Capture NX 2 vs Lightroom, Aperture, etc. etc.

[chris_werner]

Ok. I've read for weeks on this until I can't see straight, and I'm trying to buy the software I need while

doing damage control from a spending perspective, not to mention limiting how many softwares I have to learn.

Plus, Capture NX2 likes to hang on my machine, so it's not winning any reliability rewards from me.

 

I know Capture NX2 does other things, and many well, but it seems that the "book" on Capture NX2 is that since it

reads the white balance, etc. settings from the camera that it does a "better" job of importing RAW files than

the other programs, which don't have access to the proprietary information needed to do the same thing.

 

What I can't get my head around, is why I should care. It seems to me that I could set these things in the

camera, or as a customized default in whatever software I choose to import with. ???

 

I've probably just asked a really stupid question, but there it is.

 

P.S. to Ellis Vener if you're listening - I've read a number of your posts on Lightroom and infer from them that

you use that to import and that you use customized import settings to get it right "95% of the time" if I

remember your words correctly. Am I connecting the dots on your conclusion correctly?

 

Thanks to all in advance.

[ted_springer]

Capture NX is proprietary software from Nikon, so if you want a RAW converter to read your camera settings then use that.

 

- why should you care?

 

Well, Nikon NEF files are essentially made to go through the nikon RAW converter. Many people feel that it gives a much

better rendition of the images then other software. That said, using ACR or lightroom has benefits in terms of workflow. And, if

you know what you are doing you can get pretty much any effect with any software. It's really just a question of time and effort.

How much time / image are you willing to spend in front of the computer?

[ron_hiner2]

Chris... NX2 is blazingly fast for what it does... using NX2, I can fully edit and convert my pics in about 30 seconds.... photoshop takes minutes for me. The software itself seems slow at times, but if I have 50 shots to do, I can do them in much less time than I can do the same in Photoshop.

 

If it hangs, find out why, and get it fixed. It shouldn't hang. My never does.

 

Ron

[joseph_smith3]

Chris, I use Capture NX and NX2 to process my NEF files taken with my D 300. I also own PS7. I am trying NX2 on a trial basis free for 60 days. 99% of my raw processing and printing is done in Capture NX or NX2. I use PS7 to add my copyright to my prints. NX with control points is powerful enough to do almost everything I need for my images. As primarily a nature phjotographer, I am not into cloning and digital manipulation so I do not need all of those tools in CS3.

 

Capture NX and NX2 and its predecessors are the only raw processors that will read the camera settings applied to the images taken by any Nikon DSLR. Once I understood what that meant, I decided to give Capture a try. As a former slide shooter, if I got it right in the camera, why start over again or go backwards by using a non Nikon raw processor that does not use all of the info captured by the camera except for white balance? Also I found NX to be very easy to learn how to use. The opposite is true for me for Adobe PS products. I do not know about Lightroom. I have seen it demonstrated and it looks easier to use than CS3.

 

If you know PS, the use it. Same goes for Lightroom. Your workflow might be to use NX2 to do initial processing and create a TIFF that you take into CS3 or Lightroom for final editing. The key is to make sure you learn how to use one of the processors really well and augment it when needed with other tools. If you are into digital manipulation, you will need more than Capture NX.

 

By the way, Capture NX is not a download program. It is a raw processor, photo editor and a printing program. Nikon Transfer is a download program. I happen to use Downloader Pro from Breeze Systems to download my NEF images, rename them and create file folders for them on my pc and other things.

 

If you decide to try NX or NX2, there are very good teaching aids by Jason Odel you can buy over the Internet. They are well worth the nominal fee he charges IMO. In fact, you might want to download the manual to NX2 and see if it is what you want or need.

 

U point technology comes as part of Capture NX. You can get it as a plug in for CS3 for about $225. It is called Viveza from NIK software. If you do not know what this is, check it out by doing an Internet search for NIK Viveza.

 

Joe Smith

[joseph_smith3]

Chris, yoiur pc should not hang. Mine does not. Read this at requirements: http://www.nikoncafe.com/vforums/showthread.php?t=176373

 

Joe Smith

[rarmstrong]

Chris, I chose to use Aperture 2.1 because I own a new 24 inch iMac and I've found Apple's software to be very intuitive and user friendly. It is very reasonably priced at $200 and it is easy to use but has great depth and functionality. It works well with NEF files(both 12 and 14 bit) and is very fast. If you are a Mac user, it is certainly worth a serious look. Good luck!

 

Dick

[tpernal]

As a follow up to Richard's previous post.

I was starting to wonder where all the Aperture users were.

I have a D200 and an old coolpix 5000.

My raw files look extremely fine and seldom need white balance adjustments.

(only under strange unnatural lighting)

If the EXIF data, it sure looks like all the info is coming through.

What if a Capture user buys a Canon, or another brand?????

Aperture is very intuitive as mentioned, albeit a bit complicated from an archival standpoint mostly due to the sheer volume of options.

Just my 2 cents.

[chris_werner]

First off - to the hanging - I'm on a Mac, not a PC, so the links/comments, while much appreciated, don't really

help.

 

I'm not sure I'm explaining myself well. This is my mental calculus. Capture NX2 - $179, Lightroom - $299. If

I can get the results at 1/2 the price, that's what I want to do, and use the savings for other gear.

 

I've got Aperture - I like it to the extent I've used it, but I've got some concerns with how it processes edits

and archiving my work. And I'm not sure it about the downloading piece.

 

I know PS a fair bit and will continue to use it, and I consider it different from the softwares I'm asking

about, so I think of it as a separate question.

 

I guess what I'm really asking is that there seems to me to be two ways of getting the settings right - in camera

using Capture NX2, and out of camera using other softwares while ignoring the in camera settings. Is there

something flawed about idea #2?

 

Or, to paraphrase Ted, does accurate rendition of the originals depend on Capture NX2? Or can you get to the

same objective with Lightroom, Aperture, etc.?

 

Said yet again another way, is Capture NX2 a must have, and if so, why? What can it do that nothing else can do,

or that can be done another way, but at the expense of much more time/effort?

 

@ Ted again, I'll spend as much time as it takes, but I'm not willing to spend 2 hours when I could get the same

result with 1 hour with different software. I'm not willing to be patently inefficient with my time.

 

Thanks again.

[ron_hiner2]

Chris... NX2 is definitely a must-have for nikon raw shooters.

 

It's fast, and it does non-destructive edits to raw files... nothing else can do that. Other programs can do non-destructive edits to tif/psd files (assuming you never make mistakes, and never flatten the files) -- but not to raw files. I can't think of any way in NX2 to damage your original pixels -- except perhaps to the delete the file.

 

And, as I said before, it is far faster than a Photoshop-based workflow.

 

When you are done editing a tif file -- its what 40-50 meg? (assuming you flatten the layers) When you are done editing a NEF file in Capture, its pretty much the same size you started with.

 

If it's hanging on your mac, find out why and get it fixed. It runs perfectly on my mac... never a hang.

 

Aside from that, it's a subjective thing... I have 4 ways to process raw files... bibble, NX2, Photoshop, Lightroom. And I always get the best and fastest results with NX2 -- although the ACR interface is compelling, I still prefer NX2.

 

Ron

[ilkka_nissila]

You can use Lightroom 2.0 (or ACR 4.5) to imitate Nikon's conversion output with the camera calibration profiles,

which are available as beta from Adobe's website. It's very fast and the look is very similar to Nikon's picture

control settings. The results are still not identical especially with regards to sharpening but it's a huge

improvement and makes it easy to get good results out of nef files without a lot of fiddling with controls.

<p>

<i>photoshop takes minutes for me</i>

<p>It shouldn't take that long. Find out what's wrong and fix it. ;-)

<p>

It may not be so easy to find why a certain software doesn't work on a particular computer. It's really the

software maker's responsibility to make sure it works reliably. Adobe's software do, how come Nikon's don't? My

guess is because they don't do proper testing and quality control on a larger variety of hardware and OS setups,

as Adobe does.

[chris_werner]

Guys, thanks for the answers - it might be slowly sinking in. I think that maybe what I'm not getting is this - it sounds as if the raw data needs to be corrected somehow, and that correction varies by manufacturer based on something or things inside the camera or in their A/D conversion process. I guess I'm a bit stuck on why that would be, though at the end of the day it probably just isn't important. Thanks again for all the help.

[ron_hiner2]

Chris... if your camera always sees what you see, then no correction is necessary... and you might as well shoot in JPG.

 

However, if you get home and find (like I do) the the picture on your screen is not quite what you saw with your eyes, then some correction is in order. And that's when raw files pay off.

 

All the software mentioned works to do this. The key difference in Capture is that it works by recording your corrections as instructions within the raw file, but it never alters the raw file. You convert to another format once you are done with your corrections (that format may be Tiff for further processing, or it might be jpg for web use, or it might be a conversion to paper -- yup, printing is a form of conversion). All the other software besides Capture NX convert the the file to another format BEFORE corrections are applied -- and you can never go back to the orignal without starting from scratch.

[Brad_]

>>> Capture NX 2 vs Lightroom, Aperture, etc. etc.

 

As much as I like Apple, I'd go cautiously and with a lot of consideration on a decision to go with Aperture. This relates to how local edits

are handled; such as dodge and burn.

 

When a local dodge/burn is performed in Aperture, it first generates a large TIFF file - which takes time to create. Edits are then applied to

the TIFF.

When you're through, those edits are baked into the TIFF forever. If you want to make a subsequent adjustment sometime in the future,

you can't. You must star over with a new TIFF.

 

Lightroom 2, OTOH, does not create an extra TIFF - which saves time. Local edits (exposure, contrast, contrast, brightness, clarity,

sharpness, and tone) are instructions on top of the original RAW. Much faster. And any edits applied to an image can be independently

adjusted (or deleted) in the future.

 

Also, those extra TIFFs created in Aperture suck up space on your disk. And any archive storage as well.

 

Something to think about...

[brad_vautrinot]

Chris,

 

Lightroom 2 is totally non-destructive to ALL files including Nikon's NEF's and other manufacturer's RAW files. Your original files

are NEVER altered in LR. It's fast and powerful and has absolutely the best Printing module of any other software. Ever

since the start of it all photographers have complained (and rightly so) that their RAW files from their camera didn't look

the same when opened in Photoshop. Adobe has now posted camera profiles that work in Adobe's Camera RAW 4.5, Photoshop

CS3, and Lightroom 2 for every camera made, so far, so you can open your NEF RAW file in LR or Camera Raw and

have it look exactly like it would if opened in NX2. But wait, there's more. Adobe has also posted a DNG Profile Editor

that will let you make your own camera profiles in any way shape or form you want. This is powerful stuff and we're in on

the ground floor. I now do about 97+ percent of my post processing in Lightroom 2 now that I can open my NEF's exactly

as I could in NX2. I still use Photoshop CS3 when I need to do some heavy pixel wrangling and these files are then

brought back into LR. NIK Software's Viveza, SIlverEffects Pro, and Sharpener Pro 3.0 all use U-point technology and

are available as Photoshop plug-ins which makes me suspect that NIK writes the software for NX2.

 

Time and space won't permit a description of all that LR2 can do so I'd suggest you download a 30 day demo copy and

try it out.

 

Brad V.