Suggestion for extra analysis

I have a suggestion for extra analysis of the survey results to give two pieces of information that can't be obtained directly from the report:

1. What proportion of surveyed photographers use software that doesn't support DNG, some / most / all of the time?

This would reveal the proportion of surveyed photographers who can't fully adopt a DNG-based workflow because of constraints in the tools they use.

2. How do attitudes to DNG correlate with "1" above?

This should show whether attitudes to DNG (for / against) are correlated with whether one's tools of choice support it. (I doubt if the survey could reveal cause & effect here, for example whether use of DNG dictates tool choice, or tool choice dictates attitude towards DNG).

Analysis for 1:

I estimate the answer is about 58%, but this makes assumptions about the relationships between use of different products.

The nearest that further analysis could get to this number on the information submitted is perhaps to find the proportion who use one or more of "Bibble", "Capture One", and/or "From camera maker". (This would combine results seen separately in Chart 14, taking into account Chart 7 which suggests that less than 1% use software, from the camera maker, that supports DNG).

Analysis for 2:

Chart 18 shows the response to the statement "DNG solves all known problems with use of RAW files". It is a bit puzzling, because if about 58% (or whatever the number is) of surveyed photographers sometimes use tools that don't support DNG, I would have expected a higher proportion than 25% expressing disagreement. How can DNG solve all known problems for that 58% (or whatever) of photographers? (Perhaps they are taking a forward view, or perhaps they are revealing lack of sufficient knowledge of DNG to express an opinion).

I would like to see something like the DNG line of Chart 18, but separately for the two sub-populations of "1". In other words, for those photographers who sometimes use tools that don't support DNG, how did they respond to this statement? And ditto for those who don't use such tools?

(I found this survey report fascinating! I think people are going to be quoting it for a long time).

Barry Pearson – Sat, 2006/04/29 – 4:48pm

Pitchertaker For many of us

Pitchertaker

For many of us using 1600x1200 resolution on our big monitors, your tiny type size is driving me crazy. Even with glasses, it's hard to read. This is killing my eyes....

pitchertaker – Thu, 2006/05/04 – 10:06pm

Hi, Barry. The additional

Hi, Barry.

The additional analyses you suggest should be very easy to run and present.

Can you send your standard email address to me at OR[at]OpenRAW.org so we can nail down a few details and then run the tables?

Thanks,

Calvin Jones

Calvin Jones – Fri, 2006/05/05 – 1:58pm