At 12:16 PM 7/5/2005, Tina Manley wrote:
I agree, Jeff. It's way too complicated for me. I've tried to read
Adobe's specifications on DNG and it sounds like Greek!
http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/pdfs/dng_spec.pdf
I've been depending on the experts to translate it and this is what the
experts say on the OpenRaw.org site:<snipped>
Tina, it sounds like a lot of "possible" things, but that's true of almost
anything new. What I hear is that these people are pushing a specific
version of RAW file (OpenRaw) and don't like what Adobe did because it
gives the manufacturers some control. It sounds a bit catty to me, and
there isn't any real evidence that there is anything wrong with .dng. I
don't use .dng, but after your first post I tested it, and it works fine,
including with white balance.
Jeff Spirer
Photos: http://www.spirer.com
One People: http://www.onepeople.com/
Surfaces and Marks: http://www.withoutgrass.com
