5 ms·

> It is supposed to be raw data from the sensor with some additional metrics streamed in ...and what do you think DNG is?

bobmcnamara 2y ago
A file format containing a subset of the image sensor data needed for tuning an image sensor. It's user focused rather than camera developer focused.
- seba_dos1 2y ago
  Neither DNG nor various vendor-specific raw formats are meant for tuning an image sensor. They can be used for that in some specific cases, but it's not what they are for. They're for taking photos and providing the user with less opinionated data so they can do the processing of their photos the way they want rather than rely on predefined processing pipeline implemented in the camera. Despite the name, this is rarely a pure raw stream of data coming from the sensor. It's usually close enough for practical photographic purposes though.
  - bobmcnamara 2y ago
    Our proprietary format was a header followed by a raw sensor dump. Despite this, people eventually used it for photographic purposes.
    - seba_dos1 2y ago
      So is DNG in the implementation I've worked on (data as outputted by the sensor wrapped in a TIFF structure), but whether what the sensor outputs is actually "raw" can be debatable and is sensor- and configuration-dependent.
      - bobmcnamara 2y ago
        Absolutely true. Our sensors would dump their registers in the first few lines so at least you knew what settings were used for that frame.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
rickdeckard 2y ago
A patented format where Adobe standardized the exact syntax for each parameter, with mandatory and optional elements to be compliant, and (!) a patent license with some non-trivial implications which is also only valid if the implementation is compliant. In a development environment, this format competes with an already-implemented proprietary RAW-format which already works and can be improved upon without involvement of a legal department or 3rd party.
- dtagames 2y ago
  This is not correct. Both the subhead of the article and the DNG format's Wikipedia Page state that DNG is open and not subject to IP licensing. While having two file formats to deal with in software development definitely "competes" with the simplicity of just having one, patents and licensing aren't the reason they're not choosing Adobe DNG.
  - rickdeckard 2y ago
    The fact that both your sources are NOT the actual DNG license text should be sufficient to humble yourself from "This is not correct" to at least a question. --> Your information source is incomplete. Please refer to the license of DNG [0]. The patent rights are only granted: 1. When used to make compliant implementations to the specification, 2. Adobe has the right to license at no cost every method used to create this DNG from the manufacturer, and 3. Adobe reserves the right to revoke the rights "in the event that such licensee or its affiliates brings any patent action against Adobe or its affiliates related to the reading or writing of files that comply with the DNG Specification" -- None of this is trivial to a large company. First of all, it requires involvement of a legal department for clearance, Second, you are in risk of violation of the patent as soon as you are not compliant to the specification, Third, you may have to open every IP to Adobe at no charge which is required in order to create a DNG from your sensor (which can be a significant risk and burden if you develop your own sensor) and Fourth, in case the aforementioned IP is repurposed by Adobe and you take legal action, your patent-license for DNG is revoked. -- --> If you are a vendor with a working RAW implementation and all the necessary tools for it in place, it's hard to make a case on why you should go through all that just to implement another specification. [0] https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/digital-negative.html#dng https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/digital-negative.html#dng

bobmcnamara 2y ago

A file format containing a subset of the image sensor data needed for tuning an image sensor. It's user focused rather than camera developer focused.

seba_dos1 2y ago
Neither DNG nor various vendor-specific raw formats are meant for tuning an image sensor. They can be used for that in some specific cases, but it's not what they are for. They're for taking photos and providing the user with less opinionated data so they can do the processing of their photos the way they want rather than rely on predefined processing pipeline implemented in the camera. Despite the name, this is rarely a pure raw stream of data coming from the sensor. It's usually close enough for practical photographic purposes though.
- bobmcnamara 2y ago
  Our proprietary format was a header followed by a raw sensor dump. Despite this, people eventually used it for photographic purposes.
  - seba_dos1 2y ago
    So is DNG in the implementation I've worked on (data as outputted by the sensor wrapped in a TIFF structure), but whether what the sensor outputs is actually "raw" can be debatable and is sensor- and configuration-dependent.
    - bobmcnamara 2y ago
      Absolutely true. Our sensors would dump their registers in the first few lines so at least you knew what settings were used for that frame.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

rickdeckard 2y ago

A patented format where Adobe standardized the exact syntax for each parameter, with mandatory and optional elements to be compliant, and (!) a patent license with some non-trivial implications which is also only valid if the implementation is compliant. In a development environment, this format competes with an already-implemented proprietary RAW-format which already works and can be improved upon without involvement of a legal department or 3rd party.

dtagames 2y ago
This is not correct. Both the subhead of the article and the DNG format's Wikipedia Page state that DNG is open and not subject to IP licensing. While having two file formats to deal with in software development definitely "competes" with the simplicity of just having one, patents and licensing aren't the reason they're not choosing Adobe DNG.
- rickdeckard 2y ago
  The fact that both your sources are NOT the actual DNG license text should be sufficient to humble yourself from "This is not correct" to at least a question. --> Your information source is incomplete. Please refer to the license of DNG [0]. The patent rights are only granted: 1. When used to make compliant implementations to the specification, 2. Adobe has the right to license at no cost every method used to create this DNG from the manufacturer, and 3. Adobe reserves the right to revoke the rights "in the event that such licensee or its affiliates brings any patent action against Adobe or its affiliates related to the reading or writing of files that comply with the DNG Specification" -- None of this is trivial to a large company. First of all, it requires involvement of a legal department for clearance, Second, you are in risk of violation of the patent as soon as you are not compliant to the specification, Third, you may have to open every IP to Adobe at no charge which is required in order to create a DNG from your sensor (which can be a significant risk and burden if you develop your own sensor) and Fourth, in case the aforementioned IP is repurposed by Adobe and you take legal action, your patent-license for DNG is revoked. -- --> If you are a vendor with a working RAW implementation and all the necessary tools for it in place, it's hard to make a case on why you should go through all that just to implement another specification. [0] https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/digital-negative.html#dng https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/digital-negative.html#dng