This content has been marked as final. Show 70 replies
I like the sound of that reply Thomas :-)
This is a bit off topic, but it is a sudden concern that I have. I've just read in the ACR forum "If you add a keyword to an NEF file on Vista using the supplied NEF Codec from Nikon ACR can no longer read the file".
(We've previously seen complaints that (for example) ACR can't handle certain raw files downloaded via a tether rather than some other way. Then there was an example where a firmware change in a camera prevented ACR recognising the raw files).
Are we about to find that some of the reverse engineering that many raw converters exploit will fail if the raw files concerned have been altered via certain WIC codecs? Interesting times - this would be a consequence of the fact that building an industry on reverse engineering is shoddy engineering.
I try to describe the benefits of DNG to people on various tangible grounds. But, under all of that, lies the fact that I am a qualified engineer, and to me other approaches are simply poor engineering. And that will sooner or later cause serious problems, even though I can't prove it in advance.
Any news about it? Expected release time?
Any update to be had here?
I used the purchase of Lightroom as an excuse to convert all my (Canon 350D) RAWs to DNGs, in the hope that Adobe might have their act together much faster than Canon seems to. It'd be terrific to add a DNG Vista codec; any idea of a release date?
Seems like Adobe are missing an opportunity to encourage users to convert their proprietary RAWs to DNGs, by beating the manufacturers at getting a codec out the door...
> "Seems like Adobe are missing an opportunity to encourage users to convert their proprietary RAWs to DNGs, by beating the manufacturers at getting a codec out the door..."
On his blog, John Nack indicated that Adobe are a bit busy with one or two other things at the moment! (Relase and support Lightroom v1.0; their biggest announcement ever with CS3 and the completion of the CS3 products; etc). My reading of forums is that Lightroom's ease of ingesting raw files as DNGs is probably having a major effect on transition of people to a DNG-based workflow. CS3 will also help.
And given the problems that have arisen with WIC codecs so far, it might be a good idea to wait for things to be sorted out!
But ... yes, I do want to see DNG's support being ubiquitous.
Yeah, I'd like to know about this too. If there were a DNG Thumbnailer for windows, that would do most of what I need lightroom to do for me.
Since lightroom is still not working yet, it would be great if Adobe could give us the tools we need to do our work!
It seems that Adobe's "standard" dng is more "proprietary" than the "proprietary" formats.
iView and Vista work just fine with Canon and Nikon raw files.
Leica's M8 dng needs to be converted through Adobe's dng converter before they are usable with iView. In vista I have all the codecs I need for crws and nefs. Where the bleep is Adobe's "standard" codec?
Anybody have a dng to nef converter?
Yeah, I feel a right fool for converting all my Canon CR2 raws to DNG, in that Adobe zeal of trying to future-proof my images. Ironically, even Canon have managed to get a RAW codec out for Vista by now... a pity, Adobe could have made some real headway encouraging early adopters of their proposed industry standard format.
Adobe just released Lightroom and ACR4.0, two major software releases for raw files, they need some time to relase other raw software.
>iView and Vista work just fine with Canon and Nikon raw files
Will it be the case for upcoming cameras, or will you need to update the codecs? And how do you develop those files, with iView and Vista?
So far, support for camera formats has been earlier and stable.
I develop with a number of tools. Since lightroom is so miserable with removable media, I am pretty stuck with iView.
I use C1, ACR + PS, and lightroom.
I would dearly love to drop some one or more of these, but:
Lightroom does not support camera icc profiles,
Lightroom's ability to deal with digital noise is liimited
Lightroom has trouble, apparently, dealing with a large number of images (10k+)
Lightroom does not deal with removable media (needs to be able to use volume names and request those volumes that are not mounted)
iView cannot handle dngs from the Leica M8, but does ok (not perfect) with file and volume management.
iView sucks at image tweaking
bridge CS3 is almost ok as long as files are local
I know, gripe gripe, but this is driving me crazy.
Other than metadata support for geocoding (which no Adobe product apparently supports, I had better luck with the proprietary formats from the beginning of digital photography to date.
So far I see no evidence of dng "futureproofing" and I don't believe it unless I start seeing some stable open source publicly available code that supports dng in all of its glory. I think the camera vendor's have at least as much motivation to keep their stuff current.
I am not amused at the very apparent catfight between MS and Adobe.
I really would prefer that the format be really well supported by someone other than Adobe so that it would not be held hostage.
Well, it is my opinion they should have released the Vista codec with ACR
4.0 and DNG Converter. The others are right. Adobe doesn't seem to be taking
DNG seriously enough to ever get past the fad stage.
As for Adobe's release of a lot of updates well frankly that was Adobe's
choice. If they can't handle they heat and keep up with things then they
have no business do all of their updates in a 6 to 9 month period. How hard
can it be to do a codec for DNG?
> "It seems that Adobe's "standard" dng is more "proprietary" than the "proprietary" formats".
Not true. What you are seeing is deficient implementations of DNG, not faults inherent in DNG itself. There are also some GOOD implementations of DNG, as "proof of concept"!
(If a product didn't implement TIFF correctly, would you say the same thing about TIFF? Does Nikon Capture - pre-NX - support the D40X NEF? No - so does that mean that NEF shouldn't be considered? That is the wrong way of judging these things).
> "So far I see no evidence of dng "futureproofing" and I don't believe it unless I start seeing some stable open source publicly available code that supports dng in all of its glory. I think the camera vendor's have at least as much motivation to keep their stuff current".
DNG is a specification. What on Earth has "open source" got to do with anything? YOU are free to develop your own open source to support DNG if you want. Why aren't you doing so?
What does "supports dng in all of its glory" mean? Who knows what can ultimately be done with DNG? I doubt if Adobe know! There are companies out there who will surprise Adobe with what they are trying to do with DNG. That is what happens with open specifications like DNG - no one can predict what people are going to do!
And how can you generalise about "camera vendors"? My camera manufacturer provides DNG converters for all raw files they have ever released. My latest camera has the option to use DNG as its raw format. THEY don't think DNG is a problem to them!
There are "proofs of concept" that DNG itself is not the problem. It is companies who resist DNG, or provide defiecient implementations, who are the problem. This will change - users are beginning to complain about those companies.
> "How hard can it be to do a codec for DNG?"
Probably at least as hard as to do a NEF codec. And Nikon's first attempt at that was a bit of a disaster!
Is there an update to when Adobe is going to release a dng codec? It is seriously frustrating to convert a bunch of files to dng before moving to vista and realize I could have viewed the NEFs fine (leaving out any supposed problems with using vista to edit the metadata). Unfortunately, I have to convert to DNG though because robogeo, the geotagging program I use, will not read NEFs.
Seriously when will companies get the point that interoperability and usability for its customers are top priorities. "Thomas Knoll - 6:52am Jan 29, 07 PST (#1 of 15) Not yet." How bout now? Generally I think Adobe is great but this seems like a big delay for something like this.
Don't know if you've noticed, but Adobe has been just a little bit busy of late...what with the release of Lightroom Photoshop CS3 and the whole Creative Suite 3. I wouldn't expect a codec until a period of time after the release of CS3...which was less than a month ago. Possibly the next DNG rev...I don't know.
I asked this question of the folks at the Adobe stand at PMA 2007 here in Melbourne yesterday. After an initial blank look, the rep said that DNG was fully supported in CS3, which worked fine under Vista. When I refined my question a bit, it seemed no one at the show knew when a codec might get done - certainly not a priority at the moment, which is disappointing.
Yeah, well, you were talking to marketing folks...they wouldn't know anyway (as indicated by the fact they didn't know what you were talking about).
I was intrigued to read this on the Microsoft Research web site:
"We used Adobe's DNG convertor to convert Canon's CR2 files to DNG. A DNG reader was developed using the excellent WIC APIs to parse the DNG file".
It appears that Microsoft Research has at least partially implemented a WIC codec for DNG for their own purposes!
HD View - "How done?"
Yes, Jeff, I realize Adobe has been a bit busy, but ya know full support of a file format they are pioneering and pushing in a MAJOR operation system seems like a bit of a priority also.
Pentax released a codec for my K10D's PEF files. Right now for DNG I am
using the free thumbnailer from Arcsoft. It works fine in Vista and will do
until Adobe's gets their act together. It also works in Windows XP, etc.
still no word?
I hope they do one for PSD as well.
I'm sorry if this sounds like a stupid question but, here goes.
Does this thread of comments mean that, at present, with photoshop CS3 installed on windows Vista home premium, about to install Lightroom, and having just downloaded the version 4.0 of the DNG converter, that I can't convert Canon raw file to DNG or that I can't use the DNG files in Photoshop on a Vista machine.
Answer in regular plain English please, that way, I can understand
No it does not mean that. Any programs should read dng fine. But vista is supposed to be able to show thumbnails of raw files and be able to edit metadata, it can't do those things with dng yet.
so it just means I can't preview DNG files, but the actual converter doing a dng conversion in Vista works just fine? Thanks for the quick reply, much appreciated
Yes, that means that you can't preview DNG files in Vista's explorer. But you will be able to do so in Bridge/ACR/Lightroom..., and you'll be able to convert proprietary raw files to DNG.
The WIC codec for Windows Vista is a lot like video codecs with a WIC codec
for DNG and PSD, etc. this will then allow those file formats to be
displayed by Windows Vista at the operating system level. Right now without
the WIC codec for DNG and PSD the only place you can see icons is in Bridge
or some other program that has support for those formats. Once there is a
WIC codec installed in to Vista you will be able to see thumbnails of the
DNG and PSD formats (if Adobe does one for PSD) at the operating system
level like in Windows Explorer, open and save dialog boxes in thumbnail
Four months since the Vista release and still no codec. Even Canon's been able to get their act together in that time...
Disappointed (and frustrated that I let Lightroom convert all my Canon CR2 raws).
There are other options. I use the free program from Arcsoft. It shows the
DNG thumbnails just fine at the OS level. Adobe's excuse which I think is a
lame one, just as lame for them not having Vista compatibility updates out
for their products is that they just has a major launch. Well had they
developed things like Lightroom for Vista which was in beta for nearly 2
I don't think Microsoft helped things along by saying they expected only 5% of users to switch to Vista right away
True I doubt that helped I also doubt that Microsoft kept pushing the
release date back. Maybe Adobe figured it would happen again.
4 months since the official launch and still no dng. Can anyone from Adobe comment on when they expect this? It is getting frustrating.
(bump) I'm with Flounder - any news yet?
If I'm not mistaken the team behind ACR and Lightroom is the same that takes care of DNG.
There were major releases (Lightroom 1.0, Camera Raw 4.0/DNG converter 4.0), an update to ACR, 4.1 and soon an update to Lightroom (1.1?)...
So give them some time to produce the tools that you'll need to create the best DNG files out there, before you are able to view them in Vista...
What features are people looking for in a codec? I'm taking the initiative and writing a commercial decoder. I don't know what Adobe's timeline is, so I have no idea if I will get scooped. On the other hand, Apple wrote their own support into their OS, and it seems like Microsoft should be expected to do the same from Adobe's point of view: Adobe provided a nice SDK, which I am using, and is it Adobe's duty to port their technology to every platform?
Getting in Thumbnails and Previews shouldn't be too hard.
Metadata reading isn't all that difficult, but I wouldn't trust WICs metadata writer to get things right. However, from the sound of it people will most likely using an Adobe product to do editing of either image data or metadata.
Also, are folks aware of any web sites that are maintaining sample DNG images? There are a few flavors: those made with ACR, cameras that shoot DNG natively, and then there's Hasselblad's FlexColor, and I don't know if they are using the DNG SDK or rolling their own implementation. It would be nice if there was a reference library of images available to folks that need to do interop testing.
Also, if anyone from Adobe wants to chat about their implementation of the codec, then I'd like to also do interop testing with their codec (i.e., what happens when both are installed on a PC), if it is something they are indeed interested in developing and maintaining.
So I guess a have a few questions.
1. Is thumbnail support and preview enough for your needs?
2. As a bonus, I suspect having the ability to read out metadata would still be useful for those who have a lot of images. Would it be a show stopper to be unable to see all of your metadata in the Vista explorer and other Vista imaging apps? The less I have to do, the sooner you'll have your thumbnails and preview.
3. What about editing metadata? Would you trust a WIC codec, or would you use the main editing tools in your work flow for maintaining metadata?
1. Not really for thumbnails especially since arcsoft has a viewer that works ok. but having windows preview it full size would be great.
2. That would be a big help. especially if windows can search the metadata.
3. I would trust it after some test time. I would like to be able to edit it anywhere anytime, not in a specific program.