OpenRAW

Chapter 4. Experiences, Beliefs, and Preferences Concerning RAW Imaging Technology

Respondents were asked how much they agreed or disagreed with 18 statements about RAW file conversion/editing software, RAW file conversion/editing workflow, and possible future decisions or choices they might make related to RAW imaging technology.

Perceptions concerning RAW File Conversion/Editing Software

• Exactly one-third of respondents expressed both agreement (33%) and disagreement (33%) with the statement "There are enough choices of high-quality RAW conversion or editing software available." Nearly identical percentages indicated that they "agree completely" (10%) and "disagree completely" (11%). 34% neither agreed nor disagreed – making this the statement in the series on which opinions were most evenly divided.

• Respondents were also evenly divided about the statement, "the RAW conversion or editing software produced by my camera maker is useless to me." 38% agreed, 40% disagreed, and 21% neither agreed nor disagreed. That nearly 40% agreed with this statement indicates that camera manufacturers have failed to convince a large fraction of their customers that their own software is an essential system component for using RAW image files. At the same time, about the same percentage disagreed that the camera makers’ software is "useless," indicating that camera makers have a significant potential customer base for their software.

• About twice as many respondents disagreed (40%) than agreed (19%) with the statement, "Most photographers believe that their camera makers’ proprietary RAW file format gives them a competitive edge." The largest percentage (41%) neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement.

• 76% of respondents disagreed with the statement, "RAW conversion or editing software produced by independent developers will never deliver image quality as good as the camera makers’ own software." Only 7% agreed, and 17% neither agreed nor disagreed.

• Similarly 73% disagreed that "My camera maker’s RAW conversion or editing software is all I need for my photography." Only 10% of respondents agreed, while 17% neither agreed nor disagreed.

• 63% of respondents agreed that "independent developers produce better RAW software than camera manufacturers." Only 8% disagreed with this statement, while 29% neither agreed nor disagreed. These results are consistent with those presented in Chapter 3 where only about one in five indicated that camera makers’ software provided either the best image quality or the best workflow.

• Nearly 90% agreed that "RAW conversion software will continue to improve into the future." Only 3% disagreed with this statement and 8% neither agreed nor disagreed.

Perceptions about RAW File Conversion/Editing Workflow

• Most respondents (53%) agreed that "I refuse to be tied to any single RAW conversion or editing software product; I need different tools for different assignments or clients." 19% disagreed and 29% neither agreed nor disagreed. This finding confirms that most respondents do not believe that any one RAW conversion or editing software product meets all of their photography needs.

• 42% of respondents agreed with the statement, "the lack of a standard format for RAW files creates major problems in my work," compared to only 27% who disagreed, and 33% who neither agreed nor disagreed.

• A substantial majority of respondents (62%) agreed with the statement, "Encryption, hiding, or otherwise attempting to make any information in RAW files unavailable for use by other RAW software creates major problems for my photography," greatly outnumbering those who disagreed (17%) disagreed. 22% neither agreed nor disagreed with this statement.

• In response to the statement, "Proprietary RAW file formats are necessary for camera makers to improve image quality," 61% of respondents disagreed and only 16% agreed, while 24% neither agreed nor disagreed. A substantial majority of respondents does not accept camera makers’ positions that proprietary RAW file formats are essential for image quality to improve.

• A majority of respondents (53%) neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement, "Adobe’s Digital Negative (DNG) format solves all known problems with use of RAW files." Respondents who had formed opinions were roughly equally divided, with 22% agreeing and 25% disagreeing. The DNG solution appears to have generated only modest levels of either acceptance or rejection in the marketplace, with most respondents holding a neutral stance in early 2006.

• Fully 77% of respondents agreed that "There should be a single standardized format for RAW files produced by all digital cameras." Only 10% of respondents disagreed, and 14% neither agreed nor disagreed. Respondents agree far more on a preference for a standardized RAW format than they agree about whether proprietary RAW formats are necessary for improved image quality.

Perceptions concerning Future Choices or Decisions about RAW Imaging Technology

• 52% of respondents disagreed that "camera makers would never leave their customers without the ability to access or edit their older generations of RAW files." Only 28% agreed, and 21% neither agreed nor disagreed. These results reflect awareness that some firms whose cameras produced RAW files in proprietary formats have already ceased production, raising the risk of "orphaned formats."

• 68% agreed with the statement, "I am concerned that in the future I won’t be able to open or edit RAW files created by my older digital cameras," while only 18% disagreed. These results also show that the proliferation of proprietary RAW formats is creating significant concern and discomfort among camera makers’ customers.

• Nearly three-fourths of respondents (72%) agreed with the statement, "I would consider purchasing a professional grade camera that created RAW files in an open, standard format." In comparison, only 7% disagreed, and 21% neither agreed nor disagreed. Among respondents, there is very strong interest in a professional grade digital camera that will produce RAW files in an open, standardized format.

• In addition, 38% agreed with the statement, "I would consider switching brands to have a camera that created RAW files in an open, standard format." An equal percentage (37%) disagreed, while 26% neither agreed nor disagreed.

• Analysis of responses to both of the two prior statements shows that 34% - or about half of the 72% who "… would consider purchasing a professional grade camera that created RAW files in an open, standard format," also "… would consider switching brands …" to achieve that goal. That is, over one-third of all survey respondents (over 6,400 persons) reported that they would consider buying a professional camera that produced RAW files in an open, standard format and might even switch camera brands in order to do so.

It is difficult to over-state the potential importance of this result. There are very few features that camera manufacturers could focus on that would be as likely to affect the future purchasing decisions of customers as the decision to market a professional grade camera that would produce RAW files in an open, standardized format.

Perspectives on Overall RAW Imaging Technology

Respondents were asked about their agreement or disagreement with four general statements about RAW imaging technology.

• 57% of respondents disagreed with the statement, "I am familiar with the RAW technology issues, but I have not made up my mind about camera makers’ rights to control aspects of RAW image technology." Only 21% agreed, and 22% neither agreed nor disagreed.

• 67% of respondents disagreed that "Photographers will benefit most if camera manufacturers control RAW technology and provide conversion and editing software as part of their camera systems." Only 14% agreed, and 20% neither agreed nor disagreed. A large majority of respondents clearly rejected camera makers’ position that proprietary RAW imaging technologies are beneficial features of their "total imaging systems."

• Moreover, 70% agreed with the statement, "Camera makers have a poor track record in developing RAW conversion and editing software that meets photographers’ needs. They should license patented aspects of their RAW technology to all software developers for reasonable fees." Only 11% disagreed, and 20% neither agreed nor disagreed. Most respondents do not believe that camera makers can or will provide software equal in quality to their camera hardware.

• Finally, 90% of respondents agreed that "once a digital image is written to a file by a camera, data in all parts of the image file should belong to the photographer who captured the image. Camera makers should publish full and open descriptions of all parts of the RAW image files their camera produce." Only 4% of respondents disagreed with this statement, and only 6% neither agreed nor disagreed.

Respondents have exceptionally strong opinions on this topic. Camera makers that do not recognize and take account of these perceptions are at significant potential risk that their customers may decide to make future equipment purchases from firms that share their views and values concerning the information stored in RAW image files.