OpenRAW

Yes, the D30 is supported by DNG and others, but think of two things.
1)If I had puchased a D30 in 2000 and shot RAW files from day one at a rate of +/- 30 shots per week you would have around 7,000 images stored in an unsupported format that would need to be converted.

2)What if part of Canon's RAW file on a new camera is encrypted? Then after 5 years support in their software is dropped.

A single common, open, and not privately owned RAW format would be great but it will be many years (and millions of proprietary RAW images) later.

Nice comment though, at least you are thinking about the future viability of your images and taking steps to protect them.

Thanks, Larry.

I agree about the problem of numbers. (Except that, even as an amateur, I sometimes shoot over 200 Raw photographs in a day!)

If I had a D30 and had that problem, I would probably only convert when I decided to work with specific images anyway. With my own camera, (a Pentax, hence even less confidence in software longevity), 7000 PEF Raw images would be 100 GB.

The issue with the D30 isn't encryption, is it? I agree that would matters worse, and is an unacceptable attitude by a manufacturer. The issue with the D30 is the simpler one of lack of support for the native Raw format.

DNG is a published standard, with a published global licence for people to use it. It is basd on other published standards, such as TIFF EP & XML. I have been using it for just over 6 months, without noticing any problems in that time. (But I use PS CS, so naturally it would work with that s/w!)

If it is the "privately owned" (by Adobe) aspect of DNG that is putting you off, you are not alone. But TIFF 6.0 is also privately owned by Adobe - are people put off using TIFF by that? Adobe have everything to gain by encouraging people to use Raw, and lots to lose by placing obstacles in their way, such as licensing fees, etc.

Early adopters of DNG appear to be other editors, & image-management/database systems - used by photographers & users of photographs. We have to hope that Adobe keep providing their free DNG Converter, until camera manufacturers do something more sensible.

If DNG turns out not to be the answer, and another standard appears, I assume there will be a free DNG to XYZ Converter for that!

Hi - Nikon owner. Ten Thousand + Raw files. I'm not sure DNG is the answer - there can be more than one solution to a problem. I do wholeheartedly support the open documentation of the RAW files as the most likely solution that supports the users end goal - to be able to use the RAW format of your camera of choice for perpetuity. I don't see Canon, Nikon, Phase, or any of the other camera makers using the DNG format any time soon.

Hi, Robert.

Do you believe that a documented standard Raw format is at least PART of the solution? (Whether it should be DNG is a separate question. I would like to know what a better standard would look like).

All my experience in helping to design computer systems tells me that common standards are key, not just documentation of proprietary standards.

I agree that the major camera manufacturers will probably not support DNG in the short term. Here is the documented state at the end of February:

http://avondale.typepad.com/rawformat/2005/02/index.html

(Is the "Phase One Capture One" that is to support DNG related to the "Phase" you mention?)

Fortunately, as long as Adobe supply a free DNG Converter, it is less important whether the camera manufacturers support DNG than whether Raw-processors & photo-editors & asset management systems support DNG. But, obvious, we eventually need the camera manufacturers to support it, and not just Leica & Hasselblad (as promised).

I see a common Raw standard as THE target, with various other initiatives necessary in the meantime.