Monochrome DNG and Mac

[IgorRU]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I recently replaced my old & tired Macbook Pro with a new 13" Retina Display which runs on Mountian Lion OSX 10.8.2.

 

This what I now see when I double click & open the SD card on the desktop:

 

[ATTACH]347788[/ATTACH]

 

On the previous version I was able to see the thumbnails on the desktop. Once I open in either PSE or LR4 the thumbnails are visible.

 

Good to have the technical explanations for this. However is there a way around this or must I shoot DNG & Jpeg in order be able to see the thumbnails when opening the SD card on the desktop?

 

michali,

You can see Monocrom DNG thumbnails in Adobe Bridge CS6. then by the right click you can open file in PSE, ACR, RPP

My OSX 10.8.2

[jffielde]

I got a response from Leica just this morning to my question about Apple and Aperture support for the Monochrom's DNG files. She said that Leica had provided everything necessary to Apple to support the files, but that Apple had not responded as to whether they would support them.

[jonoslack]

I got a response from Leica just this morning to my question about Apple and Aperture support for the Monochrom's DNG files. She said that Leica had provided everything necessary to Apple to support the files, but that Apple had not responded as to whether they would support them.

 

Well, I guess one gets different responses from different people. But what I understand is that it's a 'core' issue, and support will come, but with an OSX update rather than an Aperture one. Around Christmas time was what I heard.

[mjh]

But what I understand is that it's a 'core' issue, and support will come, but with an OSX update rather than an Aperture one.

Support for additional camera models has always come in the shape of an OS X update, not an update of Aperture. The raw conversion functionality is part of OS X, not Aperture (or iPhoto that also relies on it). The latest update (supporting 8 new camera models) came just two days ago: Digital Camera RAW Compatibility Update 4.02.

[jonoslack]

Support for additional camera models has always come in the shape of an OS X update, not an update of Aperture. The raw conversion functionality is part of OS X, not Aperture (or iPhoto that also relies on it). The latest update (supporting 8 new camera models) came just two days ago: Digital Camera RAW Compatibility Update 4.02.

 

Hi Michael

Of course you're right, but that's not quite what I meant.

 

As I understand it they need to make changes to the actual core processing - not just to the parameters passed to it - so it will need an OSX incremental update, not just a Digital Camera RAW Compatibility Update. i.e if we're lucky it'll be in the 10.8.3 update - after which there will probably be another raw compatibility update.

 

Of course, I could have been informed wrongly, or I could have understood incorrectly - but it makes sense

 

all the best

[mjh]

It isn’t just sets of parameters that get added; the raw camera update replaces the actual code in /System/library/CoreServices/RawCamera.bundle.

[pico]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It isn’t just sets of parameters that get added; the raw camera update replaces the actual code in /System/library/CoreServices/RawCamera.bundle.

 

/System/library/CoreServices/RawCamera.bundle/Contents/

/System/library/CoreServices/RawCameraSupport.bundle/Contents/

and in this later is a .zip file of the specific camera plug-ins such as dng.adobe.m9digitalcamera.cam

 

 

[mjh]

Contents/MacOS/RawCamera in /System/library/CoreServices/RawCamera.bundle.

[pico]

Contents/MacOS/RawCamera in /System/library/CoreServices/RawCamera.bundle.

 

Ma faute

 

You know, but for the rest the plugins are xml plain text version here, should you want to look at any. I did not find anything for the monochrom, but all I did was a quick grep.

[mjh]

For all I know Apple could support the M Monochrom with the next raw camera update. Or could have done with the previous one, for that matter. Or the one before. If only they wanted to. (Fujifilm fans are in the same boat, btw: no models introduced after April 2011 are supported.)

[jonoslack]

For all I know Apple could support the M Monochrom with the next raw camera update. Or could have done with the previous one, for that matter. Or the one before. If only they wanted to. (Fujifilm fans are in the same boat, btw: no models introduced after April 2011 are supported.)

 

Well - I'm no tech, and in this context I understood that the changes were more complex - I would have imagined that the problem with the Fuji was parallel.

 

I do know that they have had the required monochrome information since the early part of the year, so that they are either not supporting the camera because they can't be bothered (in which case why didn't they simply say so) or because the lack of demosaicing (in the case of the MM) and the different demosaicing (in the case of the Fuji) takes a little longer to organise.

[pico]

I do not have a Monochrom, but if someone could poke the exif field of an Monochrom DNG to "M9", would it work?

[marknorton]

Viewed with my (now 3 years retired) software developer and vendor's hat on, I can see supporting the MM makes perfect sense for Adobe. The more cameras DNG is seen to support and the wider the variety of them, the better because it endorses DNG as a "universal" format. Impossible to know, but I don't expect Adobe would have charged Leica very much at all to support the MM - though part of the higher cost of the MM may include such a cost element.

 

Different situation over at Apple where, like it or not, Leica will hardly be viewed as mainstream and if there's coding work (as distinct from new parameter settings for existing support - say for the Nikon P7700), that's an entirely different matter and Apple will have to decide whether to devote development resources to this rare - in the scheme of things - camera and who is going to pay for the work.

 

My own experience of having such work done - for example, by Intel and a phone equipment manufacturer, Aspect - is that it is horrendously, mind-blowingly expensive and made my own charge out rate of £2000/day look cheap and (in a moment of immodesty) much better value.

[pico]

Viewed with my (now 3 years retired) software developer and vendor's hat on, I can see supporting the MM makes perfect sense for Adobe. The more cameras DNG is seen to support and the wider the variety of them, the better because it endorses DNG as a "universal" format.

 

Since DNG is Adobe's child, of course it would make sense. Apple bundled PDF into the OS. That's Adobe's, too. But Apple and Adobe are still fighting.

 

From the OS view, how universal is DNG if every new camera model requires a custom plug-in? Shouldn't a standard DNG be supportable using a single OS component?

[jonoslack]

Since DNG is Adobe's child, of course it would make sense. Apple bundled PDF into the OS. That's Adobe's, too. But Apple and Adobe are still fighting.

 

From the OS view, how universal is DNG if every new camera model requires a custom plug-in? Shouldn't a standard DNG be supportable using a single OS component?

 

Well, I don't think every DNG does need a new plugin - the MM is just different because of the lack of Bayer demosaicing (Adobe had to do something as well - at least, I needed a beta version to make it work when I was testing).

Other DNG files work 'out of the box' - it may be that camera specific colour information is added,

The M9, Pentax K5 etc. all just worked.

[sandymc]

Since DNG is Adobe's child, of course it would make sense. Apple bundled PDF into the OS. That's Adobe's, too. But Apple and Adobe are still fighting.

 

From the OS view, how universal is DNG if every new camera model requires a custom plug-in? Shouldn't a standard DNG be supportable using a single OS component?

 

So far as I am aware, Adobe didn't have to make any changes to their software for MM files - versions of LR and Photoshop back to the dawn of time (well, the dawn of DNG anyway) will open an MM file. They did put in some optimization in the latest versions, of course.

 

Of the other vendors, none have ever had a full DNG implementation - not even remotely close. Or are ever likely to, imho. So for them, it's camera by camera.

 

Sandy

[mjh]

I do know that they have had the required monochrome information since the early part of the year, so that they are either not supporting the camera because they can't be bothered (in which case why didn't they simply say so) or because the lack of demosaicing (in the case of the MM) and the different demosaicing (in the case of the Fuji) takes a little longer to organise.

While supporting Fuji’s X-Trans and EXR sensors is far from trivial (though obviously doable if one puts one’s mind to it), supporting the M Monochrom is. Now of course the owners of an M Monochrom represent just a tiny fraction of Apple’s market and they may think it isn’t worth the effort, however small.

[Dirk Mandeville]

Issues like this are what caused me to dump Aperture for Lightroom. Apple simply doesn't cater to the pro market. They cater to the mass consumer market and as nice as the interface is in Aperture, Adobe has long-sinced eclipsed them in the areas that really matter to photographers, I think. Not that Lightroom is perfect, by any means. But they do a much better job supporting new cameras and continuously expanding their list of lens profiles. Aperture just seems to be a hobby for Apple.

[jonoslack]

While supporting Fuji’s X-Trans and EXR sensors is far from trivial (though obviously doable if one puts one’s mind to it), supporting the M Monochrom is. .

 

Hi Michael - is it trivial - could you elaborate?

Sometimes taking stuff out of processing paths is as hard as putting it in - I'm also a developer, but I know nothing about this stuff.

all the best

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[TomB_tx]

Aperture just seems to be a hobby for Apple.

Everything is a hobby for Apple!