On 21 Feb 2008, at 14:45, AG Schnozz wrote:
>
>> I think it's difficult to compare film and digital 'negatives'. We
>> have many choices of 'developer' for our RAW files. Imagine someone
>> producing a RAW file that was impossible to process unless you used
>> their own RAW editor? It may have worked for Kodachrome (RIP), but
>> it would have a very short shelf life in the digital world...
>
> Sigma Foveon.
Not true at all - and in fact it enhances the argument for DNG. You
can load Foveon files into many RAW editors after they are converted
to DNG :). It's quite a common practice for those who are using Sigma
DSLR's.
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|