How many Nikon photographers use Capture NX2 instead of Adobe's Lightroom? I've been told that NEF is proprietary code and that Adobe NEF's conversion in Lightroom and Camera RAW is reverse engineered since they do not have access to the NEF code. Therefore NX2 does a better job editing and converting NEF images to TIFF or PSD. Is this true, and if so, does it really do a better job?
Posted by Drew Fulton on March 17, 2010 at 11:22 AM
Jim,
I haven't used NX2 but used the previous versions of Capture (both NX and 4). I agree, I much prefer the output of Capture when it comes to NEF images. I should clarify that. I believe Capture produces better images with the least tinkering required. I believe this is particularly true with White Balance presets.
However, I don't use Capture because it is slow. NX2 has apparently made good strides in this arena but I still understand it is much more difficult to use when handling large number of images. Since abandoning Capture NX, I have developed a workflow I really like that is based around the DNG file format (which Capture can't handle) so I don't see myself going back to NX2 (or NX3 sometime in the future). I am pleased with the images that I get out of ACR (don't use lightroom) but they sometimes take a bit more tinkering than I used to do with Capture. (I should say that I do save my NEF's embedded in the DNG so that at some point if I want to, I can extract them and pop them into Capture but in the last two years, I haven't had a need to do that).
Ultimately, your choice of Raw Converter is one step in a long workflow. The convenience of Lightroom is hard to argue with and the development of Lightroom 3 (due to be released here in the next few months) has focused heavily on improving the raw converter.
Fortunately, I know Lightroom has demos available and I think Capture does as well. Download them both and see which works best in your workflow and which images you prefer.
Hope that was helpful. If it matters, 90% of my current images come from a Nikon D3 and have many thousand D2X/D2Xs and D100 files in my archive as well.
Posted by David Bostedo on March 17, 2010 at 11:25 AM
I much prefer the output of Capture when it comes to NEF images
I've heard that before, but I've seen less comments about that since Adobe came out with its "DNG Camera Profiles" (which have nothing to do with the DNG files, per se, and you don't need to convert to DNG files.)
Part of the goal of the profiles was to make ACR/Lightroom emulate the results from the camera manufacturers RAW converters, since, as you mentioned, they know the sensors and file formats better than Adobe.
Posted by Drew Fulton on March 17, 2010 at 11:37 AM
David,
You've made some great points. I now have ACR acting how I want it to though I admit, I haven't taken the time to mess with the DNG Camera Profiles. This has been something that I have on my to do list for quite a while but haven't taken the time to sit down and really get things calibrated.
Posted by Luke Ormand on March 17, 2010 at 12:05 PM
I convert to DNG and use ACR in either Bridge or PS3
I Have Lightroom 2, and tried the demo 3, and find them both more complex than what I need, for example: When I complete my RAW editing I open the image in CS4 for any further editing required. Lightroom automatically saves a copy of the output file (TIFF) that is sent to CS4. I don't want to mix my RAW and TIFF files in the same catalog. I sent an email to the helpdesk at NAPP and was told I have no choice regarding the TIFF image.
I just downloaded Capture NX 2 and see what that offers me. Initially it seems more strait forward to me than Lightroom.
Thanks for your response
Jim
Posted by Drew Fulton on March 17, 2010 at 12:23 PM
Jim,
That's one of the reasons I like my workflow so much. With ACR and DNG, 95% of my edits happens in ACR and a preview is then saved to the DNG file that shows up in cataloging software (iView Media/Expression Media). One reason I used DNG is I hate having to keep track of a second side car XMP file. I only rarely need to do something in Photoshop that ACR/Lightroom won't let me do. When that is the case, I do have to then deal with a working file, typically a layered PSD file. I use PSD/PSB files as working files and TIFF files as finals (ie final, sharpened files for a specific print size).
To be fair, I haven't used Lightroom since very early in its life and wasn't a huge fan but that was a while back. I am intrigued by LR3 and will probably download the beta when it is released, however my catalog is getting to be so large that I am not sure that LR3 will be ideal for my workflow though it sure would simplify some things and get rid of a program that is no longer being developed/supported (iView/Expression Media).
Right now, I like my workflow and I don't plan on changing except maybe an upgrade to CS5 at some point in order to get the newer raw processing engine that will be included in PS CS5 and LR3. Though, since I used a wide variety of Adobe apps including Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, InDesign, Premiere, After Effects, SoundBooth, and Encore, the upgrade may not come as early as I like since it is a pricey upgrade for the Master Tools suite. We'll see how things look in late April (hopefully) when things get announced.
Great Post.
It´s completely true, I only use Nikon Capture NX2 to process/convert RAW for TIFFs, and then work them on PS.
My Nikon NEF files have one destination only: CaptureNX. I use this software a lot for initial processing, corrections, color balance, all lots of editing an image can have, and recommend it to Nikon users, but that´s just my opinion, I´m so used to this workflow, it´s working fine for me.
I used Lightroom when it was initially released, and noticed that it couldn´t read properly the nikon Raw files - when a NEF was opened, it was kind of "loosing" information, regarding color, as far as I could see - I found some information on the internet regarding this issue, and concluded that it was due to patented Nikon NEF code, just as you mentioned Jim, so this incompatibility between Nikon/Adobe. I´ve been using CaptureNX for a long time, all RAW metadata and file capabilities, regarding your camera model are well controlled then in the software.
I Have Lightroom 2, and tried the demo 3, and find them both more complex than what I need, for example: When I complete my RAW editing I open the image in CS4 for any further editing required. Lightroom automatically saves a copy of the output file (TIFF) that is sent to CS4. I don't want to mix my RAW and TIFF files in the same catalog. I sent an email to the helpdesk at NAPP and was told I have no choice regarding the TIFF image.
I just downloaded Capture NX 2 and see what that offers me. Initially it seems more strait forward to me than Lightroom.
Thanks for your response
Jim
Posted by Larry Fischer on March 17, 2010 at 1:08 PM
I use NX2 mosthly but occasionally ProPhoto CaptureOne 4
I've never owned PS or Lightroom so I cannot compare.
Most blogs do mention to get the most out of a Nikon RAW one is best advised to use NX2.
I don't do a lot of photos--so for wedding, photo-journalism, and other high production fields the speed of processing, combined with quality, has to be a factor.
Probably familiarity with nuances of a program over time is the best way to produce consistent photos with good quality.
I'm still learning on NX2; their tutorials in their manual leaves a lot to be desired--at least for me.
My workflow is:
1. Pre-process the NEF with NX2 to TIFF. Mostly retrieving highlights and shadows plus and some color/contrast/sharpness boost.
2. Continue using TIFF with PS.
I learned from my own experience (I cannot back it up with any science) that retrieving shadows and highlights with NX2 can bring much more details than Camera RAW and it does it in a much higher quality.
Posted by David Bostedo on March 17, 2010 at 5:20 PM
...it was kind of "loosing" information, regarding color, as far as I could see...
The explanation for this could be that NX2 can use the in-camera JPG settings to render a more finished looking file right out of the box. ACR, on the other hand, makes more guesses and does less selection for you than NX2 does. I think that with effort or experience, results improve greatly in ACR - or by using the DNG profiles. But ACR straight defaults are not going to look as good as NX2.
And even given that, as others mentioned, there may be things NX2 is just better at with NEF files.
Discussion
11 repliesI haven't used NX2 but used the previous versions of Capture (both NX and 4). I agree, I much prefer the output of Capture when it comes to NEF images. I should clarify that. I believe Capture produces better images with the least tinkering required. I believe this is particularly true with White Balance presets.
However, I don't use Capture because it is slow. NX2 has apparently made good strides in this arena but I still understand it is much more difficult to use when handling large number of images. Since abandoning Capture NX, I have developed a workflow I really like that is based around the DNG file format (which Capture can't handle) so I don't see myself going back to NX2 (or NX3 sometime in the future). I am pleased with the images that I get out of ACR (don't use lightroom) but they sometimes take a bit more tinkering than I used to do with Capture. (I should say that I do save my NEF's embedded in the DNG so that at some point if I want to, I can extract them and pop them into Capture but in the last two years, I haven't had a need to do that).
Ultimately, your choice of Raw Converter is one step in a long workflow. The convenience of Lightroom is hard to argue with and the development of Lightroom 3 (due to be released here in the next few months) has focused heavily on improving the raw converter.
Fortunately, I know Lightroom has demos available and I think Capture does as well. Download them both and see which works best in your workflow and which images you prefer.
Hope that was helpful. If it matters, 90% of my current images come from a Nikon D3 and have many thousand D2X/D2Xs and D100 files in my archive as well.
I've heard that before, but I've seen less comments about that since Adobe came out with its "DNG Camera Profiles" (which have nothing to do with the DNG files, per se, and you don't need to convert to DNG files.)
Part of the goal of the profiles was to make ACR/Lightroom emulate the results from the camera manufacturers RAW converters, since, as you mentioned, they know the sensors and file formats better than Adobe.
You've made some great points. I now have ACR acting how I want it to though I admit, I haven't taken the time to mess with the DNG Camera Profiles. This has been something that I have on my to do list for quite a while but haven't taken the time to sit down and really get things calibrated.
I Have Lightroom 2, and tried the demo 3, and find them both more complex than what I need, for example: When I complete my RAW editing I open the image in CS4 for any further editing required. Lightroom automatically saves a copy of the output file (TIFF) that is sent to CS4. I don't want to mix my RAW and TIFF files in the same catalog. I sent an email to the helpdesk at NAPP and was told I have no choice regarding the TIFF image.
I just downloaded Capture NX 2 and see what that offers me. Initially it seems more strait forward to me than Lightroom.
Thanks for your response
Jim
That's one of the reasons I like my workflow so much. With ACR and DNG, 95% of my edits happens in ACR and a preview is then saved to the DNG file that shows up in cataloging software (iView Media/Expression Media). One reason I used DNG is I hate having to keep track of a second side car XMP file. I only rarely need to do something in Photoshop that ACR/Lightroom won't let me do. When that is the case, I do have to then deal with a working file, typically a layered PSD file. I use PSD/PSB files as working files and TIFF files as finals (ie final, sharpened files for a specific print size).
To be fair, I haven't used Lightroom since very early in its life and wasn't a huge fan but that was a while back. I am intrigued by LR3 and will probably download the beta when it is released, however my catalog is getting to be so large that I am not sure that LR3 will be ideal for my workflow though it sure would simplify some things and get rid of a program that is no longer being developed/supported (iView/Expression Media).
Right now, I like my workflow and I don't plan on changing except maybe an upgrade to CS5 at some point in order to get the newer raw processing engine that will be included in PS CS5 and LR3. Though, since I used a wide variety of Adobe apps including Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, InDesign, Premiere, After Effects, SoundBooth, and Encore, the upgrade may not come as early as I like since it is a pricey upgrade for the Master Tools suite. We'll see how things look in late April (hopefully) when things get announced.
Drew
It´s completely true, I only use Nikon Capture NX2 to process/convert RAW for TIFFs, and then work them on PS.
My Nikon NEF files have one destination only: CaptureNX. I use this software a lot for initial processing, corrections, color balance, all lots of editing an image can have, and recommend it to Nikon users, but that´s just my opinion, I´m so used to this workflow, it´s working fine for me.
I used Lightroom when it was initially released, and noticed that it couldn´t read properly the nikon Raw files - when a NEF was opened, it was kind of "loosing" information, regarding color, as far as I could see - I found some information on the internet regarding this issue, and concluded that it was due to patented Nikon NEF code, just as you mentioned Jim, so this incompatibility between Nikon/Adobe. I´ve been using CaptureNX for a long time, all RAW metadata and file capabilities, regarding your camera model are well controlled then in the software.
I Have Lightroom 2, and tried the demo 3, and find them both more complex than what I need, for example: When I complete my RAW editing I open the image in CS4 for any further editing required. Lightroom automatically saves a copy of the output file (TIFF) that is sent to CS4. I don't want to mix my RAW and TIFF files in the same catalog. I sent an email to the helpdesk at NAPP and was told I have no choice regarding the TIFF image.
I just downloaded Capture NX 2 and see what that offers me. Initially it seems more strait forward to me than Lightroom.
Thanks for your response
Jim
I've never owned PS or Lightroom so I cannot compare.
Most blogs do mention to get the most out of a Nikon RAW one is best advised to use NX2.
I don't do a lot of photos--so for wedding, photo-journalism, and other high production fields the speed of processing, combined with quality, has to be a factor.
Probably familiarity with nuances of a program over time is the best way to produce consistent photos with good quality.
I'm still learning on NX2; their tutorials in their manual leaves a lot to be desired--at least for me.
the fisch
1. Pre-process the NEF with NX2 to TIFF. Mostly retrieving highlights and shadows plus and some color/contrast/sharpness boost.
2. Continue using TIFF with PS.
I learned from my own experience (I cannot back it up with any science) that retrieving shadows and highlights with NX2 can bring much more details than Camera RAW and it does it in a much higher quality.
The explanation for this could be that NX2 can use the in-camera JPG settings to render a more finished looking file right out of the box. ACR, on the other hand, makes more guesses and does less selection for you than NX2 does. I think that with effort or experience, results improve greatly in ACR - or by using the DNG profiles. But ACR straight defaults are not going to look as good as NX2.
And even given that, as others mentioned, there may be things NX2 is just better at with NEF files.