Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing?

"John McWilliams" <jpmcw.TakeThisOut@comcast.net> wrote
news:ZJqdnY0WE8j9JcfVnZ2dnUVZ_szinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> Bookish wrote:
>> I've been using Adobe Photoshop's plugin to processing my Nikon NEF
>> images. Would there be any advantage in getting Capture NX2 to do this
>> rather than using Photoshop? For about the price of Capture NX2 I
>> could get Adobe Lightroom instead and use it's highly rated cataloging
>> abilities.
>
> Is there no trial available for NX2? There certainly is for Lightroom, 30
> days, and the beta for registered owners of LR, but I would be happy to
> extend a few invites to the beta testing for those interested. Need E-mail
> for this, in form of joe_doaks AT reprobate.com
>
> --
> John McWilliams


60 days
http://support.nikontech.com
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

Bookish wrote:
> I've been using Adobe Photoshop's plugin to processing my Nikon NEF
> images. Would there be any advantage in getting Capture NX2 to do this
> rather than using Photoshop? For about the price of Capture NX2 I
> could get Adobe Lightroom instead and use it's highly rated cataloging
> abilities.


The main advantages are:
Nikon's software saves metadata for all edits made to the raw file
within the *nef file. Those edits are selectively "undoable/redoable",
and can be opened at a later date, on another computer, or by another
user without needing "sidecar" files containing the edit data - you just
need the *nef.
CaptureNX and ViewNX save a compressed jpeg "preview" image within the
*nef file. If you have the codex installed on your computer, then the
computer will display thumbnails etc using this "edited" jpeg - so you
see the *nef thumbnails as the edited version - not the original raw file.
Nikon's "picture control" method allows sharing presets between camera
and software on the computer. You can edit a picture control
(saturation, contrast, sharpening etc), upload to camera, then shoot
jpeg, tiff etc with same settings applied, or shoot raw, and have the
picture control you set in-camera applied as default setting when
opening the raw file in Capture Nx.
If you use a D300 or D3 camera, then Capture Nx applies auto CA
correction to raw files by default(it can be unselected if you want to
for some reason, or further "tweaked"). So far with D300, the
auto-correction works better than any other method I've tried, and
requires no further manual input.
As far as the "quality" of conversion goes, people have different
opinions as to whether other raw converters are as good. I don't think
that they are, but YMMV. The user interface of Capture is a bit
different, and although sensible/intuitive, if you are familiar with
using Photoshop, it may seem that the reverse is true. Rendering and
conversion of raw files is slow, partly (IMO) bad design, but also as
edits are saved, the embedded jpeg is updated every time.
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

frederick wrote:
> Bookish wrote:
>> I've been using Adobe Photoshop's plugin to processing my Nikon NEF
>> images. Would there be any advantage in getting Capture NX2 to do this
>> rather than using Photoshop? For about the price of Capture NX2 I
>> could get Adobe Lightroom instead and use it's highly rated cataloging
>> abilities.
>
>
> The main advantages are:
> Nikon's software saves metadata for all edits made to the raw file
> within the *nef file. Those edits are selectively "undoable/redoable",
> and can be opened at a later date, on another computer, or by another
> user without needing "sidecar" files containing the edit data - you just
> need the *nef.
> CaptureNX and ViewNX save a compressed jpeg "preview" image within the
> *nef file. If you have the codex installed on your computer, then the
> computer will display thumbnails etc using this "edited" jpeg - so you
> see the *nef thumbnails as the edited version - not the original raw file.
> Nikon's "picture control" method allows sharing presets between camera
> and software on the computer. You can edit a picture control
> (saturation, contrast, sharpening etc), upload to camera, then shoot
> jpeg, tiff etc with same settings applied, or shoot raw, and have the
> picture control you set in-camera applied as default setting when
> opening the raw file in Capture Nx.
> If you use a D300 or D3 camera, then Capture Nx applies auto CA
> correction to raw files by default(it can be unselected if you want to
> for some reason, or further "tweaked"). So far with D300, the
> auto-correction works better than any other method I've tried, and
> requires no further manual input.
> As far as the "quality" of conversion goes, people have different
> opinions as to whether other raw converters are as good. I don't think
> that they are, but YMMV. The user interface of Capture is a bit
> different, and although sensible/intuitive, if you are familiar with
> using Photoshop, it may seem that the reverse is true. Rendering and
> conversion of raw files is slow, partly (IMO) bad design, but also as
> edits are saved, the embedded jpeg is updated every time.

I wouldn't describe most of this as an advantage NX2 has over Lightroom,
for example. All LR edits are non-destructive as well. Different
interfaces, and LR is fast, and doesn't restrict one to Nikon. The
biggest benefit would seem to be an ability to match the camera's built
in JPEG styles for RAW images, which no other converter can do as
precisely, because no one else has the exact algorithyms that Nikon
designed.

--
John McWilliams
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

John McWilliams wrote:
> frederick wrote:
>> Bookish wrote:
>>> I've been using Adobe Photoshop's plugin to processing my Nikon NEF
>>> images. Would there be any advantage in getting Capture NX2 to do this
>>> rather than using Photoshop? For about the price of Capture NX2 I
>>> could get Adobe Lightroom instead and use it's highly rated cataloging
>>> abilities.
>>
>>
>> The main advantages are:
>> Nikon's software saves metadata for all edits made to the raw file
>> within the *nef file. Those edits are selectively
>> "undoable/redoable", and can be opened at a later date, on another
>> computer, or by another user without needing "sidecar" files
>> containing the edit data - you just need the *nef.
>> CaptureNX and ViewNX save a compressed jpeg "preview" image within the
>> *nef file. If you have the codex installed on your computer, then the
>> computer will display thumbnails etc using this "edited" jpeg - so you
>> see the *nef thumbnails as the edited version - not the original raw
>> file.
>> Nikon's "picture control" method allows sharing presets between camera
>> and software on the computer. You can edit a picture control
>> (saturation, contrast, sharpening etc), upload to camera, then shoot
>> jpeg, tiff etc with same settings applied, or shoot raw, and have the
>> picture control you set in-camera applied as default setting when
>> opening the raw file in Capture Nx.
>> If you use a D300 or D3 camera, then Capture Nx applies auto CA
>> correction to raw files by default(it can be unselected if you want to
>> for some reason, or further "tweaked"). So far with D300, the
>> auto-correction works better than any other method I've tried, and
>> requires no further manual input.
>> As far as the "quality" of conversion goes, people have different
>> opinions as to whether other raw converters are as good. I don't
>> think that they are, but YMMV. The user interface of Capture is a bit
>> different, and although sensible/intuitive, if you are familiar with
>> using Photoshop, it may seem that the reverse is true. Rendering and
>> conversion of raw files is slow, partly (IMO) bad design, but also as
>> edits are saved, the embedded jpeg is updated every time.
>
> I wouldn't describe most of this as an advantage NX2 has over Lightroom,
> for example. All LR edits are non-destructive as well.
But it does not save edit information as metadata embedded in the raw
file. That is a /significant/ advantage to NX.
> Different
> interfaces, and LR is fast, and doesn't restrict one to Nikon. The
> biggest benefit would seem to be an ability to match the camera's built
> in JPEG styles for RAW images, which no other converter can do as
> precisely, because no one else has the exact algorithyms that Nikon
> designed.
>
They aren't limited to camera's built in styles. The "styles" can be
created and/or edited on computer, uploaded to camera, downloaded from
camera, shared between cameras and users.

I believe that all the points I made are all /significant/ advantages
over any other software, including Lightroom.

The slow nef rendering could be seen in context of using a different raw
workflow using picture styles properly shooting jpeg HQ + raw. CF cards
are cheap. Free software like View NX or even the windows live photo
viewer can be used to gallery view (including correctly rendering of any
edits to the raw file) and to sort raw files.
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

frederick wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>> frederick wrote:
>>> Bookish wrote:
>>>> I've been using Adobe Photoshop's plugin to processing my Nikon NEF
>>>> images. Would there be any advantage in getting Capture NX2 to do this
>>>> rather than using Photoshop? For about the price of Capture NX2 I
>>>> could get Adobe Lightroom instead and use it's highly rated cataloging
>>>> abilities.
>>>
>>>
>>> The main advantages are:
>>> Nikon's software saves metadata for all edits made to the raw file
>>> within the *nef file. Those edits are selectively
>>> "undoable/redoable", and can be opened at a later date, on another
>>> computer, or by another user without needing "sidecar" files
>>> containing the edit data - you just need the *nef.
>>> CaptureNX and ViewNX save a compressed jpeg "preview" image within
>>> the *nef file. If you have the codex installed on your computer,
>>> then the computer will display thumbnails etc using this "edited"
>>> jpeg - so you see the *nef thumbnails as the edited version - not the
>>> original raw file.
>>> Nikon's "picture control" method allows sharing presets between
>>> camera and software on the computer. You can edit a picture control
>>> (saturation, contrast, sharpening etc), upload to camera, then shoot
>>> jpeg, tiff etc with same settings applied, or shoot raw, and have the
>>> picture control you set in-camera applied as default setting when
>>> opening the raw file in Capture Nx.
>>> If you use a D300 or D3 camera, then Capture Nx applies auto CA
>>> correction to raw files by default(it can be unselected if you want
>>> to for some reason, or further "tweaked"). So far with D300, the
>>> auto-correction works better than any other method I've tried, and
>>> requires no further manual input.
>>> As far as the "quality" of conversion goes, people have different
>>> opinions as to whether other raw converters are as good. I don't
>>> think that they are, but YMMV. The user interface of Capture is a
>>> bit different, and although sensible/intuitive, if you are familiar
>>> with using Photoshop, it may seem that the reverse is true.
>>> Rendering and conversion of raw files is slow, partly (IMO) bad
>>> design, but also as edits are saved, the embedded jpeg is updated
>>> every time.
>>
>> I wouldn't describe most of this as an advantage NX2 has over
>> Lightroom, for example. All LR edits are non-destructive as well.
> But it does not save edit information as metadata embedded in the raw
> file. That is a /significant/ advantage to NX.

Hardly. One reason LR, Camera Raw and all independent RAW processors do
not do this is because of the proprietary nature of RAW formats.
Metadata in LR is saved automatically in its catalog, exported to .xml
files for RAW formats, embedded if you convert to DNG.

>> Different interfaces, and LR is fast, and doesn't restrict one to
>> Nikon. The biggest benefit would seem to be an ability to match the
>> camera's built in JPEG styles for RAW images, which no other converter
>> can do as precisely, because no one else has the exact algorithyms
>> that Nikon designed.
>>
> They aren't limited to camera's built in styles. The "styles" can be
> created and/or edited on computer, uploaded to camera, downloaded from
> camera, shared between cameras and users.
>
> I believe that all the points I made are all /significant/ advantages
> over any other software, including Lightroom.

Lots of others do not.
>
> The slow nef rendering could be seen in context of using a different raw
> workflow using picture styles properly shooting jpeg HQ + raw. CF cards
> are cheap. Free software like View NX or even the windows live photo
> viewer can be used to gallery view (including correctly rendering of any
> edits to the raw file) and to sort raw files.

Yes, there are always work arounds for sloughy software.

--
John McWilliams
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

frederick wrote:

>>
> You are sounding like a brand-zealot / fanboy / shill.

Pot; kettle; black.

--
lsmft
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

John McWilliams wrote:
> frederick wrote:
>
>>>
>> You are sounding like a brand-zealot / fanboy / shill.
>
> Pot; kettle; black.
>
Rubbish.
Read the entire thread again.
The OP asked for advantages of NX.
I listed some very valid advantages, and you started crying like a new
mother who's just been told her baby is butt-ugly.

I believe that I've stated fact as fact, and clearly when I've expressed
something that's my opinion, I've made it clear that it's "IMO - and
YMMV." In my original reply, I tried to be diplomatic - as I'm not
aiming to troll the over-sensitive Adobe shill/fanboys who frequent
these forums.
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

frederick wrote:
> John McWilliams wrote:
>> frederick wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>> You are sounding like a brand-zealot / fanboy / shill.
>>
>> Pot; kettle; black.
>>
> Rubbish.
> Read the entire thread again.
> The OP asked for advantages of NX.
> I listed some very valid advantages, and you started crying like a new
> mother who's just been told her baby is butt-ugly.
>
> I believe that I've stated fact as fact, and clearly when I've expressed
> something that's my opinion, I've made it clear that it's "IMO - and
> YMMV." In my original reply, I tried to be diplomatic - as I'm not
> aiming to troll the over-sensitive Adobe shill/fanboys who frequent
> these forums.

I'll take your word for it then, that you're not trolling; merely
opinionated and truculent. Kinda like that guy who calls himself Rita....

--
lsmft
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

frederick wrote:

> If you use a D300 or D3 camera, then Capture Nx applies auto CA
> correction to raw files by default(it can be unselected if you want to
> for some reason, or further "tweaked"). So far with D300, the
> auto-correction works better than any other method I've tried, and
> requires no further manual input.

Can you make/share/download custom profiles for third party lens CA &
distortion corrections?

--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com

all google groups messages filtered due to spam
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

"TH O" <tho.RemoveThis@tho.23.invalid> wrote in message
news:tho-583ED4.18542320062008@news.giganews.com...
> In article <1213908411.183804@athprx03>,
> "G Paleologopoulos" <gpaleo.RemoveThis@ath.forthnet.gr> wrote:
>
>> > Is there no trial available for NX2? There certainly is for Lightroom,
>> > 30
>>
>> 60 days
>> http://support.nikontech.com
>
> The best thing you could do is try it out for yourself.
>
> Personally, I found NX and NX2 resource hogs with a very non-standard
> user interface when I tried the demos. They frequently brought XP and
> all other applications to a crawl. I don't know that I could tolerate
> using it every day.


Upgrade your PC then.
I run NX1, Photoshop CS3 and Bridge together with no problems at all.
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

Agreed. Sounds like Paleologopoulos is running a VERY old and underpowered
PC.



"N" <N.TakeThisOut@onyx.com> wrote in message
news:485c9d2e$0$11601$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
> "TH O" <tho.TakeThisOut@tho.23.invalid> wrote in message
> news:tho-583ED4.18542320062008@news.giganews.com...
>> In article <1213908411.183804@athprx03>,
>> "G Paleologopoulos" <gpaleo.TakeThisOut@ath.forthnet.gr> wrote:
>>
>>> > Is there no trial available for NX2? There certainly is for Lightroom,
>>> > 30
>>>
>>> 60 days
>>> http://support.nikontech.com
>>
>> The best thing you could do is try it out for yourself.
>>
>> Personally, I found NX and NX2 resource hogs with a very non-standard
>> user interface when I tried the demos. They frequently brought XP and
>> all other applications to a crawl. I don't know that I could tolerate
>> using it every day.
>
>
> Upgrade your PC then.
> I run NX1, Photoshop CS3 and Bridge together with no problems at all.
>
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing? 

"John Smith" <JohnSmith.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote
news:Vza7k.1331$q03.961@newsfe06.phx...
>
> Agreed. Sounds like Paleologopoulos is running a VERY old and
> underpowered PC.
>
>
>
> "N" <N.TakeThisOut@onyx.com> wrote in message
> news:485c9d2e$0$11601$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>> "TH O" <tho.TakeThisOut@tho.23.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:tho-583ED4.18542320062008@news.giganews.com...
>>> In article <1213908411.183804@athprx03>,
>>> "G Paleologopoulos" <gpaleo.TakeThisOut@ath.forthnet.gr> wrote:
>>>
>>>> > Is there no trial available for NX2? There certainly is for
>>>> > Lightroom, 30
>>>>
>>>> 60 days
>>>> http://support.nikontech.com



Nope. I just provided the link.
My PC rocks. That does not make NX / NX2 a speed demon though.
 >> Stay informed about: Nikon Capture NX2 for RAW processing?