OpenRAW

Hold on - its time to get real here. The TIFF standard was originally defined in 1986 by
a group of seven vendors, including HP and Microsoft, and is now owned by Adobe. Its a universal standard, fully open and published, and is used by the United States Government for image and document preservation in the Library of congress:

http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/fdd/fdd000022.shtml

Why wouldn't DNG go down the same path?

(Perhaps I just don't understand conspiracy theorists)

Perhaps I just don't understand your drone-like loyalty to the one, the only Adobe.
This isn't even remotely conspiracy theorizing ... This is real talk about real possibilities and if you can't grasp that you're sorely lacking any understanding of economic foresight.

Why does Adobe own TIFF then? To help advance their control of the Photoshop standard. They've made a good name for themselves, no doubt there. Imagine this ... realisitcally: "Adobe Inside" on every camera. And there wouldn't be a AMD, there wouldn't be a MAC. This would be an UNFAIR ADVANTAGE given to the already dominant company. Where's the competition in a standard such as ? So it should be taken out of the hands of the competitive.

Plan for the worst, hope for the best.
Or should I get real and consider that paranoid logic?

James, you clearly think that DNG is your enemy!

It isn't. Your fears are groundless. It is at least a step on the way to satisfying the goals of this website. But you are hardly likely to believe what I've just said!

If you MUST treat DNG as your enemy, at least consider the principle "know thy enemy". Learn about it. After all, it gains in support month by month, so you can be certain that you will keep hearing about it in the coming years. Unless you know about it, it will be easy for any knowledgeable person to refute whatever you say about it.

http://photoshopnews.com/?p=262

Does anyone other than Adobe take it seriously?

Yes, see the April report:

http://avondale.typepad.com/rawformat/2005/04/dng_support_sta.html

Is the support increasing?

Yes, see the smaller February report:

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

How can we feel safe if Adobe owns DNG?

Try re-phrasing that as "how could we feel safe if Adobe owned TIFF 6.0?" (Which they have done for 13 years). Did Adobe try to rip you off?

http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/tiff/TIFF6.pdf

Is it likely that camera manufacturers would ever trust a standard owned by Adobe?

They do for TIFF 6.0, and have done for 13 years! (How many cameras have TIFF as an option?) So do the rest of us.

Why can't we have an open standard for Raw developed like other standards with academics and disinterested parties?

Is that how people think standards are developed? Chuckle! Name one.

What, JPEG, you say? Er ... Forgent are sueing everyone in sight about JPEG. Adobe and many others are paying up. Forgent are now sueing Microsoft. So much for that way of developing standards!

Well, what is the basis for DNG?

DNG is an extension of TIFF 6.0, and is compatible with the TIFF EP standard. TIFF EP, (ISO/DIS 12234-2), is owned by ISO. It
is possible (but not required) for a DNG file to simultaneously comply with both the DNG specification and the TIFF EP (ISO) standard. Think of DNG as a way of making TIFF 6.0 and TIFF EP serve the needs of photographers, and people who use photographs. (DNG is not a stand-alone standard).

http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/pdfs/dng_spec.pdf

But can DNG support the data needed for my camera?

It currently supports 70+ cameras, with all sorts of sizes and sensor configurations. (Bayer sensors, Fujifilm offset sensors, Sigma/Foveon 3-colour sensors), etc. It is a very flexible and forward-looking standard. (It supports 32-bit channels, which is way beyond the typical 12-bit channels!) It supports the same set as Camera Raw:

http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html

But won't Adobe try to get royalty fees for it?

No - they have published a global licence to use it for free. Courts won't be sympathetic if Adobe ever tries to get money from it! But why we should worry, if they haven't tried to get money from us during the 13 years that they have owned TIFF 6.0? And do you think Adobe will come knocking on your door?!

http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/license.html

How can I use DNG if I don't want to pay Adobe any money?

Easy - use the DNG Converter. Free. No timeout. No need to register. Mac & Windows. Updated every 3 or 4 months with new cameras & features. Worked reliably for the last 6 1/2 months to my knowledge.

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?product=39&platform=Windows

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?product=39&platform=Macintosh

But there must be something in it for Adobe?

Yup! Adobe want photographers, and people who use photographs, to be happy people. They want those people to use Raw, and still be happy. Because those happy people will want to buy photo-editors with Raw capability. And many of those will freely choose Adobe. So Adobe will make a lot of money! (So will Adobe's competitors. So what?)

Does this satisfy the goals of OpenRAW?

A freely available standard, to which 70+ camera Raw formats can be converted today, accessible by an increasing number of Raw processors & viewers & asset management systems, and probably lots more software packages in future, capable of embedding your original Raw files in case you ever want to extract them ....

You judge. Adobe can't coerce you. I don't want to coerce you. What will enable you to sleep easy at night?

I know nothing. You know everything.
And with that said, I'm heading off to buy Adobe stock.

For a group that fights so fiercely as photographers for rights to their own photos, myself included, and with such a high-cost of investment in equipment required just to join the fray ... I suppose I shouln't be surprised by such an established prejudice against those who even utter the words non-profit.

How narrow minded we can be when it comes to our livelihood. I'm trying to be a voice of reason in the wake of this snow-ball Adobe started rolling. They don't need your support.

But you know what? DNG is a sound idea. And with all your harangue and
preaching of it I believe that more-so now. And it does accomplish the goals of this site, were it adopted by everyone. However, I have yet to meet a professional photographer who uses anything but photoshop. And I know dozens. Sure some use Nikon Capture ... but you know that deal.

Do you see my point? Or are you blind to anything but a bright future?

I think there is a little paranoia here. Adobe is hardly microscum. Adobe has acheived its dominance in the image processing market by suppying what people want. Photoshop is a great product and continues to be developed (just try CS2).
If some one came along with a better product we could switch, it is after all not fundamental to how a computer works.
Microsoft have acheived dominace onthe back of a second rate product that has become completly dominant in the market, whilst constantly failing to meet its users needs. It uses Trade Marks, Patents, legal muscle and political power to crush all oposition.
Adobes launch of the DNG format is obviously based on self interest (they do have to make a profit), however it actually meets a need, works and has been offered to all free to use.
I want to see OpenRaw and DNG become a standard. Controled by a body like the WC3 consortium (with Adobe and the camera manufactures all having a role), setting standards that companies and software developers try to meet because they want to.

"Controled by a body like the WC3" ... fine then.

it's the private ownership of standards i'm "paranoid" about.