![]() ![]() DNG allows photographers to archive their raw camera files in a single format for easy cataloging and access in the future. Hence, I would not be concerned with software not being able to read your RAW files in the future.The Adobe DNG Converter, a free utility that converts files from more than 350 cameras to DNG, enables you to easily convert camera-specific raw files to a more universal DNG raw file.ĭigital Negative was developed to address the lack of an open standard for the proprietary and unique raw files created by each digital camera. And it is not like the code for reading old RAW formats is so huge and complex that companies need to get rid of the old ones to make space for new ones. Why would anyone drop support for something they have been historically able to do well? No company wants to hear complaints from angry customers that are using very old gear. In fact, I have yet to see any software seize support for old RAW files – all that typically happens is newer cameras are added to the list of supported cameras. First, post-processing and conversion software we see today does not just drop support for older cameras and their proprietary RAW formats. Well, the whole “compatibility” argument and inability to read RAW files in the future are myths for several reasons. In addition, we have been fed with arguments like “your current RAW file may become unreadable some day in the future”. We have been previously told by Adobe and other DNG supporters that the DNG format would be the format of the future, which gets rid of proprietary RAW files and simplifies them all to a single, open format. In fact, manufacturers are so reluctant in providing proper documentation with their RAW files that software companies have to reverse-engineer the process of reading and demosaicing RAW files. So if Adobe itself cannot do it, how would others with much more limited resources? RAW files already tons of proprietary metadata to begin with (some of which is sometimes encrypted) and you cannot even obtain proper documentation from manufacturers on how to read it. The funny thing is, even Adobe itself does not want to mess with all that metadata in its Lightroom and ACR software! If they did, you would not have to keep switching those camera profiles or applying color, sharpness and other adjustments to images. I have yet to see a software package that can read all the original RAW metadata such as picture profiles, lens corrections and other data from DNG files properly. Most software out there either has limited support for DNG, or it cannot properly read DNG files at all.Īnd this includes metadata – although Adobe keeps telling us that all the original metadata is fully preserved, other software engineers did not properly implement a way in their software to read that embedded metadata. One of the main reasons why I moved away from DNG back to RAW files is compatibility. But it turned out that other companies simply did not believe in the DNG format having as bright of a future as Adobe believed it would have, so support for DNG has been quite limited as a result. Of course this is all not Adobe’s fault, which has provided plenty of documentation on DNG, made it royalty-free and even proposed DNG to be controlled by a standards body, if needed. If you open a converted DNG file in anything other than Adobe software, you might find yourself dealing with excessively slow rendering time, odd colors, inability to read metadata and all kinds of other issues. And the list of DNG “ignorers” is not limited to camera manufacturers – most post-processing software packages out there either do not read DNG at all, or read it poorly, making DNG a lot less useful than it was designed to be in the first place. Aside from a couple of companies like Leica, Ricoh and Samsung, all the big boys like Nikon, Canon, Sony, Panasonic, Olympus, Sigma and Fuji continue ignoring DNG and pushing their proprietary RAW formats. Although Adobe has been pushing hard to make the DNG format open and widely adopted for many years now, it seems like very few companies actually give a damn about DNG.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |