Re: [Openexr-devel] Adobe's Digital Negative Format

[Derek Gerstmann]

Chris Cox wrote:

> > Wouldn't an open standard such as OpenEXR be a better choice?
>
> No, OpenEXR is the wrong thing for camera RAW files.

Thanks for clearing this up, and directing me to the documentation.

I freely admit that I know very little about DNG, and this is what
motivated my post, in hopes that someone could explain its need.

Thanks for the detailed summary and explanation.

...

The other point that I was interested in exploring was how feasible
it would be to simply extend the hdr encoding capabilities of OpenEXR
to provide the functionality needed for storing RAW files.

Thanks to Florean for pursuing this train of thought:

> Of course, I would prefer it if digital cameras could directly output
> OpenEXR files, performing a high-quality conversion inside the camera.
> I guess someone should contact digital manufacturers.  Users demanding
> OpenEXR output would probably be most effective.

I agree. It would be really nifty for the camera itself to take
multiple exposures and convert the RAW data into an OpenEXR
HDR representation all by itself.

> Another possibility would be to come up with a specification for
> storing raw camera data in an OpenEXR file, but from a camera user's
> point of view I don't see any advantage over using DNG, and I don't
> think we should try to reinvent the wheel.

And I think his point is justly stated, and there probably won't
be a need until there is a demand.

...

Thanks everyone for the discussion.

-[dg]
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Derek Gerstmann                                      address@hidden
http://home.myuw.net/dgerstma            NCCA - Bournemouth University
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=