1 Sep
2011
1 Sep
'11
1:43 p.m.
Right. Of course you can also use TIFF, which is
somewhere in between.
From what I understand. TIFF covers a multitude of sins
;-) It is quite
psosible to have a program that can handle some TIFF files and not
ohters, for ecxample.
It's not lossy like jpeg, stores 16-bit (many
cameras' sensors output
14), but still permanently bakes the white balance.
Of the crowd who support keeping the RAW images around (some just
post-process immediately to TIFF or JPEG, and discard the .RAW) suggest
converting to .DNG, and keeping both the RAW and DNG. Of course
everything is mostly duplicated, but it's my feeling that original disk
space, backup disk space, and bandwidth is cheap and so I couldn't care
less about sort of doubling my requirements.
I don;t see that as a solution. In an _ideal_ world, every image would
also be printed at a high resolution on archival paper :-). And it would
also be converted to a standrd (e.g. JFIF) format, even though this
results in loss of qualtiy, just in case that's all that could be read in
the future. But as we all know, things don't always happen like that.
The point bing that the image to need to recover <n> years from now may
never have been converted to TIFF or DNG or whatecer. Or the DNG fiel may
be corrupt.,
[...]
Besides, there's some "vendor lock-in"
when you buy Nikon (or
whomever's) lenses --- you would have to sell your stuff second hand and
That;'s not the same problem at all. From where I am sitting I can see a
dozen film cameeras with interchangable leses, all with different mouts,
regiser distancs, etc. So, no, I can;t take the lens from an Exakta Varex
and put it on a Miranda Sensorex, or from a Werra and put it on an
Olympus Pen FT, or wahtever .But once I've taken the photograph using the
lens/body of my choice ,the resulting film negative can be printed
withouit refernce to the camear that took it. In other words, if you gave
be a roll of 120 film negativs from a 'blad (a camera I don't own), I
could print them. I don;t have to worry that the lens from my Pentacon 6
would not fit that camera.
This is most certainly not true of handling RAW digital image files.
then rebuy a different manufacturer, just to deal with
basically the
same problems. The third party lens manufacturers that produce
compatible lenses are usually sub-standard(but admittedly cheaper) --
the glass from Nikon is better than tamron, sigma, and so on. Not to
mention, there are some real benefits to using Nikon glass on Nikon
body. An example is auto-correction of lens flaws (perhaps, say,
chromatic aberration) inside the body.
I am dern sure my Nikon doesn't do this...
-tony