| |
Nikon Responds to Encryption Claims
 A few days ago I reported that Nikon were encrypting the white balance data in Nikon D2x RAW files, as discovered by Thomas Knoll (author of Adobe Camera RAW) and other RAW software companies. Now Nikon have responded to the wave of online discussion by issuing the following statement:
NIKON ADVISORY - April 22, 2005
The Nikon D2X professional Digital Single Lens Reflex camera has received widely positive acclaim for its overall performance and image processing quality. Recently, speculative statements which appear to be based on misunderstandings and misinformation about the D2X camera’s “encryption” of certain white balance data have propagated on the internet.
The purpose of this advisory is to clarify this matter with facts and explanations.
The Nikon D2X is capable of producing high quality images that can be saved in a variety of file formats, including the proprietary Nikon Electronic Format (NEF), standard TIFF and several levels of standard JPEG compressed files.
The NEF, a Nikon proprietary raw file design, was introduced with the Nikon D1 Camera and Nikon’s original Capture software. The combination of Nikon camera, in-camera image processing, NEF file format and in-computer image processing with original Nikon Capture software was developed as a system that faithfully saved image files that represent the camera settings made manually or automatically by the photographer at the time a picture was taken.
Nikon’s preservation of its unique technology in the NEF file is employed as an action that protects the uniqueness of the file. At the same time, Nikon makes available a software developer kit (SDK) that, when implemented appropriately, enables a wide range of NEF performance, including white balance, for Nikon photographers and their productive use of the NEF file.
Since the inception of the system, Nikon has always provided photographers with choices about how they might use the system’s performance and enjoy high quality images. Nikon’s choices for opening and processing NEF files have been and continue to include:
* Nikon Capture software
* Plug-in for Adobe’s Photoshop
* Nikon PictureProject software
* Nikon View software
* Availability of Nikon Software Developer Kit (SDK) and the software that has been developed using the SDK
Through use of the Nikon Software Developer Kit, authorized developers can produce software by applying creative concepts to their implementation and adding capabilities to open Nikon’s NEF file and use NEF’s embedded Instructions and Nikon’s Libraries. Nikon photographers reap benefits from independent developers’ approaches, because it allows the photographer to open and process their NEF images.
After a developer’s software is created using the Nikon SDK, a NEF file can be opened, edited in either TIFF or JPEG format, and then saved in formats available in the developers’ software. This process has been available since the first Nikon SDK for NEF.
With each introduction of a new Nikon digital Single Lens Reflex model, Nikon updates the available SDK selection to provide new information; this is the situation with the D2X, D2Hs and D50 models. As stated above, application for the Nikon SDK is possible for bona fide software companies that send Nikon a written application for the SDK. Once approved, the SDK is provided to the developer at no charge and they are authorized to use it.
Nikon has provided its confidential SDK software to many software developers. With the Nikon SDK, developers may design excellent and creative compatibility between the NEF and their software, all without compromising the integrity of the NEF’s original concept, and ensuring that work done by the photographer during the picture taking process can be incorporated into the rendering of the image.
The trilogy of performance, from Camera-to-NEF-to-Capture, has evolved though several generations of Nikon Digital SLR models, improving along the way. As a proprietary format, Nikon secures NEF’s structure and processing through various technologies. Securing this structure is intended for the photographer’s benefit, and dedicated to ensuring faithful reproduction of the photographer’s creative intentions through consistent performance and rendition of the images. Discussions propagated on the internet suggesting otherwise are misinformed about the unique structure of NEF.
Nikon’s Camera System, NEF and Capture software are a tightly knit system, and they are all developed through the cooperative efforts of Nikon’s design teams, and this collaboration results in achieving the highest image quality.
Nikon strives to provide photographers with excellent picture taking performance, compatible Nikon in-system image processing performance and by extension, compatibility with additional software developers’ products, with the ultimate goal of delivering a high level of integrity for a photographer’s creative vision.
Nikon continues to welcome dialogue with bona fide software developers.
Published:
Saturday, April 23, 2005
Compare Prices
Support PhotographyBLOG: Buy this product from one of our affiliate retailers (US first/red, UK second/blue):
Reader Comments
-
Sounds like Nikon is pushing me towards Canon. When I buy a camera and take pictures with it, I own the pictures and if I can't use the tools that I want to use well then the camera isn't any use to me.
Jim Doherty at 11:33pm on Saturday, April 23, 2005
-
,----[ http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/nikon_responds_to_encryption_claims/ ]
| As stated above, application for the Nikon SDK is possible for bona
| fide software companies that send Nikon a written application for the
| SDK. Once approved, the SDK is provided to the developer at no charge
| and they are authorized to use it.
`----
I was wondering if this information is available to open source
devlopers. That is to say, developers that may not be associated with
any corporate entity. Couls yoyu, for instance, make this SDK
available to FreeBSD developers?
Lee Doolan at 11:34pm on Saturday, April 23, 2005
-
By referring to their data as "'encrypted'" they seem to be declining to indicate it as such, and they seem to be indicating that the information is free to use by others -- with the preferred method (at least for them) being the SDK.
I think that the best IP protection that they can legitimately claim for their codes would be trade secret -- so releasing the decoding methods for the color balance data (as long as it wasn't obtained under NDA -- which you would be under if you signed the agreements that come with the SDK), seems like it would be completely legal.
I.e. asking people to sign the SDK is how (and probably the only legal way) they keep the information about the format under wraps.
Stephen Samuel at 11:44pm on Saturday, April 23, 2005
-
fyi
the 'latest comments' thingy on the left hand side of the page completely blows away the page layout of the site, in firefox at least...
really need to limit the number of characters that can be displayed at once ;P
gekido at 12:41am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
why do i get the feeling that the gimp developers(very small pun)wont be found bona fide?
the biblical plague of DRM decends on the land having delt with my alpine car stereo drive being damaged by protected cds and dvds that freeze every five minutes while being played iv bought my last product with this nonsense built in
as a nikon owner canon make mighty fine camaras too if we refuse to support this it will go away make your choice.
just remember its a crime to decrypt things encrypted by others so they are not your photos anymore.
peter at 12:47am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Nikon can not possibly expect to benefit from the encryption of my white ballance data (Not that I havn't already worked around it via freely available code). I would like to find out the name of the corporate tard who thought this would be a good idea. Can we get a list of Nikon e-mail addresses to ping with our feelings on the matter?
Frank at 01:39am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
I was considering purchasing a Nikon for my next major digital camera upgrade.
Not any more.
sheldon white at 01:53am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
"bona fide software developers"
Just buy Canon and you won't have to ask Sony what "bona fide" means or even care. I bought Canon and have not looked back. This little item will cost Sony for sure.
Bob Jackson at 03:06am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Frank, it's not about Nikon benefiting from the encryption of your white-balance data. They clearly stated that everything they do is intended to benefit you, the photographer.
What? It doesn't? Oh.
Dan at 03:07am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Gosh, could Nikon's new unfriendly attitude towards Linux and open source have anything to do with the fact that Bill Gates announced a new closer relationship with Nikon during Gates' key note speech at the 2005 Consumer Electronics Show?
My approach since then has been simple, when I bought a new camera earlier this year, I specifically avoided consideration of Nikon cameras.
Frank Daley at 03:45am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
It sounds like it would be sensible for Nikon to adopt a certification program similar to that used by SUN to control the Java implementations.
In this case, any developer could apply to get the SDK but would be prohibited from shipping or distributing software that did not pass Nikon validation tests.
Just my 2c.
Jonathan Watmough at 03:48am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
"Securing this structure is intended for the photographer’s benefit, and dedicated to ensuring faithful reproduction of the photographer’s creative intentions..."
So clearly I'm not going to buy the particular Nikon camera mentioned, but it's statements like this that really scare me away from buying any other Nikon camera. Instead of apologizing for the decision, they try to bury this load of nonsense in there. This statement is an outright lie. And when even the company leadership can't respond properly given unwelcome limelight, then I don't trust that the company won't continue building this into future products. If I'm going to invest a lot of money in lenses, then I can't risk Nikon suddenly releasing all of its cameras with this nonsense; and the company leadership hasn't shown any understanding that what it did was wrong.
Nick at 04:00am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Nerd needs NO Nikon!
Shaun Savage at 04:17am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Thank you Nikon!
You just made it easier for me to choose my next DSLR. One thing I already know is that it won't be a Nikon.
Thanks again.
EZ
EZ at 04:24am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Who cares? Why would anyone use a Nikon? They lost the battle a long time ago to Canon. Not only are Canon's cameras and lenses superior (e.g. D20) but Canon actually supports their cameras and honors their warranties.
Satan at 04:28am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Now this reply is a complete BS!
I will NOT allow anyone to encrypt MY data besides ME, period.
Thank You Nikon for making my D-SLR choice a lot easier.
I just ordered Canon D350 a few moments ago.
Nikon, go to hell!
I do hope someone will release the encryption key to the public just like it happened with CSS. I don't even think it's illegal since it's not a copy-protection mechanism and if someone claims it is, the claim will not stand a chance in court.
Your honour, our technology is a copy protection mechanism designed to prevent unauthorized copying of photos shot with our cameras. You see, it should be illegal for people to make a perfect copy of a photo they shot with our camera without our permission.
Oh, You mean we don't own the copyright to the photo. Too bad, but we do own the format those photos are stored in. This does count, doesn't it?
Anttix at 04:38am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Hmm... I am in the market for a DSLR.
This information is a new ripple on the water for me.
I certainly was considering getting a Nikon.
But now, I am not so sure.
If Canons dont have a similar restriction, I will probably get that instead.
Chai Ang at 04:56am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Sure go buy your cheap plastic 350D toy. Real photographers will continue to buy Nikon cameras regardless. It's only unwashed Richard Stallman wanna-be's that will object. Real photographers will not be objecting, because real photographers use Photoshop which supports it. Nikon DO indeed provide you with access to your NEF files if you use their software or Photoshop plugins. No pro photographer would ever use GIMP, so no loss there. No freedoms have been taken away. If you feel really that way, buy your plastic 350D or shoot in jpg.
meep at 05:33am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Umm, photoshop DOES NOT support this, that's how the whole thing got started.
As for freedoms being taken away, if MY data cannot be used bow I want it to, what other explanation is there for that.
Robert Aitchison at 05:51am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
I've only bought one Nikon Camera - a D70. Nikon's increasing arrogance, poor service when my camera failed (through authorized repairer) mean I will never ever buy another item from Nikon again. I couldn't even find a phone number or email/snail mail address for customer relations or complaints. Don't listen to your customer base at your own peril.
Sammy Yousef at 06:41am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
What's so proprietary about the raw data coming from a CCD matrix anyway? They add some metadata from the camera to the CCD matrix that describes what the camera measured, and what options the user selected for processing it, and then say they're keeping it proprietary for "my protection"?
A couple of years ago I did "apply" for the Nikon SDK and they never bothered to reply anyway. I am a Nikon user, but I find this annoying and frankly, its not too late to switch.
I can get just as good lenses (and more with IS) from Canon. (Canon once left me in the lurch with the switch from FD to EF lenses, so I started investing in Nikon - I'm not afraid to switch back.)
IMHO this is just an attempt by Nikon to limit competition for their own software, which is quite functional but a bit klunky.
rgordon at 06:48am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
I'm simply sad to see senior management of a major make give in to hype and promises rather than reality.
My stance is quite easy: if you're not willing to show me the quality of your product, I can safely assume there are problems.
Worse, the problems probably aren't dealt with.
I don't buy equipment lightly as I have a high cycle time (minimum of 3 years) - I favour Open Sourced equipped kit simply because it gives me a backup support option. That is why I buy, for example, NetGear networking kit - I can have a look inside.
Sorry Nikon, next time you talk to MS you may ask why share prices are declining and employee share options are rumoured not to be such a wanted article anymore. Maybe read Loius Gerstener's "Who says elephatnts can't dance" - it may help.
= P =
Peets at 07:19am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
LMAO. Nikon is scaring people away! Go cannon! I agree with what others have said. I buy a camera. I take pictures with that camera. I want the pictures in a format that I can't possibly have to pay money out for in the future (not proprietary [GIF, Nikon], but rather "free" [JPEG and such]). I don't want the risk of losing images to some format that is not freely available!
I can see it now: Nikon Secure Formats Hacked. Oh wait, it already has been.
Ugh. I can see it coming, so I will stop it now: YES, GIF IS PROPRIETARY!
Nikon Film: I'm now very leary.
Nikon Digital: No way in hell.
-Wes
Wes Spikes at 07:30am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
I agree with the sentiments here.
I am have been researching my first dSLR purchase for some time going back and forth between Canon & Nikon.
Since I am going to spend 10x on the lenses, picking the right body now is a critical decision for me. I expect to upgrade the bodies every 2-3 years, but the lenses are an investment for the next decade.
This seals encryption seals the deal for Canon.
I don't support companies that pull these tricks anymore. I won't tolerate companies using encryption and proprietary file format to lock-in my work.
And the SDK kit doesn't cut it for me. It leaves me at the whim of a company and their profit motives.
And don't get me wrong, I believe in the profit motive, and support this motive when I buy the product at the store. Make a good quality product and I will pay a good price for it.
But start playing games with lock-ins and I'll take my business elsewhere.
It's why I dumped Microsoft. And Nikon just lost a customer who could of put 10-15k their way in the next 180 days.
BWhaler at 08:03am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Interesting coincidence. All my SLR bodies and lenses have been Nikon since the 80's but on my last trip to China most of my gear was either stolen or left lying in our van damaged beyond repair (local police aka "Public Security" was the suspect!) so I'm interested in going digital.
During the analog age making a commitment to a certain brand was easier and simply based on technical merit and "wysiwyg hardware".
Now, I can't tell if my chosen manufacturer will turn to proprietary tricks with their bodies in the future so buying compatible lenses is also somewhat of a leap into the darkness.
But I sure as hell won't support any company that insists on holding my digital data hostage to their corporate whims. That's why my PC already runs Linux, and my iBook dualboots...
Patrick at 08:21am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Nicon said:
As a proprietary format, Nikon secures NEF's structure and processing through various technologies. Securing this structure is intended for the photographeròÀÙs benefit , and dedicated to ensuring faithful reproduction of the photographeròÀÙs creative intentions through consistent performance and rendition of the images.
Do they really think the others are idiots?  Who can benefit from the fact he cannot use the software he likes and have to be limited by the only one program he has in any case? They take their castomer's rights and say he benefits from it. Black humor.
Alexander at 08:35am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Just to say, that if Nikon thinks they can bush off the sales loss of a few minor technophiles, then a google for 'Nikon' produces the two top news stories about this issue. A search for 'Nikon cameras' has a story about DMCA preventing Photoshop compatability in the first three.
So it looks like a lot more people will be learning about this issue than they might hope.
h4rm0ny at 08:40am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Sorry Nikon, pictures taken by me is my intellectual property and so is the digital representation of these prictures. You want to encrypt and take away the freedom to select the best tool for managing my intellectual property? OK. I can live with that. No Nikon for me. It is a free world.
Petter at 09:37am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Why are you so upset? What we see is a trend started by Microsoft who made the structure of Word, Excel, etc document formats a trade secret so you may only read modify or print your own documents if you buy/licence the program from Microsoft.
Furthermore I don't understand why this questionas arose at all! Why didn't Adobe apply for this free SDK from Nikon? Or aren't they a 'bona fide' company? (Especially interesting that according to Nikon their second preferred method is a 'Plug-in for Adobe’s Photoshop '.) If Adobe opens these RAW files we will be able to re-store our RAW photos in the open RAW DNG format.
Andreas at 10:19am on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Thanks Nikon, you just made my $10,000 decision for me...:
I will be placing my initial order for a 1D-Mark 2, 70-200IS, 2x Teleconverter, 85/f1.2 and spare battery + other stuff.... tomorrow morning (followed by at least 2 more "L" lenses this year). The $500 rebate on the Mark 2 doesn't hurt either!
As a user of Linux (OpenOffice, Gimp, Bibble) you left me no choice in the matter.
I stopped using Windows & Adobe when they went to mandatory activation. It STOPS here and now for you, NIKON.
The consumer still has a choice and I don't chose Nikon products anymore.
William Stanton at 12:25pm on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
While I support open source software (and try to use it whenever possible), for me, there is just no escaping from commercial products like Photoshop. In that light, not having x or y proprietary feature available in Gimp or other open source software simply doesn’t affect me as long as Nikon continues to make the internals of NEF available to Adobe.
That said, Adobe is promoting its own “digital negative” as a platform-independent format and encouraging camera makers to use it natively. While Nikon probably will persist in using their own NEF format for RAW files, Adobe provides a free utility to convert NEF into digital Negative. You can be sure that Adobe will convert the Nikon proprietary white balance data into their own Digital Negative white balance format.
The developers of Gimp should certainly be looking to support Adobe’s digital negative (if they haven’t already), as it is likely to be a significant standard in the years to come.
If Nikon’s proprietary method of doing white balance really has merit, they should file a patent for it. That’s the only protection they really need. If they want to protect the integrity of white balance rendering in third-party products, they shouldn’t impede open source developers from support their technology. They have nothing to gain and everything to loose.
The majority of comments here would suggest that people have or will boycott Nikon for their stance. Maybe that’s what it will take to get Nikon to reconsider. I made my choice to go with Nikon years ago and as i am moving to digital, I have thus far not regretted buying the D70 and will not be boycotting Nikon for this one stupid decision unless it affect me personally. I just can’t let emotions or ideologies get in the way of professional productivity. Nonetheless, Nikon is treading on dangerous territory if it thinks that there is advantage to locking out “unqualified” developers.
Shame on you Nikon!
Stephen Brown at 12:35pm on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
While I support open source software (and try to use it whenever possible), for me, there is just no escaping from commercial products like Photoshop. In that light, not having x or y proprietary feature available in Gimp or other open source software simply doesn't affect me as long as Nikon continues to make the internals of NEF available to Adobe.
That said, Adobe is promoting its own "digital negative" as a platform-independent format and encouraging camera makers to use it natively. While Nikon probably will persist in using their own NEF format for RAW files, Adobe provides a free utility to convert NEF into digital Negative. You can be sure that Adobe will convert the Nikon proprietary white balance data into their own Digital Negative white balance format.
The developers of Gimp should certainly be looking to support Adobe's digital negative (if they haven't already), as it is likely to be a significant standard in the years to come.
If Nikon's proprietary method of doing white balance really has merit, they should file a patent for it. That's the only protection they really need. If they want to protect the integrity of white balance rendering in third-party products, they shouldn't impede open source developers from support their technology. They have nothing to gain and everything to loose.
The majority of comments here would suggest that people have or will boycott Nikon for their stance. Maybe that's what it will take to get Nikon to reconsider. I made my choice to go with Nikon years ago and as I move away from film, I have so far not regretted buying the D70 and will not be boycotting Nikon for this one stupid decision unless it starts to affect me personally. I just can't let emotions or ideologies get in the way of professional productivity.
Nonetheless, Nikon is treading on dangerous territory if it thinks that there is advantage to locking out "unqualified" developers. Microsoft gets away with all kinds of crap because they control a huge percentage of their market. If Nikon pulls the same kind of stunts then they will just loose market share to Canon. Microsoft has succeed, at every turn, to hinder my productivity with their stupid stunts. If Nikon thinks there is advantage to getting into bed with Microsoft, they should think again. I *will* switch!
Stephen Brown at 12:57pm on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
I wonder if the SDK even works for the various *NIX or even OSX? Does Anyone know?
Grant M. at 01:10pm on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
Photoshop may be the end all of all image processing still I would want to at least have the ability to edit it in other applications e.g. Gimp. Choice is always a beatiful thing.
As a happy owner of F3 and N4004 this policy is disappointing. I just think a camera company should force me into an image editor. I especially find "bona fide developer" requirement troubling. As a CS student we wrote an image processor for a class. Apparently I wouldn't be able to write decoding for NEF since I am not "bona fide developer".
Luckily Nikon is not the only game in town and if and when I decide to purchase a new camera Nikon won't be on my short list.
Vladimir at 03:53pm on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
When I talked to the Nikon rep at MacWorld Expo about using PhotoShop instead of the Nikon software for editing NEF format, he told me the Nikon software has an advantage. He said that third-party developers do not get full access to all the parameters of the image, so the Nikon software has more complete editing capabilities. He may have been speaking beyond his knowledge, but among the many representatives at the booth, he was designated as the Nikon software authority.
He specifically claimed that whatever means PhotoShop used for editing the NEF RAW files would not have the full power available in the Nikon software. My objection is that this software is both an extra cost over and above the cost of the camera, and I do not like its user interface. Nikon forces PhotoShop owners/users to learn another program, and expend more money to work with their proprietary RAW format system.
I have bought two digital Nikons, each time debating between Canon and Nikon. The next time is still an open question, although so far I cannot object to the results in PhotoShop.
Bela at 07:34pm on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
I bought a Nikon camera a few years ago. It had the features I wanted at a reasonable price. I've had no problems with it.
However, Nikon's stance on their NEF data encryption is just stupid. What is a 'bona fide developer' exactly? I write software for a living, but not for image manipulation. If I wanted to read NEF data, would I be considered a 'bona fide developer'? I highly doubt it.
I'm not planning to buy another camera soon, but my 4 megapixel camera will get old after a while, and I'll start looking at 6 MP and beyond with larger lenses. At that point, I'll have to think twice about buying another Nikon.
Nobody cares about the SDK; they just want to know if they can read NEF files without being sued. Are they able to do that or not?
Nick at 11:25pm on Sunday, April 24, 2005
-
The new NEF WB data has been already decoded twice with two independent programmers. So the free world will be happy with dcraw and UFRaw, the small vendors will ship their own converters. But photoshop users can suffer - the big company is afraid of using decoded data because of DMCA.
Alexander at 06:24am on Monday, April 25, 2005
-
Embrace thyself, here comes the horde..
uh-oh at 10:16am on Monday, April 25, 2005
-
I really can't beleive that you would all suffer with second rate equipment just to avoid spending an extra $150. I would venture a guess that virtually everyone who has posted so far is not considering spending $5000 on a camera. But because Nikon has somehow offended you you will be buy another brand even though these issues would not even affect you. Not to mention, how many of you would be shooting NEFs in the first place?
Also guess what?! I use Nikon Capture in conjunction with Photoshop and have no problems.
Just out of curiosity to all the "open source" fans out there. Do you service your
own car at your own recommendations, or do you have you dealer do it? Ever try to change the brakes on a Honda only to realize you have to have a special tool?
Before you turn your back on the finest cameras built (which really hurts no one but you) take a broad look at the situation.
Dean Shenberger at 03:39pm on Monday, April 25, 2005
-
Anttix in Comment #16 wrote:
"I don’t even think it’s illegal since it’s not a copy-protection mechanism and if someone claims it is, the claim will not stand a chance in court."
This is exactly right. I can't imagine what Adobe is talking about when they say they're worried about possible DMCA violations in 'circumventing' encryptinon that isn't a copy-protection scheme. IANAL, but cases like Cahmberlain vs. Skylink, http://news.findlaw.com/andrews/bt/cmp/20050406/20050406chamberlain.html, illustrate pretty clearly that things like this aren't even close to being classifiable as "a mechanism used to controll access to a copyrighted work".
Mitch Smith at 04:07pm on Monday, April 25, 2005
-
I am finally making the transition from film
to digital, after experimenting with a few
low-end digital cameras. Not being a pro, I
was trying to decide between the Canon Digital
Rebel, the EOS 20D, and the Nikon D70.
Needless to say, this would also include a
lot of optical glass, since I shoot everything
from extreme close-ups to far distance.
Besides the qualities of the products, I also
consider the corporate attitudes and actions.
While I am not considering a D2x at this time,
this action by Nikon shows that they do not
have the consumer's best interests at heart.
Thus, they have just knocked themselves out
the running for my business.
Alan F. at 04:39pm on Monday, April 25, 2005
-
Stupid! Just plain stupid! LOL. These guys are just don't understand that its not just the small number of people complaining here. Its the 10 or 20 people we each also scare off buying it. Being the family and neighbourhood technologist... "I" am the one people consult for advice on these items, and I couldn't in good faith recommend a system where future access to the data is going to be a SIGNIFICANT issue.
Oh! so I should recommend "lock in" should I?
Ben C at 05:28pm on Tuesday, April 26, 2005
-
Alan F. wrote in comment #41:
"Besides the qualities of the products, I also consider the corporate attitudes and actions."
Have a look at Canon's corporate philosophy. I think you'll find the social responsibility statement more meaningful than Nikon's.
Kyle R. at 09:17pm on Tuesday, April 26, 2005
-
Regarding GIF b being proprietary and JPEG not - the patent for the compression method used in GIF has expired, the patents covering JPEG have not. JPEG is more "proprietary" than GIF.
Regarding the Nikon software: a) what platforms does it support; b) what am I supposed to do in 15 or 20 years when "Windows XP" and the x86 processor family is no longer available; c) if $150 is such an insignificant amount, and so important to getting the absolute best quality out of the camera, why isn't it just included in the price of the camera? When the cashier at the grocery store tries to convince me that the 10 cent error she made isn't that important, I ask her if she's willing to pay it out of her own pocket, then. Why is Nikon trying to add on an extra "tax" to inflate the price of their camera?
Steve Peltz at 07:46pm on Wednesday, April 27, 2005
-
Just out of curiosity to all the “open source” fans out there. Do you service your
own car at your own recommendations, or do you have you dealer do it? Ever try to change the brakes on a Honda only to realize you have to have a special tool?
Don't be stupid. Hondas don't require special tools to change the brakes or to do any other simple service operations. I wouldn't buy a car that did use methods like this to make it more difficult to service it. By the same token, I won't buy a camera where the maker intentionally made it difficult to get to my data.
BTW, I do all my car service.
Grishnakh at 11:41pm on Thursday, April 28, 2005
-
In fact, the car makers pull the same stunt with the engine the black-box controllers, so it is very difficult to, say, "performance tune" your engine. They use the excuse that only "certified mechanics" are knowledgable enough to be messing around with it. In some places, the pollution-control laws enforce that claim, whether it is a valid claim or not. Now, if they haven't already, they will be able to enforce it under the anti reverse engininering provisions of the DMCA.
What Nikon is doing in effect, is claiming that only their software is "qualified" to access the data (available to the public as "Nikon Capture") and to "qualified" software developers (in the form of the SDK). They are enforcing that claim using encryption so that the DMCA can be used for enforcement. For the purposes of the DMCA the encryption need not be good (and, as we've seen, it has already been cracked.)
As with cars, this neither affects nor bothers the average car or camera owner. They just want it to work. The number of whiners is so small that if you want your voice to be heard you're going to have to do a lot more than rant on these pages.
Stephen Brown at 01:32am on Friday, April 29, 2005
-
Sadly, when I finished reading the summary of this article on slashdot I was already convinced I wasn't going to like it.. halfway through the full article I was already disheartened enough to let go of my desire to purchase a new Nikon SLR (was preferring over Canon) in the coming months... but, as it seems I'm not alone in this decision, I suppose the others stated it best.
Thank you Nikon for making my SLR purchase decision easier. Apparrently Nikon is not even an option for anyone who demands full control over the images they take. Anyone willing to pay over US$1000 for a camera is 99% likely to demand full control over the images they take. I hope the massive consumer backlash in progress teaches your company something so as I may again respect your company's name in 10 years.
TechSmurf at 12:55pm on Friday, April 29, 2005
-
I did not realize I was being "stupid" by stating a fact. 1991 Honda Accord requires a special puller to remove the rotors.
This whole "issue" is only affectiong a few people! Most pro Nikon shooters already use Capture. So right now they are wondering what is wrong with all of you. Boycotting Nikon over this is sort of like saying "I don't like the f-monut lens, so bye-bye Nikon".
Anyway I think it is very interesting reading all of your different veiwpoints. Good luck with whichever system you chose. But since I tend to be brand loyal I will defend Nikon to the end. When someone asks me about a camera I always recommend Nikon, but if they mention Canon I will happily admit Canon makes a good camera also.
Dean S. at 01:16pm on Friday, April 29, 2005
-
I don't use Nikon and I don't use Canon. So, I think I can be neutral on this issue.
I certainly hate companies that use proprietary coding systems. That's why I am 100% Microsoft-free. I also hate companies that force me to pay hidden fees. So, if it is really true that even Photoshop doesn't have a complete access to ALL data contained in the NEF file format and only Nikon's own software does, I surely would not consider buying a Nikon's product.
As a camera manufacturer, Nikon has earned its excellent reputation over the decades. But that was in the past. Now, we are in a new century, using a new technology. Digital market is booming and there's no shortage of excellent new products from a variety of manufacturers. Several of them (Canon, Fuji, Minolta, Olympus, Kodak) have been dominated by Nikon in the traditional camera market - but not any longer. Those that are more dynamic and progressive, move to the top. Some others are trying to use dirty tricks to compensate for their slowness in embracing new technology. That WILL certainly bite them in the butt.
BTW, brand loyalty is really very naive and short-sighted notion (unless you've got tons of equipment or very expensive equipment from a specific company). But then again, sometimes it's best to bite the bullet and make a switch for your own good.
Rob at 10:52am on Sunday, May 01, 2005
-
Given this can Nikon gurantee that there will always be software for my (linux) PC to read the format? If not I ahve bought my last Nikon.
Graeme at 01:42pm on Tuesday, May 03, 2005
-
I will be sticking with my D1x's and D1 for a long time. I will not buy a camera that uses such technology. If I need a new digital camera for my Nikon lenses, ir will be a Kodak. It will be interesting if this case goes up against DMCA, there are exceptions for the legal copyright owners to descrypt data for fair use access to material.
The New Philosophy:
"We own the Copyright to the World's Best Pictures. Yours"
Brian at 11:53am on Friday, May 13, 2005
-
Very interested in the new D70s, but just discovered Nikon uses encrypted RAW images in this camera, very frustrating. I use Linux and Nikon don't have any software for Linux, so I'm now looking elsewhere for an digital SLR. Bad move Nikon!
Rich at 06:26pm on Monday, July 11, 2005
-
Rich (or Mark if you happen to know), what raw converters are available for Linux? I would like to give Linux a try, but
I sometimes shoot raw with my Oly E-1 and don't know if there is anything I can use under the Linux operating system that converts Olympus Raw Files (ORFs) to 16-bit TIFFs.
Zoltan Arva-Toth at 08:29am on Tuesday, July 12, 2005
-
I browse and saw you website and I found it very interesting. Thank you for the good work.
I browse and saw you website and I found it very i at 08:56am on Saturday, July 23, 2005
-
This is all very childish indeed.
I'm sure the big software developers do or will have access to this SDK. So what about the others? Pro photographers in my opinion, will use the capture software im sure to make adjustments and then export to another format. From all the cataloging software I have tested, only very few actually support NEF encrypted or not, but this is no big deal as there are many that do. I dont see what all the fuss is about and if you think a few kids crying over this is going to ruin Nikon, then think again. They will always be number 1 or 2 in the market and that will not change - They make awesome products (FACT). Who is to say that your beloved canon will not implement a similar encryption in the future? OH, you have so much faith when it suits you, then throw your teddybear out the pram over something so trivial.
BKK at 09:59pm on Sunday, August 21, 2005
-
Nikon's response is not at all clear to me. If I can't refer to the data settings for pictures I may have shot months ago, how can I learn what WB settings worked and what didn't.
One of the reasons I'm looking to go digital is for my own reference of the settings I used for my photos.
When I do buy digital, I'll look at Canon. I don't know if Nikon's wrong, but they have me suspicious.
Ron at 05:44am on Monday, August 22, 2005
-
I'm studying Adobe CS2, which marries Photoshop with Illustrator and InDesign. The programs are beautiful and they merge together making working with images a pleasure. I don’t yet understand the implications of the NEF problem, but if NEF makes it difficult to use a Nikon file in Photoshop, I won’t use Nikon. I met a great photographer who does wonderful humanitarian work. He switched to Canon in 2000. I think I will follow his lead and get Canon. I also want fast lenses that deliver images the way they’re intended to.
Jake at 04:28am on Wednesday, October 05, 2005
-
I just stumbled on this site hoping to find a way around all this drama. No such luck. Yes it's not the end of the world but it does mess up my work flow. I have no choice since I work for a newspaper and all the equipment provided is Nikon but since switching to the D2HS I can no longer edit NEF files with ease in Photoshop CS and we can't afford to update software on all newsroom computers every time we update cameras. I am extremely frustrated. I was so happy to get my hands on this new body and now It's a pain in the neck to shoot raw. Aaaaaahhhhhhh!
autumn at 10:43pm on Thursday, October 27, 2005
-
Came across this looking for a good way to process raw on Linux. None found yet.
Tip - Many pros expect to make thousands or tens of thousands of dollars off of any individual image. As such, they aren't going to mind putting in the money for the best software and equipment. However, unless they're totally suicidal, they aren't going to put up with anyone denying them access to their own work for even a minute.
I'm not really a pro yet, working on that. In the meantime, buying photoshop and a windows PC at the same time as getting this camera weren't financially possible. So I'm stuck shooting jpegs which puts me at a big disadvantage.
Think I won't remember this when I start making money? Think again. I'll be remembering the people who posed for free and helped me find gigs, as well as those who just figured I wasn't worth their time.
Pablo at 12:22am on Saturday, February 18, 2006
-
anyone can use UFRaw both for linux and Windows.
ufraw.sourceforge.net
The upcoming version is going to have embedded WB settings for many cameras, including D200.
Alexander at 04:17pm on Sunday, February 19, 2006
-
I work in the computer business and reading through all this I suspect that the reason for encrytion is more sinister. Encryption of any type allows Nikon to encode date/time details and even the camera unique number into the photo file. That could subsequently be used by law enforcement bodies such as the CIA to track a photo back to a specific camera and thereby to the original buyer (if paid for by credit card) - if the camera was sold on then they could also try tracing forward to subsequent purchasers especially if bought on eBay or with a credit card transaction. Only cash purchases provide a possible break in the tracing chain. Scary stuff and big brother stuff.
Richard at 10:03am on Saturday, September 02, 2006
-
Richard said: I work in the computer business and reading through all this I suspect that the reason for encrytion is more sinister.
The only thing sinister is that Nikon is using DMCA to prevent anyone but licensees from accessing the data contained in the NEF files. The data is still accessible (i.e., decipherable) but Nikon exercises control over which software can be used.
Encryption of any type allows Nikon to encode date/time details and even the camera unique number into the photo file.
But they don't. They encrypt the colour balance info.
That could subsequently be used by law enforcement bodies such as the CIA
I'm not American but I know that the CIA is not a law enforcement agency.
to track a photo back to a specific camera and thereby to the original buyer (if paid for by credit card)
I would love to be able to trace all my photographs back to me. Most professional photographers would.
if the camera was sold on then they could also try tracing forward to subsequent purchasers especially if bought on eBay or with a credit card transaction. Only cash purchases provide a possible break in the tracing chain.
There is no "chain" that you speak of because nobody distributes their photos in raw (NEF) format.
Anyway what kind of photos would you be afraid of the CIA (or FBI, if you really meant "law enforcers") getting their hands on?
Stephen Brown at 10:33am on Saturday, September 02, 2006
-
Stephen do not be so naive. Microsoft were embedding unique computer codes into word documents - this came out after the US law enforcement/intelligence agency tracked a virus writer back to the Philippines...
What do you mean the CIA is not law enforcement... talk about picky.... Why do you thinkk governments have central intelligence agencies for but to support the laws of their land...
Wait a few years and you will find that what I am outlining will be reality...
Wake up and smell the coffee.
Richard at 11:21am on Saturday, September 02, 2006
-
Richard Said: Stephen do not be so naive. Microsoft were embedding unique computer codes into word documents
I have no problem with that. People who use Microsoft products have made their own bed and sleep in it.
Incidently, digital images do contain a variety of data (some of which you speak) but it is not encrypted. It's recorded by the camera if the form of Exif data.
- this came out after the US law enforcement/intelligence agency tracked a virus writer back to the Philippines...
So you think virus writers have a right to be protected from law enforcement agencies? And you think law enforcement agencies shouldn't be allowed to use forensics to track criminals? And you think I'm naive?
What I see is somebody trying to lump in the issue of the police doing their job (which we pay them to do) with the issue of whether or not we should be protected from police prying into our lives (which is political) with the issue of Microsoft's buggy software (which is a security issue) with the issue of Nikon encrypting the white balance data (which is the subject of this article).
What do you mean the CIA is not law enforcement...
They are an intelligence gathering agency. Call them spies but they do not make arrests and they do not administer justice. Not their mandate.
talk about picky....
Sure I'm picky. As a photographer and as a network security administrator.
Why do you thinkk governments have central intelligence agencies for but to support the laws of their land...
Those agencies that have the mandate to "support the laws of their land" do so with my support.
Wait a few years and you will find that what I am outlining will be reality...
I know exactly what you are talking about. But you confuse law enforcement with government oppression and invasion-of-privacy issues. Furthermore, you don't supply any facts (regarding the Nikon issue) and you are trying to turn Nikon's decision into a political issue using your ill-conceived conjecture.
You have valid political concerns but the only reference you used to support your concerns was legitimate law enforcement agencies catching real criminals. And you chose the wrong forum to express those concerns in.
Wake up and smell the coffee.
You didn't answer my question: What kind of photos would you be afraid of law enforcers getting their hands on?
Stephen Brown at 12:19pm on Saturday, September 02, 2006
-
Richard, if we were talking about 'MEF' rather than 'NEF', then I might
see your point, since Microsoft is the epitome of Big Brother. But I do
not see Nikon as fulfilling that roll. They are more like Distant Second
Cousin Several Times Removed. 
GARY POGODA at 12:54pm on Saturday, September 02, 2006
-
I'm surprised to read this - (I'm a programmer and a user of an open source OS myself). I was just about to buy a Nikon D70, but now I know to avoid their products. Goodbye Nikon, hello Cannon!
Martin at 06:34pm on Tuesday, September 12, 2006
-
I just got a second hand D70 (1 day old). The NEF's worked fine with GIMP + UFRaw (UFRaw also supports batch mode). Does anyone know if things have changed with the D70?
However, after reading this thread, I've regretted my decision on Nikon. What a shame - Nikon. void(0);
mad
Justin at 01:57am on Tuesday, January 02, 2007
-
I shoot a D50 and I do just fine with Gimp+UFRaw... Tools are readily available to work with my stuff... I'm not complaining.... Quit whining
Evan Hart at 06:04am on Tuesday, January 02, 2007
-
Must be nice to have something as trivial as this to complain about. Please.
Brent at 09:54pm on Monday, January 08, 2007
-
First, thanks for posting on all of this info.
I was pretty taken aback merely on the NEF problems, now after reading on the WB topic, I am really so happy on my final choice to go with Pentax... my K10D has worked really well, and it has DNG open source! Plus, lenses are backwards compatable with in-body stabilization. : ) Check it out for yourself or go to pentaxforums.com and ask questions.
solar1 at 02:59pm on Saturday, July 07, 2007
|
|
RSS Feeds
