View NX

I'm considering adding Nikon View/ Capture NX to my current post processing work

flow, which consists of Adobe LR and PSCS3. If I were to shoot RAW, and convert

to TIFF in View NX, would the in camera settings (sharpening, contrast, etc.) be

applied during the conversion to the TIFF file? I know ACR ignores these

settings.

Your choice whether to apply them or not. Many of us think the color rendition is better using Capture NX to open NEF files. I find a mixed workflow to be best. Capture NX is good for a lot of things. PS is better or easier for others.

I shoot raw, do initial processing in NX, save a copy as a tif then open it in PS for serious modification. I'm sure it could be done in NX but the user interface isn't user friendly for someone who normally uses Windows programs.

As far as I know, for the processing of Nikon's NEFs, you cannot go wrong using CaptureNX. It produces the best image quality compared to the others.

 

Whether CaptureNX is the best software or not, that's another subject to discuss/argue about. :)

I'm aware of Capture NX's capabilities from what I read; however, in View NX there is a convert files feature that I'm specifically asking about. Does this work the same as Capture by applying the in-camera settings to the RAW file during conversion? If so, it looks like a much more efficient approach to converting files. (Or am I missing something here?)

From the View NX Mac Help guide:

 

 

"You can convert a JPEG (JPG), TIFF (TIF), or RAW image (NEF) into a JPEG or TIFF image. You

can also convert multiple images at one time.

 

You can also change the image size, delete the camera settings and XMP/IPTC

information, or delete color profile when converting the file format. In addition, you can

change the file size or delete various information by converting the file to the same file

format.

 

You cannot convert a movie file or an image dust-off data (NDF).

 

View NX is free; why don't you give it a try and see for yourself?

View NX is a memory hog. I find that if I want to do more editing in Photoshop, I have to close it before proceeding because all of my 2 GB of RAM are tied up displaying images in View NX.

NX produces the very best rendition of NEFs. At least that is my observation. The software runs moderately slowly on my machine

(fast Dell workstation) but I do not shoot huge volumes, am usually not on a tight schedule, and mostly don't give a

flying furuncle about how long it may take -

there's always "overnight" or while I'm "watching the news", or "preparing/having lunch" or whatever.

 

For much of my imaging needs NX provides all the PP I need to view or to print.

 

For the little paid work I do nowadays, or for things I wish to treat

on a pixel-level of resolution I use other, more appropriate software.

 

But certainly the bulk of my pictures are opened and transformed

in NX.

 

ViewNX is good too. There's very little "bad" these days. It's really only about choosing the appropriate tool for your needs.

 

Should those needs change, use another tool. PP software is definitely not "one size fits all", just as little in photography is.

I open my nef files in PS and use the plugin that is automatically launched to convert.

 

So here is my question. Is there any difference between using ViewNX, CaptureNX or the PhotoShop Plugin to convert a file from nef to whatever? I'd guess that Nikon would have the exact same algorithm for all three.

Hi Patrick,

 

The difference is in the ability to make adjustments like changing NR for instance. I would avoid using Nikon's Photoshop plug-in; View NX is free after all. View NX allows most of the relevant adjustments, just leave Active D-Lighting and any NR turned off in your camera's Picture Control settings (D3 or D300) or Image Optimization settings (all other Nikon DSLRs).