Adobe DNG support?

[Snaphaan]

Any rumors from Corel if they will support Adobe's DNG format in a future version. I made a suggestion in the wishlist.

[ferdinand-paris]

This was discussed extensively back in the days when the Bibble Labs team were still on the job - perhaps even back in the Bibble 5 days. The Labs team were quite emphatic they they wouldn't support DNG created by the Adobe conversion tool. I don't recall the precise reasons, but they had some. IIRC camera-created DNG was supported, at least for some cameras.

If the Labs team wouldn't do it then personally, I'd be surprised if Corel did. But that said, I seem to recall that the Labs team wasn't going to support non-Bayer sensors either, and Corel have recently introduced support for Fuji x-trans so anything is possible. However I think that Corel was pushed to do this because of the popularity of Fuji among enthusiast shooters, i.e. those that shoot RAW, and ASP was at a significant competitive disadvantage. I don't see that that's the case for DNG.

Short version: don't hold your breath.

[Snaphaan]

Short version: don't hold your breath.

Oh well, that's a REAL pity. I'm moving to PhotoNinja then.

Hopefully one day Aftershot Pro will have some DNG support. It's the only thing keeping me back.

[nipponichi]

Why converting to DNG? With virtual machines and backed up SW you can convert your RAWs in 100 years if necessary but there is never a way back.
With DNG you are limiting the number of available RAW converters.

I remember Bibble refused to support converted DNG because for every camera the DNG import filter has to be fine-tuned, so meaning double-work without real benefit.
There cannot be just one generic DNG import if best quality shall be achieved.

Regarding Photo Ninja: Do you get exactly the same result if you compare results from original RAW-file and converted DNG file?
Or is there a difference? (I don't know.)

[pgman]

This was discussed extensively back in the days when the Bibble Labs team were still on the job - perhaps even back in the Bibble 5 days. The Labs team were quite emphatic they they wouldn't support DNG created by the Adobe conversion tool. I don't recall the precise reasons, but they had some. IIRC camera-created DNG was supported, at least for some cameras.

If the Labs team wouldn't do it then personally, I'd be surprised if Corel did. But that said, I seem to recall that the Labs team wasn't going to support non-Bayer sensors either, and Corel have recently introduced support for Fuji x-trans so anything is possible. However I think that Corel was pushed to do this because of the popularity of Fuji among enthusiast shooters, i.e. those that shoot RAW, and ASP was at a significant competitive disadvantage. I don't see that that's the case for DNG.

Short version: don't hold your breath.

It had to do with Adobe.

Nobody else, than Adobe was allowed to zip/compress the DNGs. So Pentax, Leica... use the DNG format and it's uncompressed, while the Adobe converter zips the TIF and the JPEG section of the DNG file.

Now, that Adobe has applied to make DNG an ISO standard (that was in 2008), they may have changed their policy. Looks like not much is happening with DNG becoming a standard format...

/Syv

[Snaphaan]

Why converting to DNG? With virtual machines and backed up SW you can convert your RAWs in 100 years if necessary but there is never a way back.
With DNG you are limiting the number of available RAW converters.

Without some universal standard in 100 years some formats might become absolute.

The problem is I have a massive amount of older DNG files that were converted from RAW's I don't always have anymore. Yes, that was a mistake but still. It would be terrific if AP allowed me to revisit those older DNG's.

I can't imagine DNG support is anything worse than supporting all the current RAW formats.

I could make the switch to Aftershot Pro and stick to the camera specific RAW files (which I have been doing for a couple of months now). Maybe I should, maybe I shouldn't. You see I'm switching to Paintshop Pro and if Corel has a RAW converted that would blend seamlessly with it's photo editor then I'm in support of it 100%.

Also, I heard that Corel doesn't seem to really invest much time and effort for Aftershot. Is this true?