Amatuer needs Help! I shoot all bird photos in Raw but then transfer everything to JPEG. I do this so I have maximum flexibility in the event that I take an outstanding shot. I have NX View which does not allow for cropping and other RAW processing features. Can someone tell me the best and easiest software for processing RAW photos? I really want to learn how to make the most of my digital images. i use a Nikon camera if that matters.
Richard,,,,,,there are endless possibilities here. One person's best and easiest will not be for someone else. I use Adobe Camera Raw (inside Photoshop 4) and like it very much.
The ideal approach is to stay in RAW as long as you can, and make saving to JPEG your very last step. I freely admit I didn't get it until I read a couple of books on Photoshop for Nature Photographers. At the risk of being simplistic, think of it this way: RAW is all your data. Manipulations of RAW data can almost always be undone. JPEG is a subset of your data. Once you have saved to JPEG, the stuff not in the subset is lost forever in the JPEG image. And every further change you make and save will cost you more data.
How you process the RAW is a user choice. Some like Adobe Camera Raw (ACR). It's certainly the most flexible, and gives the photographer control over almost every aspect of the interpretation and conversion of the RAW data. Others like to use a pre-defined RAW processing: Adobe Lightroom and Apple's Aperture have these; you can tweak afterwards, but the RAW conversion is done behind the scenes, so to speak.
The very easiest approach is Photoshop Elements, a subset of Photoshop, which hides all of the RAW conversion from the photographer.
As is usually the case in technology solutions, its a scale from a high degree of flexibility with somewhat difficult learning and use to very little flexibility but a high degree of ease of use.
I've been very simplistic here; others will probably jump all over me. Which takes me back to starting with a good book...
Jim - I don't think I agree with your summary of the various Adobe tools. Lightroom and ACR (in the CS versions) are nearly identical. And the ACR version in Elements is just a stripped down version from CS. It doesn't do anything to "hide" RAW development from the user any more than the full version does. It just has less options. What I think you're getting at is the "presets" - canned settings to get a certain results, usually close to what the camera maker does with its JPGs. All versions of ACR/Lightroom can use these from Adobe, or you can create your own presets. They can offer a very good starting point.
Richard - I would suggest that you download the trial of Photoshop CS5 or Elements, or both, and give it a try. (They have 30 day free trials I believe.) One good reason to stick with Photoshop (or Lightroom) and ACR is the amount of online help and resources that exist. Otherwise, Aperture, Capture One, Lightzone, etc. can all be good. I prefer ACR myself, since I was wanting to get Photoshop CS anyway.
One last note, processing RAW files will maximize the quality of your shot - but it's not magic. The improvements to be made can be very small or even none at all over a very good in-camera JPG. And at first, your RAW processed files are likely to look worse than your in-camera JPGs until you get used to the process. That said, I always like (actually enjoy) processing RAW files, and it definitely gives you the most control and flexibility over the image attributes.
I really think Photoshop Elements is the best choice for people starting out. It comes with ACR and has many important features from Photoshop as well. Just my $0.02
You have another alternative. Nikon Capture is the premium RAW converter made especially for processing Nikon NEF (RAW) files. I don't use a Nikon camera, so hopefully Capture users can chime in here.
Costs $83 at Amazon ($115 if you buy this book with it).
I use Nikon Capture in conjunction with my D700 for all my RAW processing. Very capable program and I find it very easy to use since it is fully compatible with all my camera settings and gives you everything that other RAW processing programs provide. Yes, some have advantages over others but as an amatuer, unless you really start pixel peeping, you aren't going to see that much of a difference, if any.
Discussion
8 repliesThanks
The ideal approach is to stay in RAW as long as you can, and make saving to JPEG your very last step. I freely admit I didn't get it until I read a couple of books on Photoshop for Nature Photographers. At the risk of being simplistic, think of it this way: RAW is all your data. Manipulations of RAW data can almost always be undone. JPEG is a subset of your data. Once you have saved to JPEG, the stuff not in the subset is lost forever in the JPEG image. And every further change you make and save will cost you more data.
How you process the RAW is a user choice. Some like Adobe Camera Raw (ACR). It's certainly the most flexible, and gives the photographer control over almost every aspect of the interpretation and conversion of the RAW data. Others like to use a pre-defined RAW processing: Adobe Lightroom and Apple's Aperture have these; you can tweak afterwards, but the RAW conversion is done behind the scenes, so to speak.
The very easiest approach is Photoshop Elements, a subset of Photoshop, which hides all of the RAW conversion from the photographer.
As is usually the case in technology solutions, its a scale from a high degree of flexibility with somewhat difficult learning and use to very little flexibility but a high degree of ease of use.
I've been very simplistic here; others will probably jump all over me. Which takes me back to starting with a good book...
Richard - I would suggest that you download the trial of Photoshop CS5 or Elements, or both, and give it a try. (They have 30 day free trials I believe.) One good reason to stick with Photoshop (or Lightroom) and ACR is the amount of online help and resources that exist. Otherwise, Aperture, Capture One, Lightzone, etc. can all be good. I prefer ACR myself, since I was wanting to get Photoshop CS anyway.
One last note, processing RAW files will maximize the quality of your shot - but it's not magic. The improvements to be made can be very small or even none at all over a very good in-camera JPG. And at first, your RAW processed files are likely to look worse than your in-camera JPGs until you get used to the process. That said, I always like (actually enjoy) processing RAW files, and it definitely gives you the most control and flexibility over the image attributes.
Nikon Capture is the premium RAW converter made especially for processing Nikon NEF (RAW) files. I don't use a Nikon camera, so hopefully Capture users can chime in here.
Costs $83 at Amazon ($115 if you buy this book with it).
I use Nikon Capture in conjunction with my D700 for all my RAW processing. Very capable program and I find it very easy to use since it is fully compatible with all my camera settings and gives you everything that other RAW processing programs provide. Yes, some have advantages over others but as an amatuer, unless you really start pixel peeping, you aren't going to see that much of a difference, if any.