On 21 Feb 2008, at 05:46, Wayne Harridge wrote:
>
>
>> Paul Shields <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> But - if we adhered to a universal RAW standard then there would be
>> no
>> need for any incompetent work. There is no reason why they do not do
>> that, apart from keeping proprietary ownership of the digital
>> negative. When you shoot 35mm colour film, you don't expect to be
>> limited to a particular developer I presume? C-41 is universal and we
>> expect similar results no matter which company develops the negative.
>> Imagine if a universal film type came out that was only able to be
>> processed by the manufacturer :).
>
> You mean something like Kodachrome ?
>
I think it's difficult to compare film and digital 'negatives'. We
have many choices of 'developer' for our RAW files. Imagine someone
producing a RAW file that was impossible to process unless you used
their own RAW editor? It may have worked for Kodachrome (RIP), but it
would have a very short shelf life in the digital world I believe.
Paul
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|