Adobe: No DNG turf war with JPEG XR

Update 5:15 p.m. PDT Friday: Adobe requested minor adjustments to quotations, and I obliged.

Adobe Systems' Digital Negative (DNG) format isn't a competitor to JPEG XR, a format Microsoft created as a higher-end replacement for conventional JPEG, an Adobe executive has predicted.

"I wouldn't label the two formats as competitive," said Tom Hogarty, product manager for Photoshop Lightroom, in an e-mail interview. He believes that not only is the case now, but more significantly, will be the case in the future as well.

DNG is Adobe's attempt to standardize the profusion of proprietary "raw" formats that give owners of higher-end cameras the option to process image data on their own computers instead of leaving it to the camera, which throws away a lot of data in the conversion to JPEG. JPEG XR, formerly known as Windows Media Photo and HD Photo, is Microsoft's attempt to create a higher-quality sequel to JPEG; JPEG XR likely will be standardized by the same neutral group that did so with ordinary JPEG.

Although JPEG XR and DNG are largely in separate domains, statements from Adobe and Microsoft indicate some potential for some overlap in the future.

According to Robert Rossi, Microsoft's principal program manager for emerging image and video technology, with JPEG XR, "You're giving people much of the capability of raw in a convenient file format. On the ultra-high-end there might be still a preference to use raw."

But in an earlier interview with Dave Story, Adobe's vice president of digital-imaging product development, he said raw is headed to a broader market as customers demand more image quality. "For a consumer camera, megapixels are not the ultimate goal. You can get a 10-megapixel camera for $400... We're shifting now to 'How do I get an edge on quality?' That's why raw formats exist. It's starting at the top and working its way down," he said. DNG will help enable that future by helping to avoid the "Tower of Babel" of different raw formats, he argued.

Hogarty, though, doesn't see JPEG XR and DNG on a collision course. Rather, he envisions three levels of image quality coexisting.

"The proposed JPEG XR solution will certainly provide increased quality for consumers using the current JPEG 8-bit format. But for serious photographers I don't see a significant amount of overlap between the value and flexibility that DNG (or proprietary raw formats) currently offer and the proposed JPEG XR solution," Hogarty said.

JPEG XR, he said, improves on JPEG limitations such as its inability to record more than 8 bits of data per color, providing a relatively coarse 256 levels between complete darkness and complete brightness. But it's no raw replacement.

"I think it's more important to determine which format suits the customer needs," Hogarty said. "Based on what I understand about JPEG XR, it would appear to be targeting the replacement of low-bit-depth JPEG files rather than encroaching on raw file format usage."

[horse7]

RAW is the way to go

If you are going to take a picture, why throw away information using lossy JPEG? For interchange and web, JPEG works very well and the loss can be tolerated. But 10 years from now, you may wish you had not thrown away data from the original image by using a lossy format. <br /><br />The art is a bit misleading also-- JPEG is 24b (8b/color) with 8b of luminance. Works well with current monitors and video cards, but the current state of the art in displays is far from capable of realistically rendering the full range of color.

[SeizeCTRL]

Completely Agree

I only shoot in raw now. If something wasn't right when I took the photo, I can always adjust the light, exposure, color and what not directly off the raw image.<br /><br />I love how CS3 creates an xml type file that keeps track of all the changes you made, that way if you want to revert back to the original, you can just delete that file.

[nicmart]

If camera makers accept DNG...

...that would finally, it seems likely, make it possible to print <br />pictures from kiosks in their uncompromised state. Canon and <br />Nikon, in particular, are doing shooters no favor by avoiding DNG.

[seanwal111111]

JPEG XR == Meritless

&lt;quote&gt;"Based on what I understand about JPEG XR, it would appear to be targeting the replacement of low-bit-depth JPEG files rather than encroaching on raw file format usage."&lt;endquote&gt;<br /><br />That's what I understand too, and in other words JPEG XR doesn't have any merits except that the format accommodates very high bit precision. The human eye is unable to see more than eight bits of precision per (R,G,B) color. Therefore JPEG XR doesn't have any merits fullstop.

[squished]

Superior compression

Don't ignore the much improved compression algorithm that JPEG XR offers. This holds a lot of merit. According to the article <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://news.com.com/Microsoft+photo+standard+comes+into+focus/2100-1041_3-6199840.html" target="_newWindow">http://news.com.com/Microsoft+photo+standard+comes+into+focus/2100-1041_3-6199840.html</a><br /><br />"Compression technology that can record the same quality as traditional JPEG at half the file size or twice the quality at the same file size. In addition, unlike JPEG, the Microsoft format's encoding algorithm can preserve all the pixel data in what's called "lossless" compression."

[Heebee Jeebies]

It all sounds nice except...

Why should anyone believe that DNG is good choice either. Adobe has been trying to cram it down our throats yet they can't get many camera makers on board and to make matters worse almost a year after Windows Vista shipped (which is a dog of any operating system I will admit) they still haven't gotten out a DNG Codec for Vista. It seems Adobe has doesn't seem to be taking their own comments seriously. You can't expect people to adopt something unless you fully support it.<br /><br />Microsoft' JPG format has an even bigger problem. It's Microsoft, I trust Microsoft like I think George Bush is smart and that is not at all.<br /><br />Robert