Some of the same things are true with my D100. Nikon Capture gives a
more detailed and better color rendition does Adobe Camera Raw. I
really think that either the camera manufacturers are not as
forthcoming with their code as one might think, or that Adobe just
can't take the pains to tune the raw conversion as carefully. Capture,
while generally great software, does not really hand off to Photoshop
that well. Nikon also provides a Photoshop raw conversion plug in as
well, but without the myriad controls, and camera settings are mostly
adopted automatically lessening its usefulness. I think all these
camera software solutions have their problems, as does Adobe. It is a
trick to work around them.
I have been thinking that archiving the PSD file may be the way to go
rather than raw. I can't imagine that PSD would ever become
inaccessible. Anyone have a thought on that?
Winsor
Long Beach, California, USA
On Jan 20, 2005, at 6:55 AM, C.H.Ling wrote:
>
> I worry about data archive more than software compatibility, I'm still
> using
> dBase III plus for my daily work. Data can be damaged (such as hard
> disk
> failure I faced few months ago) without any notification while software
> phase out will be a long notification period, there will be enough
> time for
> me to transfer the format. Actually, I believe RAW compatibility will
> be
> standard for most photo softwares and it doesn't need many resources
> to keep
> all the old camera support.
>
> I don't think the current RAW support from PS and PhaseOne C1 is come
> from
> Olympus development kit, they look very different from each other.
> Even with
> the latest C1 3.6 the image quality is still not as good as the one
> from
> Olympus Viewer. Unfortunately Olympus Viewer does not have a very fast
> work
> flow and it doesn't deal with over exposure very well.
>
> Olympus also provide RAW plug-in for PS, I have download the one for
> my PS
> 6.0, it provide exactly the same output quality as Olympus Viewer.
>
> C.H.Ling
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mark Dapoz" <md@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>>
>> Not that I'm a big fan of Adobe's policies, but at least they're
>> making
>> the
>> DNG standard open and royalty free (at least for now :-). None of
>> the big
>> camera manufacturers openly document their RAW format. They expect
>> software
>> developers to buy software development kits from them which provide
>> the
>> libraries to deal with the raw format. The majority of third party
>> software
>> that you buy does this. They're at the mercy of companies such as
>> Olympus
>> when it comes to reading older formats. How long will Olympus
>> continue to
>> support the E-10 format? 10 years? 15 years? 20 years? I bet in 20
>> years
>> they're not going to care about those ancient file formats! RAW is
>> good
>> as
>> a temporary format, just don't archive anything with it.
>> -mark
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|