A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Raw" file issues?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #13  
Old May 26th 05, 09:45 PM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ryadia@Home wrote:

Yes. Mrs Browne wished for a boy with good looks, smart wit and high
intellect. Unfortunately she got Alan!.


Your mother thought anal sex with a donkey wouldn't get her pregnant.

--
-- 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.
  #14  
Old May 26th 05, 09:47 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Alan Browne wrote:

It is not in Nikon's interest to tell everyone their innovations in
(say) automatic white balance, or in Canon's interest to spill their
beans (say) fancy device physics for optimal bias estimation in
long exposure images.


No. They give away all the data to "qualified" software developers.


That is a matter for Nikon to decide, not OpenRAW.

They are not protecting anything to a degree where it would remain a
secret for more that a week or so. That it can be cracked easilly by
writers of sw such as dcraw are testimony to the fact that it is pointless.


If it can be "cracked" easily, then OpenRAW has no point.

If you don't like Nikon's or Canon's policies about any of this, you
are free to purchase the products of other companies. Right? Or is
someone forcing you to purchase Nikon's software?


Yes, Nikon. For a person with 000's of dollars in Nikon glass, being
forced to purchase more beyond a camera is simple wallet gouging.


Nikon is forcing you? Really? Well, if anyone forced me to do
something I didn't want to do I would report the incident as the crime
it is.

Really, what exactly is the problem here? If anything, the very
existance of Dave Coffin's "dcraw" makes the ranting Reichmann, et al,
look very kookish, and rendering the entire "OpenRaw" issue moot: RAW
file formats are as open as can be, _despite_ the best efforts of
Nikon.


The point is to stop these idiotic and pointless 'races' in the future.


Again, who is forcing you to participate in these "races"?

  #16  
Old May 26th 05, 10:04 PM
UrbanVoyeur
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ryadia@Home wrote:
RichA wrote:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/raw-flaw.shtml



I'll offer a more realistic, less dramatic scenario.

You shoot RAW as most do. Then you convert that RAW data - because
that's all it is at that time - to an image format. In the case of a
Canon the best choice is TIFF but there are others.

Now you have an editable "image" file with all the detail of the
original image in it and capable of being processed further in just
about any image editor know to man at this time.

Bloody sensationalist bull **** is all that comes out of that site.


Not exactly. If the some crucial bit of data is encrypted, obscured or
just not known, you may only get all the information out by using the
manufacturers software.

You may not like the manufacturer's processing choices. The manufacturer
may also cease to support that format in the future.

It's not bull****, it's already happening. You may not care. I and other do.



--

J

www.urbanvoyeur.com
  #17  
Old May 26th 05, 10:06 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Alan Browne wrote:

48V twisted pair POTS is a "standard" invented at the dawn of the
telephone era. There are many engineers who wish we could rip the
entire mess out of the ground, off the poles and start over again.
Offer praises to Allah or whoever that cell phones, VOIP and the rest
of it are doing the job indirectly.


Backward compatibilty is not compromised by forward progress where data
formats are concerned.


Then you must agree that OpenRAW is without a legitimate function.
What's good for the goose, etc.

Or, if you prefer, open RAW does not mean 'cast in concrete'. Each OEM
can do as he likes as long as the format is readable by all, and special
data sections are clearly documented.


As I said, this will in many instances necessarily reveal trade secrets
or other facets of the technology that the manufacturers would likely
be unwilling to disclose. And if part of the OpenRAW is the signing of
an NDA, then can we honestly call it "open"?

Regarding the olde telephone analog standard it has served extremely
well for a very long time. Real engineers are too practical to "wish"
for solutions that don't make economic sense.


If some djinn were to remove the need to work against the crazy POTS
nonsense, many communications engineers would be profoundly thankful.
Indeed, they must be: look at where all the innovation is occuring
today telephony. I can cite similar software and hardware
examples. _NO ONE_ likes to deal with legacy systems.

This backward compatibilty 'tax' is far cheaper than "ripping the
entire mess out of the ground..."


You are forgetting or ignoring the cost of innovations that are simply
unimplementable within the legacy framework. It is for this and other
reasons that the sensible person does not want camera manufacturers
constrained by some Adobe or OpenRAW or otherwise committee drafted
multi-volume 2356 page standard written in dense legalese.

  #18  
Old May 26th 05, 10:07 PM
Paul Furman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ryadia@Home wrote:

You shoot RAW as most do. Then you convert that RAW data - because
that's all it is at that time - to an image format. In the case of a
Canon the best choice is TIFF but there are others.

Now you have an editable "image" file with all the detail of the
original image in it



That still won't have *all* the original info. Better than a jpeg but
much less than the raw file.



and capable of being processed further in just
about any image editor know to man at this time.

Bloody sensationalist bull **** is all that comes out of that site.

Douglas


--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
san francisco native plants
  #19  
Old May 26th 05, 10:18 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Alan Browne wrote:

If it can be "cracked" easily, then OpenRAW has no point.


It's the other way around logic-boy.


Ok, then, "OpenRAW has no point if the file formats can be cracked
easily".

You admit the file formats can be cracked easily, therefore ...

If you don't like Nikon's or Canon's policies about any of this, you
are free to purchase the products of other companies. Right? Or is
someone forcing you to purchase Nikon's software?

Yes, Nikon. For a person with 000's of dollars in Nikon glass, being
forced to purchase more beyond a camera is simple wallet gouging.



Nikon is forcing you? Really? Well, if anyone forced me to do
something I didn't want to do I would report the incident as the crime
it is.


Oh sheesh. It's not like you decide one day "I hate those Mazda
*******s" and change car brands. Replacing a lens collection is not
trivial. Nikon have a lot of loyal customers who are now having part of
their own images encrypted and requiring Nikon authorized s/w to read it.


Nikon can also change their lens mount. What are you going to do, sue
them? After OpenRAW has passed their legislation mandating The File
Format, is the next step to mandate interoperable optics?

The point is to stop these idiotic and pointless 'races' in the future.


Again, who is forcing you to participate in these "races"?


Nikon. By encrypting part of MY image without my consent.


You consented to it by pressing the shutter button.

  #20  
Old May 26th 05, 10:28 PM
Alan Browne
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:


If it can be "cracked" easily, then OpenRAW has no point.


It's the other way around logic-boy.



Ok, then, "OpenRAW has no point if the file formats can be cracked
easily".

You admit the file formats can be cracked easily, therefore ...


Since it is all but impossible to encrypt the data in the first place,
there is no need to do so. Or I suppose the OEM's could begin keying
the encryption on a case by case basis. Yeah, uh huh.


Oh sheesh. It's not like you decide one day "I hate those Mazda
*******s" and change car brands. Replacing a lens collection is not
trivial. Nikon have a lot of loyal customers who are now having part of
their own images encrypted and requiring Nikon authorized s/w to read it.



Nikon can also change their lens mount. What are you going to do, sue
them? After OpenRAW has passed their legislation mandating The File
Format, is the next step to mandate interoperable optics?


A good point that misses the point. Nikon have made big marketing hooey
over backward comaptible lens mounts. So in revenge they're making part
of their files unreadable? Yeah, okay. People will buy that. Sure.


The point is to stop these idiotic and pointless 'races' in the future.

Again, who is forcing you to participate in these "races"?


Nikon. By encrypting part of MY image without my consent.



You consented to it by pressing the shutter button.


Nobody considers this when they maintain Nikon lens collections or
purcahse a Nikon camera. Or other OEM's for that matter.

End of thread for me.

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.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon A510 question about file type & sise Gene Digital Photography 6 March 16th 05 07:39 PM
Digital Photo Image File Renaming Vladimir Veytsel Digital Photography 0 February 6th 05 12:30 AM
Digital Photo Image File Renaming Vladimir Veytsel Digital Photography 0 January 9th 05 08:30 PM
File size saving for web paul Digital Photography 0 January 7th 05 01:12 AM
Question about RAW file and image size Anynomus Digital Photography 9 November 7th 04 11:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.