[Commons-l] Allow Digital Negative (DNG) RAW format on Commons? (and increase filesize limit)

[Joichi Ito]

RAW formats can have higher dynamic range. One camera I have has 16  
bits of color. CaptureOne, for instance, doesn't manage RAW in RGB  
space. It keeps the B&W and color data in different data spaces until  
it "prints" it into jpg. It's feasible that you might have two  
objects in two different lighting conditions in the same photo - for  
instance, a person in a shadow in the foreground and a building in  
the background. With the RAW you could crop, extract and correctly  
expose both objects. If you rendered into jpg you'd lose a lot of the  
information when you fixed the exposure.

I guess the question is how much "archival" of this sort of raw data  
you want in the commons. You could always just ask the photographer  
to do the processing for the various versions of the images.

On Nov 22, 2007, at 9:00 AM, Brianna Laugher wrote:

> On 22/11/2007, Jastrow <jastrow at pip-pip.org> wrote:
>> Le 11/21/07 8:26 PM, Oldak Quill a écrit :
>>>
>>> A user may want to crop an image containing multiple objects down to
>>> just one object. A high resolution image of a building could be
>>> cropped down to just show a distinctive window to go in a Wikipedia
>>> article about that style of window (no other free alternative?). If
>>> the image is high resolution, the cropped image showing just the
>>> window would still be good enough quality to use in the article.
>>
>> I still don't see how allowing DNG will bring us higher resolution
>> pictures. High-resolution, 300dpi JPEG files do exist. Photo  
>> magazines
>> usually accept TIFF and JPEG files.
>
> As someone else said, providing the RAW format allows a reuser to
> optimise it for various print qualities, rather than optimising for
> screen (and probably smaller file size at that).
>
> And I didn't make that quote up. :) Whether or not there is any
> discernible difference, (at least some) publishers feel there is. I'm
> inclined to trust them on that point rather than insist that JPG ought
> to be good enough.
>
> cheers,
> Brianna
>
> -- 
> They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment:
> http://modernthings.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Commons-l mailing list
> Commons-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
>
>