View NX vs Capture NX nef conversion and correction

[marco_landini]

<p>Hi. I' m newbie to digital photography and digital darkroom too. I got Nikon D90 ad good primes, and I' d like to achieve the best IQ the camera can produce. I shoot only NEF to have the most quality and capabilities for PS correction and editing. This is my usual workflow : Nikon transfer to load NEF image files from D90 to the computer. Then I select the NEF's and send them to View NX. On View NX I adjust white balance, exposure compensation . Then I start the NEF to TIFF conversion, still by View NX. Then I open the resulting TIFF's in PS and I start all the filter, masking, perspective, distortion, contrast, curves ecc... corrections and editing in PS. I' m here asking you if this is the correct workflow, as I know most people use Capture NX to convert the NEF to TIFF files, and I use View NX instead. I read the conversion by View nx or Capture nx is the same, same image quality. But using Capture nx is possible to make adjustments like noise reduction, perspective ecc...directly to the NEF files. I can do the same adjustments on PS, so I think I would not need Capture nx, but here' s my question : is it better to do these adjustment directly to the NEF file on Capture NX reather than make these same adjustment to the converted TIFF file in CS3 ? I already have View NX and PS CS3, so do I really need View NX too ? Thanks. Ciao. Marco.</p>

[anthony_bez]

<p>There is no "best" workflow just what works best for you.<br />You do not need to use any Nikon software If you like using photoshop. Bridge and PS3 can transfer convert NEF's, and adjust images.</p>

[dansutton]

<p>i'd argue that nikon products (ViewNX, CaptureNX) give the best rendering from the NEF file. and you then use TIFF's in PS. this preserves the good rendering at the expense of size. so you've got a fine workflow</p>

[john_demott]

<p>View NX and Capture NX2 use the same RAW conversion engine so if all you want the RAW converter to do is adjust exposure and white balance, then View NX will be fine. If you are happy with the results that you get from working on the tiff files in PS, there is no reason to change. Capture NX2 has a number of features not found in either View NX or Photoshop such as auto correction for lens distortion and chromatic aberration and the control point technology for masking. Many people, myself included, find that having Capture NX2 as part of the workflow (either for some or all images, and for some or all of the editing) adds a lot of value, but I wouldn't say that one workflow is better than another. Photoshop can certainly do some important things that Capture NX2 can not do, so it is also an important tool for me.<br>

Anthony--PS CS3 can <strong>not</strong> do the RAW conversion on D90 NEF files. The RAW conversion in PS (ACR) is available only for cameras that were supported at the time the particular version of Photoshop was being sold. Support for the D90 requires an upgrade to CS4.</p>

[gary payne]

<p>To reaffirm John's comment NX2 does offer some added capability over Vier NX. I use your workflow, except I down-select to the images to be further processed in View, then process the RAW files in NX2. This allows adjustment of "in camera" settings, i.e., white balance, exposure, picture control settings, noise reductions, etc., before moving to the other more PS like functions. I then convert to JPG out of NX2. However, there is nothing magic about this. My recommendation is find the tool that works best for you and stick to it. The learning curve is quite steep in PS but it certainly has more capabilities than NX2. As a final point, however, I would highly recommend converting RAW to TIF or JPEG out of one of the Nikon products. The concensus on this forum seems to be that better results are achieved out of View NX or NX2 than from other software.</p>

[richard_thomas9]

<p><strong>PS CS3 can indeed do the Raw conversion on D90 NEF files</strong> . You just need to update it. I have both - CS3 and D90 and I don't have a problem processing D90's NEF files in CS3</p>

[wpahnelas]

<p>i don't use ViewNX to make corrections. for that, i use CaptureNX (i'm a laggard, still using 1.3). nor do i convert to another format before making corrections. i don't usually use PS, i should mention. since NX's editing of RAW is non-destructive, i try to achieve the look i want there, and only at the end export to jpg or tif. as everyone else has said, however, there is no correct workflow -- only what works for you.</p>

[marco_landini]

<p>Thanks guys. In order to not waste the original image quality as possible : is it better to do correction in NEF original format in Capture nx then convert to tiff, or to convert from NEF to TIFF first, then correct the TIFF file in PS ? I know Capture and PS have different tools, but my question is all about not to waste image quality. Quality-wise the 2 different workflows are similar ?</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>All "editing" you do in Capture NX or View NX is non-destructive. In fact, the editing in View NX is not strictly editing, but more telling how to interpret the raw data. But, since you're using TIFF, there should not be any more loss of quality. So it's a bit a wash how you handle this, as long as you stick to a uncompressed format like TIFF></p>

<p>Your workflow is very sensible to me. ViewNX's capabilities for RAW conversion are quite good, and image quality in my view better than using Adobe raw conversion. Capture NX adds some nice extra features over View NX but nothing that PS CS3 cannot do. Some things are easier to accomplish with Capture NX, some with Photoshop.<br>

In case you're curious about Capture NX, why not give the trial version a run? You can use it for 60 days, after which you'll probably know whether you like it or not.</p>

[pete_harlan1]

<blockquote>

<p>I would highly recommend converting RAW to TIF or JPEG out of one of the Nikon products.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>I'll 2nd that. Converting in one codec algorithm and then editing in another will produce inconsistencies.</p>

<p>Nikon's software (NX) is proprietary to .nef with the codec engine well designed for the .nef filies; although some have converted Canon's RAW files to run in NX with some success...don't know why they would want to?<br>

I do almost all my RAW work now in NX. PS CS is indeed the defacto for editing and DOES have more capability in some areas, but I must say, for the photographer; PS it is like using a sledge hammer to kill a knat.</p>

[marco_landini]

<p>Last question : is it better to recover burst highlights by adobe camera raw in the nef file or by photoshop in the file converted to tiff ?</p>

[thom_hayes]

<blockquote>

<p>

<p ><a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=4873900">Pete Harlan</a> <a href="http://www.photo.net/member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Jun 17, 2009; 09:40 p.m.</p>

 

<p>...but I must say, for the photographer; PS it is like using a sledge hammer to kill a knat.</p>

 

 

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well put...very well put!</p>

<p>Thom</p>