poor support decision not
>>>to upgrade the plugin for a product as recent as Photoshop CS)
>>
>>It's part of the evil plot to promote DNG.
>
>
> My God, you're right! Instead of forcing us to pay for the CS2 upgrade,
> they give us a free program we can use instead, thus furthering their evil
> corporate goal of ... um... oh.

It's a sure bet for Adobe.

a) DNG is a corporate goal for Adobe.

b) CS owners will eventually upgrade to CS2 or whatever follows that
includes the RAW conversion.

Nothing is free.

> Actually, it does a good job of pointing out that if the camera makers
> would generate DNG in the first place, we wouldn't have to worry about
> software updates like this at all.

Yes. See point a) above. Unfortunately, the OEM's have their own
corprate agendas which are to provide their own varieties of information
formats. Example: Nikon's Image Capture. So don't expect the OEM's to
give up too soon. Further, the OEM's are more likely to encrypt and
proprietize their data formats to a point where Adobe won't tread.
(recent encryption shenanigans with Nikon white balance data in the
D2X/H cameras refer
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05041901nikon_encrypt...
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042701davecoffinint... ).

Until there is agreement, the OEM RAW formats are as good as anyone
needs for archiving. Adobe's real strength is that in most cases
everyone agrees that they do a better job with OEM RAW than the OEM's
do. So Adobe not putting these recent camera RAW's into CS just shows
that they are not so goody-goody-two-shoes as their public DNG offering
suggests. A strange set of circumstances, but there it is.

I have nothing against DNG, I have the converter, but for the time being
I do not see any need or advantage to using it at all.

Cheers,
Alan


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 21, 2005 8:46:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
> Jeremy Nixon wrote:
> > Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
[snip]
> >>It's part of the evil plot to promote DNG.
> >
> > My God, you're right! Instead of forcing us to pay for the CS2
upgrade,
> > they give us a free program we can use instead, thus furthering
their evil
> > corporate goal of ... um... oh.
>
> It's a sure bet for Adobe.
>
> a) DNG is a corporate goal for Adobe.
>
> b) CS owners will eventually upgrade to CS2 or whatever follows
that
> includes the RAW conversion.
[snip]

Anyone using the DNG route to process their 350D and D2X images under
CS / ACR 2.4 is not committed to DNG from then on. If they choose, they
can go back to the camera's Raw files when they upgrade to a version of
Photoshop and ACR that supports them. (That may be later than CS2, of
course).

When ACR 2.4 saves settings for DNG files in XMP sidecars, after the
Photoshop upgrade the photographer can simply replace the DNG files
with the original Raw files. The later version of ACR will then apply
those sidecars to the original CR2 or NEF files, as long as they have
the same name except for the extension. (I just tested this on 350D and
D2X, CR2 and NEF, files).

Photographers COULD just treat DNG as a temporary method of delaying or
avoiding the need to upgrade Photoshop for new camera support.

Of course DNG is a corporate goal for Adobe! It will open up the Raw
industry, and give photographers more confidence in Raw. That should
accelerate the growth in Raw shooting worldwide. And that will be good
for anyone in the Raw processing business or photo-editing business.
Especially, but not only, Adobe.

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 21, 2005 9:15:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:
> On Fri, 20 May 2005 18:13:06 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> >Nikon's justification for encrypting white balance data in NEF files
is
> >only to force the purchase of Nikon's Image Capture software. Nikon

> >have conveniently forgotten that the captured image belongs to the
> >photographer, not Nikon.

Correct. That is the only reason for such encryption.

> Adobe did a very good job of labelling Nikon through the internet,
the
> fact that you believe this shows that. At the same time Nikon
> released the D2x they released a software developer kit for any third
> party interested in the NEF files.

Has Adobe itself made a statement on this subject? I have seen a
straightforward factual explanation from Thomas Knoll. But I thought he
was not an Adobe employee. (I wonder if an urban legend is developing
about Adobe's part in the debate?)

I thought the SDK didn't give access to the sensor data? If so, it is
not suitable for alternative Raw processors. I don't think Adobe's
competitors take it any more seriously than Adobe do. (Actually, I
think Nikon won't supply it to individuals writing Raw-processing
software).

> Less than two weeks after Adobe released this whining press release
to
> anyone who was interested the new NEF was supported (but only by CS2,
> of course, so you will have to upgrade).

No, you won't have to upgrade. You can convert the D2X NEFs into DNGs,
and process those in CS / ACR 2.4. If / when you do upgrade, you can
replace the DNGs with your NEFs, and the sidecars with your settings
made in CS / ACR 2.4 will be applied. (I'm not sure why you would want
to do this. But Adobe are giving photographers lots of choice in this
matter).

I believe Adobe has not issued a press release on this topic. Have you
a pointer to one?

Thomas Knoll never said that Photoshop CS2 wouldn't support the D2X; in
fact he said it would. Simply that it wouldn't decode the "as shot"
white balance for fear of runnng into trouble with DMCA. For many
photographers, that doesn't matter. It appears to have been the
photographers who cared about it who launched the arguments, not Adobe.

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 21, 2005 9:21:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:
> On Fri, 20 May 2005 18:13:06 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> >Adobe might gripe about Nikon. But its Nikon's customers who should
be
> >doing the major griping against Nikon.
> >
> >To date, Konica-Minolta (and as far as a I know Canon, Pentax,
Olympus)
> >haven't hijacked the phtographers images, but that day may come.
>
> Again, you should stay up to date. Adobe Camera Raw has full
> functionality with Nikon D2x files as long as you update to CS2 and
> install the newest raw plug-in.

I believe not. It can certainly do nearly everything, but I believe it
cannot access the "as shot" white balance.

(And, as I've said elsewhere, CS / ACR 2.4 can also process DNGs
generated from D2X NEFs).

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 21, 2005 9:26:23 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:
[snip]
> As mentioned in other responses CS only supports ACR 2.4, ACR 2.4
doesn't
> support the Rebel XT. So it depends on which version of PS you're
talking
> about. My currently available Photoshops are Elements 3.0 and CS. I
would
> prefer to use CS and will not upgrade to CS 2 just to get better
workflow.

As much of this thread says, convert your Rebel XT Raw files to DNG and
open with CS / ACR 2.4. It really does work!

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 21, 2005 10:17:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 20 May 2005 18:13:06 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Nikon's justification for encrypting white balance data in NEF files is
>only to force the purchase of Nikon's Image Capture software. Nikon
>have conveniently forgotten that the captured image belongs to the
>photographer, not Nikon.

Adobe did a very good job of labelling Nikon through the internet, the
fact that you believe this shows that. At the same time Nikon
released the D2x they released a software developer kit for any third
party interested in the NEF files.
Less than two weeks after Adobe released this whining press release to
anyone who was interested the new NEF was supported (but only by CS2,
of course, so you will have to upgrade).
Anonymous
May 21, 2005 10:19:17 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Fri, 20 May 2005 18:13:06 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Adobe might gripe about Nikon. But its Nikon's customers who should be
>doing the major griping against Nikon.
>
>To date, Konica-Minolta (and as far as a I know Canon, Pentax, Olympus)
>haven't hijacked the phtographers images, but that day may come.


Again, you should stay up to date. Adobe Camera Raw has full
functionality with Nikon D2x files as long as you update to CS2 and
install the newest raw plug-in.
Anonymous
May 21, 2005 3:04:39 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:

> On Fri, 20 May 2005 18:13:06 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Nikon's justification for encrypting white balance data in NEF files is
>>only to force the purchase of Nikon's Image Capture software. Nikon
>>have conveniently forgotten that the captured image belongs to the
>>photographer, not Nikon.
>
>
> Adobe did a very good job of labelling Nikon through the internet, the
> fact that you believe this shows that. At the same time Nikon
> released the D2x they released a software developer kit for any third
> party interested in the NEF files.
> Less than two weeks after Adobe released this whining press release to
> anyone who was interested the new NEF was supported (but only by CS2,
> of course, so you will have to upgrade).

Nikon may release the dev kit spec to any qualified third party (read
the release) but that does not help any given photographer with the
issue. He'll have to cough up dough one way or another.

From Nikon: "At the same time, Nikon makes available a software
developer kit (SDK) that, when implemented appropriately, enables a wide
range of NEF performance, including white balance, for Nikon
photographers and their productive use of the NEF file."

Nikon are not doing anyone a service in this regard. Don't be fooled.
Unless you'll be implementing that dev kit yourself, you will pay someone.

When people buy a Nikon digital Camera, they should get, FREE OF CHARGE,
the software that gets the FULL potential out of that camera. Period.
Not the promisse that a software developer kit is 'available'. Same for
the other OEM's.

For their part, Adobe are not doing anyone a service wrt plugins that
aren't released for the very expensive CS.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 21, 2005 3:08:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:

> On Fri, 20 May 2005 18:13:06 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Adobe might gripe about Nikon. But its Nikon's customers who should be
>>doing the major griping against Nikon.
>>
>>To date, Konica-Minolta (and as far as a I know Canon, Pentax, Olympus)
>>haven't hijacked the phtographers images, but that day may come.
>
>
>
> Again, you should stay up to date. Adobe Camera Raw has full
> functionality with Nikon D2x files as long as you update to CS2 and
> install the newest raw plug-in.

Again, the CS users are screwed and so are high end Nikon buyers.

In effect, regardless of the Adobe version, NIKON should be supplying
FREE OF CHARGE, the plugins that will allow myriad photoshop versions to
read the camera data in full. Or, Nikon should be supplying FREE OF
CHARGE, the full capability to read the data from the camera. But no,
they want to pad on some more revenue for giving you what you already
bought!

Adobe, should maintain plugin/camera compatibility back to at least CS
if not further back.

Milk. Milk. Milk.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 1:42:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 21 May 2005 05:15:29 -0700, "Barry Pearson"
<news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote:

>Has Adobe itself made a statement on this subject? I have seen a
>straightforward factual explanation from Thomas Knoll. But I thought he
>was not an Adobe employee. (I wonder if an urban legend is developing
>about Adobe's part in the debate?)
>
>I thought the SDK didn't give access to the sensor data? If so, it is
>not suitable for alternative Raw processors. I don't think Adobe's
>competitors take it any more seriously than Adobe do. (Actually, I
>think Nikon won't supply it to individuals writing Raw-processing
>software).

http://photoshopnews.com/?p=226



Nikon Advisory - For Immediate Release
The Nikon D2X professional Digital Single Lens Reflex camera has
received widely positive acclaim for its overall performance and image
processing quality. Recently, speculative statements which appear to
be based on misunderstandings and misinformation about the D2X
camera’s “encryption” of certain white balance data have propagated on
the internet.

The purpose of this advisory is to clarify this matter with facts and
explanations.

The Nikon D2X is capable of producing high quality images that can be
saved in a variety of file formats, including the proprietary Nikon
Electronic Format (NEF), standard TIFF and several levels of standard
JPEG compressed files.

The NEF, a Nikon proprietary raw file design, was introduced with the
Nikon D1 Camera and Nikon’s original Capture software. The combination
of Nikon camera, in-camera image processing, NEF file format and
in-computer image processing with original Nikon Capture software was
developed as a system that faithfully saved image files that represent
the camera settings made manually or automatically by the photographer
at the time a picture was taken.

Nikon’s preservation of its unique technology in the NEF file is
employed as an action that protects the uniqueness of the file. At the
same time, Nikon makes available a software developer kit (SDK) that,
when implemented appropriately, enables a wide range of NEF
performance, including white balance, for Nikon photographers and
their productive use of the NEF file.

Since the inception of the system, Nikon has always provided
photographers with choices about how they might use the system’s
performance and enjoy high quality images. Nikon’s choices for opening
and processing NEF files have been and continue to include:

Nikon Capture software
Plug-in for Adobe’s Photoshop
Nikon PictureProject software
Nikon View software
Availability of Nikon Software Developer Kit (SDK) and the software
that has been developed using the SDK
Through use of the Nikon Software Developer Kit, authorized developers
can produce software by applying creative concepts to their
implementation and adding capabilities to open Nikon’s NEF file and
use NEF’s embedded Instructions and Nikon’s Libraries. Nikon
photographers reap benefits from independent developers’ approaches,
because it allows the photographer to open and process their NEF
images.

After a developer’s software is created using the Nikon SDK, a NEF
file can be opened, edited in either TIFF or JPEG format, and then
saved in formats available in the developers’ software. This process
has been available since the first Nikon SDK for NEF.

With each introduction of a new Nikon digital Single Lens Reflex
model, Nikon updates the available SDK selection to provide new
information; this is the situation with the D2X, D2Hs and D50 models.
As stated above, application for the Nikon SDK is possible for bona
fide software companies that send Nikon a written application for the
SDK. Once approved, the SDK is provided to the developer at no charge
and they are authorized to use it.

Nikon has provided its confidential SDK software to many software
developers. With the Nikon SDK, developers may design excellent and
creative compatibility between the NEF and their software, all without
compromising the integrity of the NEF’s original concept, and ensuring
that work done by the photographer during the picture taking process
can be incorporated into the rendering of the image.

The trilogy of performance, from Camera-to-NEF-to-Capture, has evolved
though several generations of Nikon Digital SLR models, improving
along the way. As a proprietary format, Nikon secures NEF’s structure
and processing through various technologies. Securing this structure
is intended for the photographer’s benefit, and dedicated to ensuring
faithful reproduction of the photographer’s creative intentions
through consistent performance and rendition of the images.
Discussions propagated on the internet suggesting otherwise are
misinformed about the unique structure of NEF.

Nikon’s Camera System, NEF and Capture software are a tightly knit
system, and they are all developed through the cooperative efforts of
Nikon’s design teams, and this collaboration results in achieving the
highest image quality.

Nikon strives to provide photographers with excellent picture taking
performance, compatible Nikon in-system image processing performance
and by extension, compatibility with additional software developers’
products, with the ultimate goal of delivering a high level of
integrity for a photographer’s creative vision.

Nikon continues to welcome dialogue with bona fide software
developers.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 1:50:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sat, 21 May 2005 11:04:39 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Nikon are not doing anyone a service in this regard. Don't be fooled.
>Unless you'll be implementing that dev kit yourself, you will pay someone.
>

Hmm. Seems like you want it both ways. First you say it's encrypted
and then you say it's not good enough they provide the tools for 3rd
party software developers. Nikon has no control over Adobe and
whether they decide to charge a premium for it, or DCRaw, Capture One,
or anyone else.

>When people buy a Nikon digital Camera, they should get, FREE OF CHARGE,
>the software that gets the FULL potential out of that camera. Period.
>Not the promisse that a software developer kit is 'available'. Same for
>the other OEM's.

You do, or at least I did with the D1x 3 years ago. I don't know what
software ships with the D2x but I have been able to upgrade all of my
Nikon software for free whenever they update it, just by providing my
camera's serial number.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 1:52:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 21 May 2005 05:15:29 -0700, "Barry Pearson"
<news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote:

>
>Has Adobe itself made a statement on this subject? I have seen a
>straightforward factual explanation from Thomas Knoll. But I thought he
>was not an Adobe employee. (I wonder if an urban legend is developing
>about Adobe's part in the debate?)

Thomas Knoll is the considered the chief author of Photoshop, is a
full time employee, and the press release was released on the adobe
website.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 1:56:14 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sat, 21 May 2005 11:08:45 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>In effect, regardless of the Adobe version, NIKON should be supplying
>FREE OF CHARGE, the plugins that will allow myriad photoshop versions to
>read the camera data in full.

So Nikon should build the software for a 3rd party software developer?

When you're done at your work why don't you just swing by my house
and wash my car?
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 4:22:49 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:
> On 21 May 2005 05:15:29 -0700, "Barry Pearson"
> <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >Has Adobe itself made a statement on this subject? I have seen a
> >straightforward factual explanation from Thomas Knoll. But I thought
he
> >was not an Adobe employee. (I wonder if an urban legend is
developing
> >about Adobe's part in the debate?)
>
> Thomas Knoll is the considered the chief author of Photoshop, is a
> full time employee, and the press release was released on the adobe
> website.

I believe Adobe has never issued a press release on this topic. I
believe a myth is growing up about Adobe's involvement in this debate.
Here are their press releases for April and Photoshop:

http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases...

http://www.adobe.com/aboutadobe/pressroom/pressreleases...

Thomas Knoll posted a factual statement about the matter to the
User-to-User forums. Here is what he said:

http://tinyurl.com/az7pc

Thomas Knoll does indeed have that sort of role with Photoshop, but as
far as I know he is not an employee of Adobe. However, that is not
relevant here. His statement is a simple explanation, and the debate
since then has been driven by Nikon's users, and industry commentators,
with little or probably no Adobe involvement.

I understand that what Nikon do really is encryption, involving the
camera serial number and the image number. The only reason to encrypt
any of the Raw file is to COERCE photographers into using the
decryption software, which means Nikon Capture. That is an attack on
their customers, instead of giving them a free choice.

What we have here is Nikon, apparently trying to coerce their D2X
customers to buy software they may not want; and Adobe, who give away a
free DNG Converter that users of CS can use instead of having to
upgrade to CS2 to handle the D2X.

How interesting that Nikon, primarily a hardware company, is trying to
force people to buy their software, and Adobe, a software company, is
giving away free software that may reduce the number of upgrades they
sell!

Here is a website dedicated to causing camera manufacturers to open up
their Raw formats, for various reasons, including long term
readability:

http://www.openraw.org/

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 4:35:29 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
[snip]
> In effect, regardless of the Adobe version, NIKON should be supplying

> FREE OF CHARGE, the plugins that will allow myriad photoshop versions
to
> read the camera data in full. Or, Nikon should be supplying FREE OF
> CHARGE, the full capability to read the data from the camera. But
no,
> they want to pad on some more revenue for giving you what you already

> bought!
[snip]

The problem with Nikon's plug-ins is that they don't provide the same
capability as Camera Raw. The question of how to remove the Nikon
plug-ins so that Photoshop / Camera Raw can work properly is a frequent
question in Adobe forums.

Even if Nikon provided their software free, some photographers wouldn't
want it in their workflow. (I don't want the software for my Pentax in
my workflow).

In the short term, photographers should be putting pressure on the
camera manufacturers to stop playing games with Raw formats, and ensure
that they can be decoded by other companies. For the future, the answer
is for camera manufacturers to use a common specification. For that, at
the moment, DNG is the only game in town.

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 4:43:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
[snip]
> For their part, Adobe are not doing anyone a service wrt plugins that

> aren't released for the very expensive CS.

This is an argument that Adobe can't win!

I want Adobe to put their development effort into either the Photoshop
release I have, or future releases. That means CS2 and CS3, etc. That
way, I will benefit from that effort.

I do NOT want Adobe putting development effort into releases that I
will never use because I have upgraded from them! (Because of the
considerable enhancements in ACR 3.x compared with ACR 2.x, including
the plug-in interface, it would take extra effort to back-fit support
for the new cameras).

In other words, this isn't a dispute between Adobe and its customers.
It is between different customers. Between you and me, in fact!

Pistols at dawn?

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 4:53:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:
> On 21 May 2005 05:15:29 -0700, "Barry Pearson"
> <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> >I thought the SDK didn't give access to the sensor data? If so, it
is
> >not suitable for alternative Raw processors. I don't think Adobe's
> >competitors take it any more seriously than Adobe do. (Actually, I
> >think Nikon won't supply it to individuals writing Raw-processing
> >software).
[snip]
> Nikon Advisory - For Immediate Release
[snip]

Nikon's statements on this topic have obscured things, not clarified
them. I think their PR people are trying to work out how to salvage
Nikon's position, but even here they dig themselves in a bit deeper:

http://avondale.typepad.com/rawformat/2005/05/nikons_pr...

http://www.engadget.com/entry/1234000960042753/

You can see what Dave Coffin said here:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042701davecoffinint...

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 11:02:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:
> On 22 May 2005 00:22:49 -0700, "Barry Pearson"
> <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >I understand that what Nikon do really is encryption, involving the
> >camera serial number and the image number. The only reason to
encrypt
> >any of the Raw file is to COERCE photographers into using the
> >decryption software, which means Nikon Capture. That is an attack on
> >their customers, instead of giving them a free choice.
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042701davecoffinint...

Are you agreeing with me or disagreeing? (I have already posted that
URL in reply to one of your posts).

Note, from that interview with Dave Coffin:

8. It's clear that many photographers are concerned over the current
situation between Adobe and Nikon because they feel it may be an
indicator of worse to come (harder encryption, more 'locking down' of
file data). So is this a storm in a teacup or a sign of more to come?

Photographers have reason to feel scared. Not being computer hackers,
they feel powerless to stop Nikon from asserting property rights over
their images.

I'm not so worried. Whatever scheme Nikon tries next, I'll just
reverse-engineer it.

9. Is there a place for a standard 'Open' RAW format or does that raise
too many issues to do with the sharing of proprietary image processing
between competitive manufacturers?

Adobe Digital Negative (DNG) is a great format -- I totally redesigned
dcraw for maximum DNG compatibility.

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.barry.pearson.name/photography/
http://www.birdsandanimals.info/
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 12:06:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On 22 May 2005 00:22:49 -0700, "Barry Pearson"
<news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote:

>I understand that what Nikon do really is encryption, involving the
>camera serial number and the image number. The only reason to encrypt
>any of the Raw file is to COERCE photographers into using the
>decryption software, which means Nikon Capture. That is an attack on
>their customers, instead of giving them a free choice.



http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042701davecoffinint...
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 5:07:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:
> Paul Furman wrote:
>
>>
>> Browse & sort the jpegs while the DNGs download/convert. Just
>> downloading raw files takes 20 minutes anyways so it's not much
>> difference.
>
>
> 20 minutes? What size CF card?


2GB microdrive thru a new cheap reader to a new top end laptop. That
sounds similar time to yours so maybe the reader isn't USB2? Only info I
can get is the computer calls it eUSB.


>
> My Maxxum 7D does a near full 1 GB dump to HD via USM 1.1 in about 8 or
> 9 minutes (RAW+JPG+THM) If I ever get a card reader and USB 2 card, I
> expect much better than that. Otherwise I'll just stick to the current
> solution.
>
> FWIW, for each 'take' or project I create a folder named with the date
> of the shoot and name of the project. Camera JPG's go in there. In
> that folder I also create a "RAW" sub directory and that's where the RAW
> take goes... and a "TB" directory for the thumbnails.
>
> I use Elements to create the thumbnails in batch and they get a "TB"
> suffix. (These are not the camera gen'd THM files).


Sounds similar to my system.

>
> I'll DNG when Minolta DNG in-camera... likewise never. The RAW's are
> just as good a long term backup as anything, IMO.

The main DNG selling point for me is somewhat smaller files on my laptop.


--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 6:14:51 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:

> The NEF, a Nikon proprietary raw file design, was introduced with the
> Nikon D1 Camera and Nikon’s original Capture software. The combination
> of Nikon camera, in-camera image processing, NEF file format and
> in-computer image processing with original Nikon Capture software was
> developed as a system that faithfully saved image files that represent
> the camera settings made manually or automatically by the photographer
> at the time a picture was taken.

Please tell me you're not taken by the notion that encrypting data such
that only specific s/w can treat it somehow is added value to the Nikon
customer.

The image taken is the photographers image. He should be able,
unfetterted, to do with it as he pleases.

Encrypting parts of the data such that it can only be processed via a
Nikon approved algorithm is 'control' of your image.

Fortunately, Nikon's feeble attempt at encryption has been defeated by
dcraw ... I only hope this does not encourage Nikon to go towards more
robust encryption. Same for the other OEM's.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 6:17:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:

> On 22 May 2005 00:22:49 -0700, "Barry Pearson"
> <news@childsupportanalysis.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>>I understand that what Nikon do really is encryption, involving the
>>camera serial number and the image number. The only reason to encrypt
>>any of the Raw file is to COERCE photographers into using the
>>decryption software, which means Nikon Capture. That is an attack on
>>their customers, instead of giving them a free choice.
>
>
>
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0504/05042701davecoffinint...



Please state clearly why Nikon encrypting _your_ image data for
processing in Nikon's software (or approved software developer) is a
benefit to you.




--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 6:25:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:

> On Sat, 21 May 2005 11:04:39 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>Nikon are not doing anyone a service in this regard. Don't be fooled.
>>Unless you'll be implementing that dev kit yourself, you will pay someone.
>>
>
>
> Hmm. Seems like you want it both ways. First you say it's encrypted
> and then you say it's not good enough they provide the tools for 3rd
> party software developers. Nikon has no control over Adobe and
> whether they decide to charge a premium for it, or DCRaw, Capture One,
> or anyone else.

DCRaw is free. But they "broke the code" which is something Adobe seem
reluctant to do as it might open them up for a lawsuit.

That they provide the tools for 3rd party devs is kind of strange. Wht
bother making it hard in the first place.

This is all added friction for the Nikon pro camera buyer.

>>When people buy a Nikon digital Camera, they should get, FREE OF CHARGE,
>>the software that gets the FULL potential out of that camera. Period.
>>Not the promisse that a software developer kit is 'available'. Same for
>>the other OEM's.
>
>
> You do, or at least I did with the D1x 3 years ago. I don't know what
> software ships with the D2x but I have been able to upgrade all of my
> Nikon software for free whenever they update it, just by providing my
> camera's serial number.

Currently, Nikon Capture (v 4.xxx if I'm not mistaken) is retailling for
about CAD$140. Who's buying it then if it's included with the cameras
with no limit on upgrades?

Cheers,
Alan.
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 6:29:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Barry Pearson wrote:

<snip>
> I do NOT want Adobe putting development effort into releases that I
> will never use because I have upgraded from them! (Because of the
> considerable enhancements in ACR 3.x compared with ACR 2.x, including
> the plug-in interface, it would take extra effort to back-fit support
> for the new cameras).

Fine for you, but a not-upgraded CS owner would of course not agree.
And if Adobe did upgrade it (hardly rocket science) it wouldn't hurt you
in the least.

At some point, there is no point to upgrades for most users. I was
quite happy with Elements 2.0, it did my modest needs quite well, except
it was only 8 bits/channel. Finally in buying the 7D I upgraded to
Elements 3.0 which is much more than I'll likely need.

>
> Pistols at dawn?

Sure. Water pistols.

Cheers,
Alan
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 6:34:28 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

McLeod wrote:

> On Sat, 21 May 2005 11:08:45 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>
>>In effect, regardless of the Adobe version, NIKON should be supplying
>>FREE OF CHARGE, the plugins that will allow myriad photoshop versions to
>>read the camera data in full.
>
>
> So Nikon should build the software for a 3rd party software developer?
>
> When you're done at your work why don't you just swing by my house
> and wash my car?

No, they merely need to let the spec (that they've already written) out
and not encrypt the data. Then Adobe will hapilly add the plugin to the
PS software.

Nikon, instead of wasting engineering resources on encryption algorithms
(that appear to be easilly breakable in any case as dcraw shows) could
instead do their customers the courtesy o writing the plugin for Adobe.
Adobe make it very easy for 3rd parties to write plugins.

The only reason to hold IP close to the vest is because you want to make
money on it. But the image YOU made with the camera YOU paid for is
YOURS, not Nikons. Don't let them hijack a little bit, because then
they will be coming for more.

Wash your car? I only wash mine twice a year!

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 6:37:33 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Barry Pearson wrote:
> [snip]
>
> The problem with Nikon's plug-ins is that they don't provide the same
> capability as Camera Raw. The question of how to remove the Nikon
> plug-ins so that Photoshop / Camera Raw can work properly is a frequent
> question in Adobe forums.

I didn't even know Nikon provided a Plugin for the Adobe s/w. McLeod, I
hope you see this...!

>
> Even if Nikon provided their software free, some photographers wouldn't
> want it in their workflow. (I don't want the software for my Pentax in
> my workflow).
>
> In the short term, photographers should be putting pressure on the
> camera manufacturers to stop playing games with Raw formats, and ensure
> that they can be decoded by other companies. For the future, the answer
> is for camera manufacturers to use a common specification. For that, at
> the moment, DNG is the only game in town.

You and I agree on all that, except for the DNG bit. I see the OEM RAW
as providing that function in spades. I would only adopt DNG if Minolta
adopted DNG in camera. I too, do not use the Minolta software. I
import my MRW's directly into Elements 3 via Adobe's RAW converter.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 10:02:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:

> Standardized formats end up being supported on far more hardware/OS/software
> combos than propietary formats. I have much more confidence that I will
> easily be able to find an app that will read DNG files in 20 years than one
> that the reads the RAW files of my Rebel XT. I sincerely hope that camera
> manufacturers adopt a standard format whether it be DNG or not.

I don't agree with the notion that my MRW's (RAW) won't be readable in
20 or 40 or 100 years.

However, I just did a test of 22 files in a directory. The DNG's are
26% to 41% (33% avg) smaller than the K-M RAW files. So, I'll be giving
this a re-think respecting backup/archive logistics.

Cheers,
Alan.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 10:02:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Alan Browne wrote:

> G.T. wrote:
>
>> Standardized formats end up being supported on far more
>> hardware/OS/software
>> combos than propietary formats. I have much more confidence that I will
>> easily be able to find an app that will read DNG files in 20 years
>> than one
>> that the reads the RAW files of my Rebel XT. I sincerely hope that
>> camera
>> manufacturers adopt a standard format whether it be DNG or not.
>
>
> I don't agree with the notion that my MRW's (RAW) won't be readable in
> 20 or 40 or 100 years.
>
> However, I just did a test of 22 files in a directory. The DNG's are
> 26% to 41% (33% avg) smaller than the K-M RAW files. So, I'll be giving
> this a re-think respecting backup/archive logistics.


Watch out for lost EXIF data though.

: - (


--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 10:42:26 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 22 May 2005 14:14:51 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Please tell me you're not taken by the notion that encrypting data such
>that only specific s/w can treat it somehow is added value to the Nikon
>customer.
>
>The image taken is the photographers image. He should be able,
>unfetterted, to do with it as he pleases.
>
>Encrypting parts of the data such that it can only be processed via a
>Nikon approved algorithm is 'control' of your image.

No, only pointing out that most of the camera manufacturers do it.
According to the article and interview by dpreview of Dave Coffin of
dcraw Canon also encrypts and compresses their raw files and it seems
to change with every new camera they release as well. For some reason
Nikon has become the focal point of hostility, the only reason being
that Thomas Knoll singled them out on the internet and found enough
gullible people to buy into it.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 10:45:11 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 22 May 2005 14:25:28 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>DCRaw is free. But they "broke the code" which is something Adobe seem
>reluctant to do as it might open them up for a lawsuit.

Adobe Camera Raw fully supports the new NEF including the "encrypted"
white balance as I pointed out at the start of the discussion. You
bought into an internet myth and can't seem to let it go.
Anonymous
May 22, 2005 10:47:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Sun, 22 May 2005 14:34:28 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@freelunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>No, they merely need to let the spec (that they've already written) out
>and not encrypt the data. Then Adobe will hapilly add the plugin to the
>PS software.

They did. That was the software developer kit. And Adobe has. You
are repeating an urban legend over and over and can't seem to shake
it.
!