View Single Post
Old Apr 30, 2005, 11:25 AM   #37
JimC
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

marokero wrote:
Quote:
Coming from the D100, the difference in quality from nef to jpg was really big. With the D2x it's no longer the case.
That's one of the points I'm making. As advances in image processing algorithms occur, you can go back and reprocess your RAW images using current technology to get better results.

Quote:
I do on occasion shoot nef, I do know the benefits of added controls in developing the nef, but why should I bother fixing something that I could have gotten right from the begining?
That's a perfectly valid opinion. I'm sure others agree with you. There is more than one side to this issue.

Quote:
Nikon offers their software and there are several third party options already.
Yes, you have alternatives based on decrypting of the metadata, because some developers have decided to stand their ground on this issue.

As of now, Adobe has decided not to support the "as shot" white balance from the new models with encrypted metadata, because they appear to be concerned with legal issues surrounding the Digital Millenium Copyright Act.

Quote:
Don't use Nikon's if you're so unhappy, to each his/her own. I'm not going to bother any longer with this issue, I'll leave it up to you.
What if they want to use Adobe to process their images? They don't have as much choice then. What if other developers don't want to support these models because they're concerned about lawsuits?

IMO, encrypting data in RAW files stifles competition.

Again, I like to see others posting their opinions, and I'm glad you're posting yours.We don't have to agree. ;-) I think it's important to hear all sides ofthis dispute, and I'm glad you're giving yours.




JimC is offline   Reply With Quote