An interesting discussion can be found on the Photoshop forums here (use a guest login to browse) about the current state of play re: raw files from the D2X and ACR. In essence, a stumbling block is that the D2X and D2Hs NEFs contain the "as shot" white balance info in an encrypted form, and Adobe feels (probably rightly) that cracking the encryption will expose them to a slavering horde of Nikon IP lawyers.
Discussion of the discussion may be found here and (tangentially) here.
This could pose a real problem for D2X shooters that want to shoot raw and don't want to use Nikon Capture.
Seems crazy that Nikon wouldn't at least want to give people the option of using alternative software (especially one so ubiquitous), but maybe it is an extension of the old tripe in camera manuals... "you can only use Nikon flash guns with Nikon cameras, or you risk damaging the circuitry of the camera" - yeah right!
This does seem very silly - especially if the photographer has set the white balance themself.
The good news is that Adobe say that the RAW converter for the D2X will be in the next version of ACR (3.1) due out before CS 2.
Alex
It is the same with Capture One. In its beta release 3.7 a raw converter for the D2X files are included and works pretty well and fast but also the "as shot" function is not given due to the encryption of this part of the data and Nikon does not release that information neither to Phase One nor to Adobe so far (this will also not be included in CS2 nor in ACR 3.1). However, capture One is anyway better than ACR in my opinion and with the automatic function for the whitebalancing it works pretty fast. Notice that Phase One offers a special deal these days for a package of Capture One and iview for $499. There is also a free 30 days trial version. see www.phaseone.com
Seems like a really strong argument for Adobe's DNG - to remove all of this proprietary BS. I makes me quite frustrated that Nikon has chosen this route.
Im just curious...why would Nikon only encrypt the white balance and leave everything else open to edit in ACR and other packages? Or, do they figure locking this feature would be enough to get everyone to use Nikon capture..
M.
A friend of mine has indicated that the D50 and the D70s will also have this "encoded" white balance.
And that if I use ACR to work on photo's I should NOT update my firmware on my D70 in May, because it to will use the encoded white balance settings.
This is a multi sided story. Nikon has a kit that allows 3rd party manufactures to decode their files and properly access them from their software. Also other manufactures also encode their file information. I have read a number of conspiracy theories about whom is trying to make a power play here. Many say Nikon. Others say Adobe is trying to impose it's open raw standard.
My guess is they work it out. In the end there is a symbiotic relationship between these companies and they will remember that they have to play nice together.
The conspiracies I like best blame it on the Cannonheads.
This is a multi sided story. Nikon has a kit that allows 3rd party manufactures to decode their files and properly access them from their software. Also other manufactures also encode their file information. I have read a number of conspiracy theories about whom is trying to make a power play here. Many say Nikon. Others say Adobe is trying to impose it's open raw standard.
My guess is they work it out. In the end there is a symbiotic relationship between these companies and they will remember that they have to play nice together.
The conspiracies I like best blame it on the Cannonheads.
Who they?
As a user of the Nikonos in several iterations, and then the RS AF, I feel I am sufficiently "qualified" to suggest that Nikon must be one of the more ignorant/arrogant organisations bested only by their local distributor here in Oz.
It's made me decide that, afterdecades of using Nikon equipment, I'm actively opting out.
Cheers,
Christian
This is a multi sided story. Nikon has a kit that allows 3rd party manufactures to decode their files and properly access them from their software. Also other manufactures also encode their file information. I have read a number of conspiracy theories about whom is trying to make a power play here. Many say Nikon. Others say Adobe is trying to impose it's open raw standard.
Being limited to their SDK would be very limiting. Also, encoding and encrypting are different things. All of the data has to be encoded, but encryption is an explicit statement that says, "keep out."
Also, it's not just Adobe vs. Nikon. It's Nikon vs. all third-party software guys, and it's a statement about who owns the images you shoot.
