1 2 Previous Next 70 Replies Latest reply on Aug 28, 2011 11:57 AM by Jeff Schewe

    ACR backward compatibility - why not?

    GrizzlyAK Level 1

      I currently use Adobe CS3 (ACR 4.6) and the latest LR (3.4.1/ACR 6.4.1). I've been using a Kodak DCS SLR/n and LR/ACR to process my RAW files. I recently bought a Nikon D3s and have found that I can't open the NEF files in Bridge or PS, primarily because my PS ACR 4.6 can't read them, and PS informs me that the file is of the wrong kind. I don't even have the "Open in Camera Raw..." option in the context menu in Bridge for NEF.

       

      My question is, then, is there an insurmountable technical reason that ACR can't be built so that it can 'degrade gracefully' for earlier versions of PS? I understand that new features and capabilities are added to ACR peirodically, but why can't the interface be designed such that an older version of PS can use the latest ACR (which, most importantly in this case, contains capabilities for newer cameras). PS doesn't care once the file is processed by ACR. It seems ACR could be easily written to determine what version of PS it should process for and, more importantly, why is it even tied to a specific version of PS anyway (other than perhaps 'smart objects').

       

      Luckily, I have LR and can work around this newfound lack of capability with my upgraded camera. However, what I come away with from this experience is that this is a well-designed force-fed upgrade requirement for Adobe PS customers that don't appear to be truly necessary. If there is a valid techinical reason that this is not possible I will understand, but as a career SW architect/engineer, personally, I just don't see it. It appears that if Adobe has taken the path that if it can't create upgrades that stimulate mass upgrades (which haven't happened with CS4 or CS5, and shareholders know it), then they rely on HW updates to make their products obsolete. Not a good business practice. (Just ask Microsoft and the millions of people still using Windows XP Pro).

       

      I would appreciate any input anyone might have on why ACR is designed in this way.

        • 1. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
          ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

          Why not, because it is more cost effective to do the last one, only.

           

          Adobe  would be programming and testing 6 different versions (or at least 5 since the DNG standard came out) of ACR instead of just the last  verison.

           

          And users wouldn't be upgrading to get new camera support.

           

          Why haven't you upgraded your software to match your new camera?

          • 2. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
            JimHess-h1lFU3 Level 1

            Adobe claims that the design of each version is so different that it makes it impossible to make Camera Raw backward-compatible. That may be true, but I think it's also a marketing tool. You're not going to see it change. That's the way it always has been, and is probably the way it always will be. There is, however, the DNG converter that you can use to convert your raw images to the Digital negative format. And that converter is free. Yes, I know, it's an extra step and a lot of people don't want to be bothered with that. But it really isn't that big of a deal. The conversion can be accomplished when the images are imported. And then the workflow is pretty much normal from that point on. But to answer your question or rant directly, ACR it isn't backward compatible, and that probably will never change.

            • 3. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
              Jeff Schewe Level 5

              JimHess wrote:

               

              Adobe claims that the design of each version is so different that it makes it impossible to make Camera Raw backward-compatible.

               

              I've never heard anybody at Adobe say it was impossible...but technically diffuclut since ACR is a plug-in inside of a host application-Photoshop, whose SDK changes with each and every version of Photoshop. In addition there are platform dependancies that play into the technical challenge. The code branching involved would be considerable to say the least.

               

              So Adobe decided to only offer free updates for the current shipping version of Photoshop, and offer the free DNG Converter as a backwards compatibility option–which they didn't have to do BTW...

               

              Clearly business considerations played a part...but marketing? Really? Adobe has to decide what makes the most sense from both a technical engineering cost as well as the revinue supporting products that are no longer shipping doesn't make sense. Management made the decision, not "marketing". That's not the way corporation are run.

              • 4. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                JimHess-h1lFU3 Level 1

                Well then, Jeff, I guess I will have to stop referring to what I have read from your comments. I realize that you are not Adobe. But a while back I remember reading comments from you talking about the technical difficulties of trying to make ACR backward compatible. You indicated, at that time, that the architecture of Photoshop changes so dramatically from one version to the next that it makes it impossible/impractical to try to make ACR backward compatible. I guess I learned my lesson. I'll keep my nose out of this sort of conversation. I get hammered no matter what I say. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

                • 5. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                  GrizzlyAK Level 1

                  Jeff, I still don't buy it, and here's why. As you point out, ACR is basically a plug-in to PS. It is an interface between the varied world of camera raw and the well-defined world of PS and the PSD file format. In the simplest terms, it converts a RAW file into a PSD file and dumps it directly into PS, right? OK, so every version of PS already has a preference (and capability) to 'maximize file compatibility', thereby making the latest PS file capable of being opened by previous versions of PS. So, since it is ACR that takes a RAW file and creates a PSD file (basically), then why can't it maintain the same 'maximize capability' funcitionality as PS? That doesn't seem like and insurmountable techincal problem to me, or even a challenging one, to a company with Adobe's expertise and resources.

                   

                  I'm convinced it is a convenient (and underhanded) way to force users to upgrade. People should have good reason (and a desire) to upgrade, not be forced into it by buying HW that is completely unrelated to the SW. ACR is the interface and Adobe has made a commitment to keep it updated to work with the latest HW (or face irrelevance), but using it to force users to drop several hundred dollars (or a thousand in the case of the complete CS) to upgrade PS unnecessarily is bad for business. I used to own Adobe stock, but have since liquidated it. I didn't see the leadership heading in a direction I considered sustainable. Neither does Wall Street and, apparently, as evident in the lackluster sales of both CS4 and CS5 (and now CS 5.5!?!), neither do current Adobe users. Warning sirens should be going off all over Adobe HQ, but I think their oblivious. I think they have gotten too comfortable with Flash dominance, and Apple and HTML5 are undoubtedly going to end that reign soon. It's time for Adobe to get back in the game and become competitive once again, or face what Microsoft did with OSX and Linux, or what Internet Explorer faced with Firefox.

                   

                  I only wish they were paying attention instead of monitoring these forums and trouncing posters with lame excuses why it's too hard to do something. Man up, Adobe.

                  • 6. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                    ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                    As a software developer, I understand Adobe not wanting to maintain an obsolete development environment just to recompile ACR from a previous version.  I do think it would be possible to provide camera profile information in a way that would be independent of the plug-in, much like the camera-profiles are now, to allow an older version of ACR to use newer profiles, although ACR would need to be updated to be smart enough to handle these independent profiles; however, this option would cost more, both in development costs and loss of upgrade revenue.  I, for one, want Adobe to survive and can afford to upgrade each time a new PS and LR version comes out, so I do.

                     

                    I'd suspect the Adobe stock price being stagnant has to do with the economy and also the fact that more and more people get their media online and don't require the perfection of photos on printed paper, so there are less customers willing to pay for a top-end jack-of-all-trades photo manipulation product.  And, otherwise, does all our outsourced talent, nowadays, in China and India and Korea use Photoshop per workstation, or do they just use open-source solutions or other, simpler and cheaper products?

                    1 person found this helpful
                    • 7. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                      Level 4

                      GrizzlyAK wrote:

                       

                      …Man up, Adobe.

                       

                       

                       

                      The Adobe legal department would hit the roof if Adobe staff owned up publicly to the fact that ACR provides, for many, the overriding motivation to upgrade to the next version of Photoshop.  They're already competing with themselves by way of LR and Ps Elements.  With backwards compatible updates of ACR a fierce new competitor would be further emboldened, namely older versions of Photoshop themselves.

                       

                      The reality is that the free DNG Converter is a fair alternative.  Folks go out and spend $10,000 on a Pentax 645D camera and then they complain about the $199 upgrade cost to Photoshop.

                       

                       

                       

                      ____________

                      Wo Tai Lao Le

                      我太老了

                      • 8. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                        GrizzlyAK Level 1

                        ssprengel, good food for thought. I, too, want Adobe to succeed. I use more than PS, and thus have CS3 Design Premium. Upgrading the entire suite (to maintain cross product compatibility) just to satisfy ACR because I bought a new camera is absurd (to me). Although I can afford to upgrade, I chose specifically not to upgrade the last three releases because I had better things to spend my money on (and I had a workaround via LR, which is MUCH cheaper to upgrade, and which, btw, has NO PROBLEM creating a PSD file for CS3 using ACR). The features in the latest versions of CS were not compelling enough in and of themselves to warrant an upgrade to me (for the price asked). Adobe should ask themselves this: if the upgrade was half as much as it is now, would twice as many people have upgraded. I probably would have. Unfortunately, the longer I wait, the more it will cost me. At some point, I'll find another, more affordable solution, as you correctly point out, many others have done.

                         

                        But, as for ADBE, sure, it crashed just like everyone else in 2008, but never returned with the market like their rivals (APPL is up 400% from it's early 2009 low). I finally dumped ADBE at 3/4 of the price I paid for it, and it's about half that now. It was the only non-performer in my tech-stock-heavy portfolio. It's more than market impact, IMHO.

                        • 9. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                          Level 4

                          GrizzlyAK wrote:

                           

                          …Upgrading the entire suite (to maintain cross product compatibility) just to satisfy ACR because I bought a new camera is absurd (to me)…

                           

                           

                          That I fully agree with.

                           

                          As tempting as the deal on the suite was when first offered, I passed because I knew I would not feel a burning urge to upgrade Illustrator, Acrobat and InDesign,  I'm doing quite well with AI 10.0.3, ID 2.0.2 and Acrobat Pro 8.3.0 (as well as Photoshop 11.0.2, since 12.x does not run on my PPC PowerMacs.

                           

                           

                          ____________

                          Wo Tai Lao Le

                          我太老了

                          • 10. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                            ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                            Adobe is priced for business use, not for the photohobbyist, like some of us.  If you are making money with your camera and the Suite there's no reason not to upgrade.  Of course, as you point out the solution is to use the current version of LR with an older version of Photoshop. 

                             

                            Apple is up 400% because it is a highly proprietary, and using that idea, then Adobe should force an upgrade every year no matter what, and to process JPGs of new cameras.

                            • 11. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                              GrizzlyAK Level 1

                              Although Apple is highly proprietary (something about which I complain to them), their stock is up 400% simply because people WANT their products. They are creative, leading edge, robust and well-designed - and pricey (but people are willing to pay it). I bought an iPhone because I wanted one, and absolutely LOVE it. I don't like some of the restrictions that come with it, but am willing to put up with them for the product. But, this is not about Apple, really, it's about Adobe's flawed approach to keeping their products selling. Adobe's Creative Suite has stellar potential, but IMO, they're blowing it. That's just me.

                               

                              Still, I'd like to hear from anyone over at Adobe who can explain why ACR cannot - easily - be made to work with older versions of PS (ahem, just like LR's ACR does).

                              • 12. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                MikeKPhoto Level 2

                                I have had to rely on DNG to process output from new cameras while waiting for an update to ACR to incorporate them. Works fine as as standalone batch product, but why not incorporate DNG conversion directly into ACR? That way we can enjoy the best of two worlds.

                                 

                                Given that DNG could have a persistent interface, would it be that difficult to incorporate into future versions of Photoshop?

                                 

                                Just a thought

                                 

                                MK

                                • 13. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                  ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                  The Adobe RAW engine core is built into Lightroom, ACR and the DNG Converter and the three are released simultaneously so you won't get camera support in one and not have it in the other, normally, unless there is some bug in one that's not in the other, which usually doesn't happen.

                                   

                                  So it's not possible to have an OLD ACR with a NEW DNG Converter built into it, right, or are you asking for a Photoshop plug-in (ACR) to come with its own DNG Plug-in, a plug-in to a plug-in, to get it to accept new camera models.  I think it's be easier to make ACR independent of all the camera profiles instead of having one version within ACR and others in separate files.  The difference between one camera and another is usually just color and noise-reduction calibration parameters.  Sometimes, of course, there are other things like built-in lens-corrections or Foveon decoding or something else that requires code changes, not just parameter changes, but not nearly every camera requires code changes, I don't think.

                                  • 14. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                    GrizzlyAK Level 1

                                    MikeMikePhoto, that's a really good suggestion. Another idea might be to just decouple ACR from PS altogether. They did it with LR. Why not make it a stand-alone application that can output several file types, like PSD, DNG, and TIFF. Instead, people are simply resorting to using 3rd party RAW converters (some free) for their new cameras instead of upgrading their PS, and as a result are becoming more alienated by Adobe.

                                     

                                    For example, I was seriously considering upgrading to CSx Master Collection from my Design Premium to get the whole shebang. But, like Tai Lao, I considered the cost to upgrade with every new version just to get the latest version of ACR that will work with my PS, or some other hokey upgrade requirement. I just have something against a single plug-in driving my decision to drop another $1,200 on an upgrade every 18 months whether I need it or not. Not gonna happen. So now, I'm thinking that perhaps I'll just upgrade my PS and InDesign next time, and give up my Flash Professional and Dreamweaver (and learn HTML5). My GoLive CS2 is still working just fine.

                                    • 15. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                      MikeKPhoto Level 2

                                      I guess what I was trying to say was DNG is backward compatible with almost all version of Photo

                                      shop/LR. Whereas ACR is not. So having a plugin to DNG

                                      would solve that issue. Surely that is one of the design goals for DNG.

                                      • 16. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                        Level 4

                                        GrizzlyAK wrote:

                                         

                                        …So now, I'm thinking that perhaps I'll just upgrade my PS and InDesign next time, and give up my Flash Professional and Dreamweaver (and learn HTML5). My GoLive CS2 is still working just fine.

                                         

                                        Except that now that you have bought into the suite, you cannot upgrade the individual point applications, you would have to buy full versions of each point application at full price, not upgrades—or you have to upgrade the entire suite.

                                         

                                        That's why I declined to buy into the suite scheme right from the get go.  Never had a suite, never will.

                                         

                                        ____________

                                        Wo Tai Lao Le

                                        我太老了

                                        • 17. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                          GrizzlyAK Level 1

                                          If that is true, then that's yet another reason Adobe is losing ground, and customers.  Wonder how Quark's coming along? I should take another look at GIMP too.

                                          • 18. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                            Level 4

                                            Except that now that you have bought into the suite, you cannot upgrade the individual point applications, you would have to buy full versions of each point application at full price, not upgrades—or you have to upgrade the entire suite.

                                             

                                             

                                            GrizzlyAK wrote:

                                             

                                            If that is true…

                                             

                                             

                                            Oh, that is true, trust me!  100%, categorically and confirmed true.

                                             

                                            It was made clear at the very beginning, and it's somewhere in the legalese of your suite license.  It has been discussed ad nauseam in the Photoshop forums.

                                             

                                            The idea was that they were giving you a great deal on the initial price, and then you'd be bound to upgrade the entire suite.  The individual licenses you may have had for the point applications expire when you buy into the suite.  The serial number of the suite is useless for any individual point application upgrade you might buy.

                                             

                                            For a production environment, this could very well make sense.  For an individual user, not so much.

                                             

                                             

                                            ____________

                                            Wo Tai Lao Le

                                            我太老了

                                            • 19. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                              Level 4

                                              GrizzlyAK wrote:

                                               

                                              …then that's yet another reason Adobe is losing ground, and customers…

                                               

                                              Oh, yeah?  To whom?  

                                              • 20. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                JimHess-h1lFU3 Level 1

                                                Some of you might be hoping that Adobe is losing ground.  I don't know, maybe they are.  But I doubt it.  I have said before that $10.00/month is a pretty good price to pay to have a full software development team working to improve your working tools.  It hasn't motivated me to stop using Adobe Products, and I doubt if ever will.

                                                • 21. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                  Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                  I'm replying to the original post, realizing that much has been said already.

                                                   

                                                  1.  You probably already know that Adobe is providing you a FREE SOLUTION in the DNG converter.  That's right, just convert your raw files to DNG using the latest converter, then use all the power and capability of your existing old version of Photoshop and Camera Raw.

                                                   

                                                  2.  You paid money and bought a new camera.  Why?  Because it does more stuff or makes better pictures?  Assuming you answer yes, why do you think Adobe deserves any less of your money for their software that does more stuff and makes better pictures? 

                                                   

                                                  Would you be complaining that a camera manufacturer didn't give you a free camera if they came out with a new model right after you bought yours?

                                                   

                                                  You should be thankful that Adobe makes any changes at all to Camera Raw after you buy the software.

                                                   

                                                  Yes, we all know it would be charitable indeed if Adobe would continue to add Camera Raw support for new cameras to older versions for a while after the new version releases.  But they don't, and this is clearly because they have chosen this path on purpose.  They aren't in business to give away free upgrades - they are clearly in business to make money!

                                                   

                                                  Would you be singing a different tune if you owned $50K in Adobe stock?

                                                   

                                                  Debate this policy all you want but I really don't think it's going to change.  Frankly, it's a brilliant strategy on Adobe's part.

                                                   

                                                  -Noel

                                                  • 22. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                    GrizzlyAK Level 1

                                                    @Tai, you ask "To Whom?", well, mainly, to themselves. Just look at how poorly the last 3 releases of CS have done for upgrades, relatively to past. You can blame it on the economy, but I don't buy that. There's a value proposition connected to upgradeing software when it is in the price range of the CS. Personally (and I can afford it), it's just not there in the latest ones.

                                                     

                                                    @Noel, your argument about buying a new camera is like saying I'm making my garage obsolete every time I buy a new car and, therefore, I should be OK with buying a new house as a result? Really? And, regarding the ADBE stock... I did, and I AM singing a different tune. I sold all of it before it lost another 50% of it's value. The Adobe bottom line you are praising so readily has to be sustainable for an investor. When a company uses expensive, forced upgrades to users that include menial enhancements, IMO, that will come back to bite you. One only has to read through these forum posts to see that I'm not alone.

                                                     

                                                    Don't get me wrong. I've used Adobe's products a long time, and do almost every day still. I have a lot of respect for the engineers and what they accomplish in their products. I only question their management and the decisions they are making. The success or failure of a company rests squarely on the management. There may be no viable alternative for everything Adobe does currently, but that by no means that Adobe can rest on it's laurels and become complacent, or try to improve the bottom line by abusing their customer base in lieu of continued industry-leading creativity.

                                                     

                                                    And I disagree with your assessment about 'it'll never change'. It WILL change when enough people get tired of upgrading for nothing. There may be a lot of people who absolutely require Adobe's products for their work. But there are probably just as many who can, and will, find alternatives if they have to.

                                                    • 23. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                      Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                      GrizzlyAK wrote:

                                                       

                                                      And I disagree with your assessment about 'it'll never change'. It WILL change when enough people get tired of upgrading for nothing. There may be a lot of people who absolutely require Adobe's products for their work. But there are probably just as many who can, and will, find alternatives if they have to.

                                                       

                                                      Upgrading for nothing?  Are you daft?  There are huge new features in Photoshop CS5 that are very useful, and Camera Raw 6.x sports an entirely new conversion process which can deliver much higher quality results than any previous version.

                                                       

                                                      And I don't accept your premise that Adobe would make more money if only they gave away more updates to old versions.  We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

                                                       

                                                      I think you're only unhappy because for some reason you don't think the latest version is worth buying, or maybe you're applying a different standard for gauging what software is "worth" vs. hardware.  I do know that for some folks upgrading to the latest version means they need to get new computer hardware, so that compounds the problem, but hey, if you want to play you have to pay.

                                                       

                                                      Just buy each new Photoshop upgrade every few years and be happy.  Or, you have a free solution in the DNG converter if you just can't bring yourself to shell out the money for the slight added convenience.  I just don't see where the problem is.

                                                       

                                                      -Noel

                                                      • 25. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                        GrizzlyAK Level 1

                                                        OK, as I've come to notice in these Adobe forums, it's probably a good time to end a conversation once someone starts calling you 'daft', or telling you "I should be thankful" for something, or pretending to know why I feel like I do. It's been eye opening, for sure. It's just too bad nobody from Adobe decided to add to the dialog. You folks can carry on without me. Cheers.

                                                        • 26. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                          Yammer Level 4

                                                          Like you, I struggle to see the problem, and, as an engineer and programmer, I struggle to see why it's so difficult...

                                                           

                                                          The latest DNG Converter can read most camera raw formats and convert them to DNG. The job is half done already. All that remains is to feed the DNG output into an old version of Camera Raw, ensuring the correct compatibility setting is used for the conversion. The tools exist; it's automation that is the real problem.

                                                           

                                                          I wouldn't expect all the latest bells and whistles of new Camera Raw releases for free, but I doubt that an updateable api which converts raw to DNG before passing to Camera Raw can be so difficult that it's not viable. Such a thing wouldn't be compatible with existing versions of CS, but it could be built into future versions.

                                                          • 27. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                            Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                            I guess I have to spell it out:  It is my opinion that they did it the way it is today on purpose!

                                                             

                                                            You're looking for some technical reason why things are the way they are, while the real motivation is more likely from marketing.

                                                             

                                                            They've provided you a free solution, so you can't complain that they've left you out in the cold.  But it's certainly less convenient, and if you want maximum convenience and integration, you have to buy the upgrade.  Think about that, placing yourself in the shoes of a company trying to make money by selling software.

                                                             

                                                            Like I said it is the embodiment of the saying, if you want to play, you have to pay.

                                                             

                                                            Hey, I made an argument almost identical to the one GrizzlyAK is putting forth myself, until I finally saw the light.

                                                             

                                                             

                                                            -Noel

                                                            • 28. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                              Yammer Level 4

                                                              Steady on. There's no need to be patronising. I'm just pointing out that (in my opinion), for future versions at least, the technical arguments against backwards compatibility are minimal. There needs to be a distiction made between (internal) DNG conversion and new ACR functions. To expect new features for old versions of CS is not only unworkable, but unreasonable. I don't think anyone doubts that Adobe wants us to give it more money. It is a business.

                                                              • 29. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                                GrizzlyAK wrote:

                                                                 

                                                                once someone starts calling you 'daft'


                                                                I did not call you that - I asked if you were that in an overemphasized response to an extreme statement you made.  I understand that you have taken it as an insult, and I apologize for insulting you.

                                                                 

                                                                Could you please offer an alternate explanation for the following statement?

                                                                GrizzlyAK wrote:

                                                                 

                                                                ...when enough people get tired of upgrading for nothing.


                                                                Deliberate overemphasis to make a point?  A hidden context to the statement that I missed entirely?

                                                                 

                                                                -Noel

                                                                • 30. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                  Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                                  I'm sorry, Yammer, I didn't mean to patronize.  Geez, I guess writing my thoughts out plainly just isn't working for me this week.

                                                                   

                                                                  -Noel

                                                                  • 31. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                    Yammer Level 4

                                                                    Ha ha. Seems not

                                                                     

                                                                    What is needed is for someone to develop a Windows service (apologies to Mac users - I don't know how they work), which converts raw files to DNG (in the background) when they are first created/copied to the computer. It would use DNG Converter to do this, which would need updating every time a new camera is used.

                                                                     

                                                                    Any takers?

                                                                    • 32. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                      ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                                      Wouldn't you want this to be a device-driver so you could just copy to or from it to do the conversion on-the-fly as necessary.  And it is still a problem of how to get the DNG Converter to convert things under programmatic control when it's an interactive program, not a command-line utility, or did that change with 6.5? 

                                                                       

                                                                      If the DNG Converter was a command-line utility you could run a scheduled-task that is triggered by files being written to a directory or just a timer that would cause it to kick off a script to convert the incoming RAW files to another outgoing-DNG folder and then move or remove the original RAW files.

                                                                       

                                                                      I suppose you could use a Win-Automation macro to remote-control via recorded mouse-clicks the DNG Converter to convert files automatically.  You could run it in a virtual machine so it'd be mostly invisible to whomever is logged in, although they'd need to start up the virtual machine whenever they logged in unless you were running on a server-class machine where the virtual host runs as a service and doesn't require a user to be logged in.

                                                                      • 33. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                        Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                                        The DNG converter does respond to putting the path on the command line, by the way.  I don't know if there's syntax that will cause it to kick off a conversion though.  Just in doing a couple minutes of experimentation it's pretty clear it handles command line switches, though I couldn't coerce any help out of it.

                                                                         

                                                                        -Noel

                                                                        • 34. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                          Yammer Level 4

                                                                          I can't find the official documentation, but 10 minute's googling found this in a forum ...

                                                                           

                                                                          Command Line Support in the Adobe DNG Converter

                                                                          Introduction

                                                                          Previous versions of the Adobe DNG Converter always displayed a UI,  which required human interaction to convert propriety raw files into DNG  format. This made DNG conversion difficult to include as part of  automated raw processing workflows.

                                                                          Adobe DNG Converter 3.2 has added command line parameter support, which  allows it to be run by automation systems without displaying a UI. This  allows DNG converter to be included in automated raw processing  workflows.

                                                                          Running the Adobe DNG Converter from the Command Line

                                                                          Under Windows, you can run the DNG converter from the command line by  just typing the path to the executable file, followed by the parameters.  For example, assuming the DNG Converter is installed at the standard  location, type:

                                                                          “C:\Program Files\Adobe DNG Converter.exe”

                                                                          followed by the parameter list.

                                                                          Note: Under Windows, you need to include at least one option in the  parameter list to prevent the DNG Converter from displaying its UI. If  you don’t have any non-default options to specify, just in use the “-c”  option, which is a default option.

                                                                          Under Mac OS X, you need to type to entire path to executable file,  which is inside the Application bundle. For example, assuming the DNG  Converter is installed at the standard location, type:

                                                                          “/Applications/Adobe DNG Converter.app/Contents/MacOS/Adobe DNG Converter”

                                                                          followed by the parameter list.

                                                                          Parameter List

                                                                          The parameters list consist of options followed by the names of raw  files to convert. Options must precede the names of any raw files that  they apply to, and apply to all the remaining raw files on the command  line.

                                                                          Command Line Options

                                                                          The Adobe DNG Converter supports the following command line options:

                                                                          -c Output compressed DNG files (default).

                                                                          -u Output uncompressed DNG files.

                                                                          -l Output linear DNG files.

                                                                          -e Embed original raw file inside DNG files.

                                                                          -p0 Set JPEG preview size to none.
                                                                          -p1 Set JPEG preview size to medium size (default).
                                                                          -p2 Set JPEG preview size to full size.

                                                                          -d <directory> Output converted files to the specified directory.
                                                                          Default is the same directory as the input file.

                                                                          -o <filename> Specify the name of the output DNG file.
                                                                          Default is the name of the input file with the extension
                                                                          changed to “.dng”.

                                                                          • 35. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                            Yammer Level 4

                                                                            I don't know how old that is, or whether there are new parameters to support ACR backwards-compatibility setting. Maybe there's something on Labs.

                                                                            • 36. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                              Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                                              I wonder if there are any appropriate events raised by WIndows when files are automatically transferred to disk (e.g., through WIA)...  One could tie an action to the event via the Task Scheduler...

                                                                               

                                                                              -Noel

                                                                              • 37. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                                areohbee Level 6

                                                                                Oops - I see I'm a little late to the party - how to delete post?

                                                                                • 38. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                                  Hudechrome Level 2

                                                                                  There is an easy answer to all this, provided by a wine grower:

                                                                                   

                                                                                  “We will sell no wine before its time.”

                                                                                  -P Masson

                                                                                   

                                                                                  Don't buy a camera before it's time, and it's time is when the next version of PS arrives.

                                                                                   

                                                                                  I have done that and merrily go along with cameras that ran first on 4.6.

                                                                                   

                                                                                  Ok, ok! silly argument, so I'll go away now.

                                                                                   

                                                                                  Peace!

                                                                                   

                                                                                  Lawrence

                                                                                  • 39. Re: ACR backward compatibility - why not?
                                                                                    Noel Carboni Level 7

                                                                                    Actually it's a VERY good point.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Clearly, from a professional perspective, not bothering to figure out if Photoshop actually supports the expensive new camera one is about to buy is irresponsible to say the least.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    But people often miss the fact that every camera puts out a slightly different raw format from every other, since the camera makers just won't embrace the DNG format.  And so these people make the mistake of assuming they'll have the same support they have always had, then surprise turns to frustration and impatience when they realize that mistake.

                                                                                     

                                                                                    -Noel

                                                                                    1 2 Previous Next