Vista to give HD Photo format more exposure

Vista to give HD Photo format more exposure Microsoft is looking to supplant the ubiquitous JPEG with an image format of its own--and it's hoping the debut of Windows Vista will help do the job.

In 2006, Microsoft began promoting its own image standard, formerly called Windows Media Photo but renamed HD Photo in November. The company makes no bones about its ambitions: "Our ultimate goal is that it does become the de facto standard people are using for digital photos," said Josh Weisberg, Microsoft's director of digital imaging evangelism.

"HD" doesn't actually stand for "high definition," but it's supposed to connote the better image quality that comes with HD TV. Rico Malvar, a Microsoft Research director who helped develop the format, said that compared with JPEG, HD Photo preserves more subtle details, offers richer colors and takes up half the storage space at the same image quality.

It is tough to get new image formats to catch on, much less to replace prevailing standards, but Microsoft has two strong forces on its side.

HD Photo

First, Microsoft built HD Photo support into Windows Vista, consumer versions of which go on sale Tuesday. That means camera manufacturers increasingly will be able to count on HD Photo support when customers upload their images to a computer, and software such as Web browsers will be able to display and save HD Photo images.

"Clearly, the goal there is to help make it pervasive. If you can use it in Windows, a large percentage of the user base already has access to it," Weisberg said.

Second, Adobe Systems, the most influential image-editing software maker by virtue of its Photoshop products, is helping support HD Photo, said Kevin Connor, Adobe's senior director of product management. Though the "timing didn't work out" to build HD Photo support into Adobe's upcoming CS3 version of Photoshop, Adobe is working with Microsoft on a plug-in with the goal that both Windows and Mac OS X Photoshop users will be able to open and save HD Photo files.

"What's good about HD Photo is that it was designed specifically for digital photography, with a good understanding of how digital photography usage is evolving," Connor said. "It will certainly take time for HD Photo to be as broadly accessible as JPEG--if it ever is quite that broad--but there can be reasons even today why a consumer might prefer to use HD Photo."

'Massive' challenge
Better image format technology doesn't necessarily ensure success. JPEG 2000, like JPEG named after the Joint Photographic Experts Group that produced it, offered better compression quality than JPEG but was a dud. Likewise, the PNG (Portable Network Graphics) format fixed issues with GIF (Graphics Interchange Format), but it hasn't replaced it.

Camera makers have reason to be cautious before they build support into their products.

"JPEG is an industry standard with a variety of quality levels within its architecture," said Sally Smith Clemens, a product manager at Olympus Imaging America. "A replacement format would have to offer very broad support from many developers of both hardware and software to be practical or considered."

A further complication is that the enthusiasts dissatisfied with JPEG and most likely to appreciate HD Photo already are embracing an alternative: the raw image formats that provide detailed, unprocessed data straight off the camera's image sensor. Adobe is trying to standardize the chaotic profusion of raw formats through its Digital Negative (DNG) format.

Replacing JPEG is a massive, massive undertaking...
--Kevin Connor,
senior director
of product management,
Adobe Systems

But probably the biggest obstacle is JPEG's momentum. Even if Microsoft gets HD Photo to catch on, supplanting JPEG is another challenge altogether.

"Replacing JPEG is a massive, massive undertaking, as JPEG really works well for people. JPEG is an open standard that is supported everywhere, on every device and every browser and every workflow," Connor said.

But Eddie Tapp, author of several books on digital-image editing, believes ordinary photographers could be interested in HD Photo. Even the point-and-shoot crowd values image quality, especially when it comes to revisiting older photos, he said.

"The day will come when somebody says, 'That picture you did at Mount Whatever--I want a big copy of that,'" Tapp said. "People look back at images they've done and think, 'I wish I had a higher-resolution camera or better file.'"

Microsoft already has sunk more than six years into developing HD Photo and recognizes it has years of work still to come. "The adoption is going to take some time," Weisberg said.

Winning allies
Microsoft is also trying hard to court business partners for the format. It dropped the "Windows Media Photo" moniker not just because HD Photo is more descriptive, but also because of partners' objections

"Manufacturers of a product that might compete with something to do with Windows...didn't like putting something branded 'Windows' into some of their products," he said. "We don't really care too much for the potential backlash in the industry: 'Here goes Microsoft again with another Windows thing they want us to use.'"

Microsoft also lowered licensing barriers to try to speed adoption. "As you can tell from the license terms, this is not something where we said, 'Let's make billions of dollars off this,'" Weisberg said. The only licensing obligation is to maintain HD Photo image compatibility.

Open-source software also can support HD Photo, Weisberg said, even though Microsoft holds patents for the technology. HD Photo technology is covered by the Open Specification Promise, an agreement under which Microsoft pledges not to assert its patent rights.

CONTINUED: Sales pitch...
Page 1 | 2
More from News.com on this story's topics

Microsoft Windows

Create an email alert | RSS feed

Photography

RSS feed

Microsoft

Create an email alert | RSS feed

Adobe Systems

Create an email alert | RSS feed

See more CNET content tagged:
digital photography, JPEG, digital imaging, Adobe Systems Inc., Adobe PhotoShop

Add a Comment (Log in or register) 78 comments (Page 1 of 4)
Great benefits
by Striker77s January 26, 2007 8:22 AM PST
I'm a serious amateur photographer and I really hope MS HD format catches on. Any serious photographer shooting with a DSLR knows the problems with jpeg which forces most of us to shoot in RAW. A RAW file is just the data straight off the sensor without any processing. Everytime a new camera comes out with a new sensor the format changes. RAW is a pain to work with be we all do it because jpg is just horrible. HD offers some really neat improvements besides file size. To me the file size is the least important improvement. HD has the ability to save in 16bit or 32bit and uses a wider color space. What this means to everyday users is that when your camera over exposes or underexposes your image you can fix it on the computer. With jpg you are limited to very little exposure adjustments. The colors will be smoother and details in shadows and highlights will not be lost. The fact that HD come from microsoft is the best and worst thing about it. With MS fully behind it, it actually might have a chance to take over jpg. But with MS behind all the manufacturers of devices and software programmers will be extremely skeptical because if HD takes over, microsoft may suddenly start charging huge royalties. They attempted that a few years back with FAT16 and caused a huge uproar. Mark
Reply to this comment View reply
The end...
by thedreaming January 26, 2007 8:32 AM PST
...doesn't justify the means. We do need a new standard, but why does it have to come from Microsoft? Can't the open source community come up with a format that doesn't require royalties to be paid to a company just to use it? Remember when no one wanted to add GIF support to their editors/viewers cause they would have to pay royalties?
Reply to this comment View all 3 replies
The risks heavily outweigh the benefits.
by Microsoft_Facts January 26, 2007 8:35 AM PST
Does anyone have any fantasy that MS will do anything other than extract money from our pocket to use this format if they should prevail? You know all too well MS will constantly make changes to prevent alternative products and operating systems from using this format. Changes not only technically, but also legally to keep open source people out of it entirely.
Reply to this comment View all 3 replies
You couldn't pay me enough!
by LarryLo January 26, 2007 9:23 AM PST
Why does MS always try to control the file format? First MP3s to WMV now this? I am sorry, but given their track record on interoperability and format sharing (SMB2, Doc, etc) I simply do not trust them. Besides they are solving a problem that seems to only exist in their heads. I will stick with RAW and JPG Thanks!
Reply to this comment
As a professional photographer.....
by frankwick January 26, 2007 9:41 AM PST
As a professional photographer I welcome the change. Yes, RAW is good. However, shooting in RAW can be slow and the file sizes are enormous! My lab will not accept RAW images for processing. On the other hand, JPG is fast, all programs support it, the labs accept it, but there can be artifacting and loss of detail. If MS can work with the camera makers to have "HD Photo" as an option AND work with the major labs to support processing I would use it in an instant.
Reply to this comment View all 4 replies
You guys are funny!
by KTLA_knew January 26, 2007 9:45 AM PST
The number of posters that never even bothered to read the story or do even a few seconds of investigation into the question of royalties is quite funny! Good to know that 10 years on, C/ZDNet hasn't changed a bit! It was 10 years ago this very week I became a regular reader of C/ZDnet for amusement with my morning coffee. The names have changed, but the posts are EXACTLY the same! Thanks, all!
Reply to this comment
ROTFL! Yeah, right...
by Penguinisto January 26, 2007 9:59 AM PST
Here's why it won't work: 1) .jpg is a universal platform-independent standard. Good luck ditching that. 1a) If done right and with decent software, .jpg compression leaves no artifacts that can be seen by a typical user. 2) Professional graphics types don't want no stinking compression when working with files locally, so they'll use something not compressed, compelte with layer info and/or alpha channels. 3) Like it says in the article: "[b]A further complication is that the enthusiasts dissatisfied with JPEG and most likely to appreciate HD Photo already are embracing an alternative: the raw image formats that provide detailed, unprocessed data straight off the camera's image sensor.[/b]" Professional photographers already have .RAW format (a non-compressed raw CCD-output file) from which to work on w/o any intermediary software to dicker with aside from their camera-maker's plugin into P-Shop or (insert fave editor here). If you want it printed, you convert it to a no-compression .jpg, or you go to a professional printer using .tif (or preferably, something that uses CMYK color values instead of RGB, so that the printer doesn't have to do that conversion for you). 4) "[b]"The day will come when somebody says, 'That picture you did at Mount Whatever--I want a big copy of that,'" Tapp said. "People look back at images they've done and think, 'I wish I had a higher-resolution camera or better file.'"[/b]" ...BS. True resolution stops cold at whatever your camera shot it at. Anything else to enlarge it will always sacrifice sharpness, and will almost always lead to pixellation and artifacts. If you want a big resolution, you shoot it at max resolution right there, on the scene, and save it in the camera's native format, which can always be converted later on. The MSFT PR Flack failed to account for film and slide scans, which will always be dependent on the scanner, as the negatives and slides will always be of the same size, same chemical composition, etc. Your only hope there isn't some file format; it'll be the resolution of the scanner itself. No file format can deny physics FFS... I don't need a file format to make a bigger scan of a negative - stuff I scanned years ago w/ an old Acer 2700 film scanner (@2048 resolution), I can re-scan now with my current rig - a Nikon CoolscanIV (@4000 res) without the worry or regrets, or have the local photo shop scan it on a drum scanner @ 8000 or higher if I'm, oh, printing something the size of a billboard... 5) there are already file formats that do 16 (and even 24) bpp for internal use once I convert it from RAW... some 'innovation', huh? /P
Reply to this comment View reply
you're joking?
by sjkx January 26, 2007 11:03 AM PST
"but they encourage others to use their technology" ? by locking customers into their technologies. "You can't even play iTunes songs in Windows Media Player. (That is crazy!)" Is it just as crazy that you can't play protected Windows media in iTunes or on an iPod? The delusions of partisan biases, sigh.
Reply to this comment
RAW vs Jpeg vs HD Photo
by wilswong January 26, 2007 11:14 AM PST
Jpeg has its uses, times when the people using them do not need any enhancement. RAW is used usually when I take photos to do designs on them. However Jpeg still works fine. No matter what, I think what is really on the line here is our expectations and customer expectations (if you are a professional). I would say to maximize the potential of the camera ability the best bet is still using RAW and covert it to whatever format the lab can print. I say getting rid of proprietary RAW and have a open standard RAW is higher on the agenda than replacing JPEG. If JPEG is so crap, then use RAW. I believe the memory cards of today is fast enough to handle slightly larger files so it is not of consequence. The only people who may want speed with RAW would be the sports photographers and/or nature photographers. Otherwise most people out there would be ok with JPEGs and RAWs.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
Microsoft HD Format
by malibrate January 26, 2007 11:55 AM PST
This is just another attempt by Microsoft to co-opt everything in the world. I am a professional photographer and I can assure you that we do NOT need another image format. If MS ran the world back in the days of film, they would have tried to replace 35mm film with 36mm (or 34mm) film just to muck things up to their advantage. Like Bob Newhart says in his psychiatrist routine: JUST STOP IT!
Reply to this comment
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Next 10 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News.com to your homepage or feedreader.
Google
Yahoo
MSN
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Today's Top Stories
Google adds privacy policy link to home page
Photos: Take a trip inside the Mac Classic
1 euro eBay baby goes home
Down to earth with the Blue Angels
Ask.com closes Dictionary.com deal
Most Popular Stories
'Netflix box' to carry more than just Netflix
Jobs, Apple directors face new backdating suit
IE 8 to have antimalware protection
China's military tries out Segways
Stolen: Google employees' personal data
Resource center from News.com sponsors
Aligning CIO & CEO visions
What CIOs need to know

Click Here!
It's a simple truth. The closer you and your CEO see things, the greater your chance for success. Our exclusive report can help you get there—and help your business grow. Get the report featuring the views of 765 CEOs on innovation. learn more

Click Here!
What CEOs think: Innovation Insights for CIOs

Learn How CIOs can deliver strategic success for their enterprises

The New CIO: Beyond Technology

Learn how CIOs become heroes

Podcast: Chris Gorog of Napster

Learn about the impact of technology in strategy execution

The future of the Enterprise

Read more about tomorrow's organization

CIO Vision Series:Innovating within a retail industry disrupted by the Web

Video: CIO of Virgin Entertainment Group, Robert Fort

CIO Vision Series: Innovating around social search

Video: Yahoo CIO Lars Rabbe

Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Microsoft (0.39%) 0.10 25.98
Adobe Systems (1.46%) 0.58 40.39
Dow Jones Industrials (0.00%) 0.00 11,288.54
S&P 500 (0.00%) 0.00 1,262.90
NASDAQ (-0.27%) -6.08 2,245.38
CNET TECH (0.00%) 0.00 1,580.18
  Symbol Lookup



advertisement
On GameSpot: Wii Fit tells 10-year-old she's fat
Advanced
search
Advanced
search
Visit other CBS Interactive sites