tholte Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>I am trying to decide between LR3 or NX2. I have CS4 but don't use most of it's features. I want simple and easy and a good way to keep track of images. It would be great to hear from someone who has used both. I just bought a new computor so speed and power is not an issue. Insights would be appreciated. I don't like doing the free trial thing because I never take the time to explore it. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howard_m Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>I have both. Definitely LR3. I cant recall the last time I fired up NX2. This is esp. true if one of your goals is 'to keep track of images'.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howard_m Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>Don't get me wrong, NX2 does great RAW conversions but it's interface is so clunky and it's so slow that it makes me not really want to use it. And, once you figure out the camera profiles thing on LR (and perhaps make your own), LR gets very close to NX2 rendering output</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raczoliver Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>I use Lightroom more than NX2, however, with NX2 I can usually reach my desired results faster, but the workflow is not to my liking. It is also not ideal to keep track of thousands of pictures. I would say for "simple", NX2 is superior. "Easy" is a tie, and for "a good way to keep track of images", Lightroom wins hands down.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin_delson Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <blockquote> <p>I am trying to decide between LR3 or NX2</p> </blockquote> <p>There really is no deciding since these two programs differ in their use.</p> <p>NX2 is not used for cataloging, editing only. You can of course batch apply IPTC data after ingestion.<br> LR is both' editing AND cataloging. (PIE)</p> <p>You will get many answers to your question; but it comes down to YOUR needs.<br> Someone who shoots 500 photos a year probably does not need either program.</p> <p>OTOH, if you shoot 10,000/yr, LR is not the only game in town, although it's praises are sung by many, some of this due to Adobe's marketing excellence.</p> <p>Unlike some, I do not find Capture NX 1.XXX clunky or slow. Most people who complain about this are either running on a machine w/o the needed horse power or have not configured their computer to operate the way it should.</p> <p>I use Capture NX all the time.<br> It is designed with Nikon camera's in mind, it's RAW processing algorithm is second to none for NEF's, and once learned (yes, it has a clunky GUI), it is far more powerful than LR in when it comes to pure image editing.<br> My cataloging is handled by another program (Not LR)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_aungthwin1 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 The more I use NX the more I dislike it. LR3 is a killer program. I also use CS5 for the really tricky stuff. Whatever people claim about NX the proof is in large prints. My prints from both LR and Capture tell me that NX has no advantage in terms of being able to extract more details. Both LR3 and CS5 have ACR 6.3 which has stuff in it that NX can only dream about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joemikel1 Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>LR3 is quite impressive and does a good general job, but when it comes to "squeeze" a nikon nef, nothing can compare to NX2....</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markonestudios Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>Another vote for LR3. Vry powerful tool with a very simple front-end.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_letts Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>Having used NX2 for ages, I find Adobes workflow logic (LightRoom/CS5) completely alien and unintuitive to my way of thought.<br> If you're used to CS4 maybe you won't like NX2.<br> It's easy enough to download trial copies and try them out ..</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john_demott Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>Lightroom is better for organizing and retrieving files. Capture NX2 has more editing features (but not as many as Photoshop) and, for me, it is easier to get the results I want with NX2. If you use NX2 you can also use View NX2 as a file browser, but it is still not as full featured as Lightroom as an organizational tool.</p> <p>The choice depends mainly on what you do and how you like to work. Since you use Photoshop, you must use Adobe Camera Raw--if you like ACR and find you can do all your editing in ACR then Lightroom will probably be a good choice. If you want more editing control, particularly if you want to do local edits, NX2 should give you great results easily. If you generate thousands of images on a regular basis and need to sort, catalog, organize, etc., then LR is the way to go.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrison_k. Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>LR3 all the way. Also, it's written for multi-core cpu's and 64-bit, where as NX2 is only 32-bit.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>Tim, doesn't the Bridge in CS4 do what you need re tracking etc., if you just set up a folder system? If not, then for what you are requesting, LR3. Very easy to use, local adjustments and the process engine is very good. <br> In any event, your work will be excellent not because of what program you use, but the skill you always bring to your work.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrison_k. Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>Barry is correct. You can use Bridge for almost everything that LR is used for keeping track of images. It's easy to apply ratings, flags, colours, keywords etc. The "filter" works the same as in LR. You also have "collections". I like how Bridge search lets you chose between Bridge searching or the OS searching. Bridge, it seems, is allowed extra privileges to the OS that LR doesn't get. It's quicker to move folders of images in Bridge than in LR, too. Bridge is 32 bit for Windows users. Kind of a drag.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_south Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 Non-destructive editing, smart collections, key wording, selective copy and paste of adjustments to one or many files, lens correction, perspective correction - Without Lightroom life would be miserable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigpjenkinsphotography Posted March 31, 2011 Share Posted March 31, 2011 <p>I always start with NX2 and usually finish there as well. If my photo needs something 'special' then I work it over in PSCS4.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indraneel Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>I see you shoot Nikon, so really there's no contest... go with Capture NX2. Lightroom is not even in the same league unless you're doing high volume stuff like weddings. For all your cataloging needs, photomechanic is selling for $60 only for a limited time. Capture NX2 will give you the absolute best image from every Nikon camera you have, due to their having all of the in camera sensor, filter and algorithm data that were modified to produce the raw file. The editing facilities are very intuitive and powerful. Think of CNX2 as a wayward brother of PS, not as a competitor of LR.</p> <p>My workflow goes like this... nikon transfer2 with some iptc data during simultaneous ingest to two external drives, viewNX2 to rate/delete/write protect the import. I'll be using photomechanic here to keyword manage the files (I have already checked that the iptc data causes no conflict with what VNX2 or CNX2 puts in and is viewable by both). Launch captureNX2 from viewNX2 on individual/multiple files. Other editors I launch from VNX2 are PSCS2 (rarely), SNS-HDR, NIK Sharpener, silver efex (but these are on tiffs I save from VNX2 or CNX2). If you go with CNX2, you can also save a bundle by choosing not to get the NIK filters (except color efex) since most of the stuff can be done by CNX2.</p> <p>The only reason to get LR3 would be if you have a non nikon camera and don't like large numbers of huge tiff files (from the other camera's raw converter), or you're shooting high volume (weddings/ model portfolios/ airshows..) I got LR3 for my olympus, but the difference in image quality between LR3 and olympus viewer is big enough for me to be debating whether to eliminate the olympus camera altogether, rather than deal with tiffs vs poor IQ.</p> <p>Photoshop is required of course, capture NX2 cannot blend multiple images or move layers (relative to each other) yet.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicolaiecostel Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>As a working wedding photographer, shooting raw, I tried different ways to optimize my conversions in order to gain speed and accuracy.<br /><br />I had a go at NX2 but its interface and workflow is vastly inferior to the other two converters I use: LR3 and Capture One.<br /><br />Capture One isn't as fast or simple as LR3, so LR3 is the winner for weddings, thanks to it's blazing fast workflow, integrated camera profiles (my D700 NEF's look as good in LR3 as they do in NX, on a LED monitor, but with seemingly better detail).<br /><br />However, for those special album shots, I use Capture One six, because of it's color reproduction, contrast and toning. I did some tests between the three and Capture One's files have a certain depth to them, the nikon profile, while not being a standard profile like in LR3, renders skin tones beautifully and is very kind to gradients.<br /><br />For the fashion, landscape, macro, I also use Capture One, and occasionally LR3, when I want to speed things up.<br /><br />Overall, I would definitely recommend LR3 over NX for high file volume, and for low file volume I think one should definitely get accustomed to Capture One. I use NX2 from time to time thanks to the file "faithfulness", but that workflow and overall clumsiness just drives me up the walls.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OPK Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>why on the Earth you want to pay for another software if you already have everything needed in Photoshop CS and Bridge. I see no point in such attitude.<br> I used to work with NX2 but now I stuck with ACR in CS3 and Bridge. this is more than sufficient workflow.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin_delson Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>Tim,</p> <blockquote> <p>You will get many answers to your question; but it comes down to YOUR needs.</p> </blockquote> <p>As I said several post earlier.</p> <p>LR3, CNX, Capture One, PS, PSE blah, blah blah.<br> Opinion and personal bias run rampant when answering this question.</p> <p>Bottom line?...Use what works for you.<br> We all have different work flows.<br> Output is all that matters. How YOU arrive at that remains your decision.</p> <p>Once we as photographers become comfortable with a particular program, it is quite difficult to get us to change, especially if what we are doing is working well.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tholte Posted April 1, 2011 Author Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>I really appreciate everyone's input. I realize that CS4 should do the trick for me but I just don't like how you have to hop around to do things. I don't use layers and yearn for simplicity. I think I am going to get LR3 and give it a whirl. I am swamped with thousands of images I have to try and organize. Wish me luck and thanks again for all the good advice, more than worth the $25/year membership here on PN. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OPK Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>you can't wish more simplicity than organize files in Adobe Bridge and edit/develop them in Adobe Camera Raw (and all that thing without even opening PS).<br> I'm not trying convince you to any special soft....but you already HAVE one simpliest solution. at the end It's your money, isn't it;)</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tholte Posted April 1, 2011 Author Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>Martin, it does not seem that simple to me but I am no rocket scientist by any stretch of the imagination. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garrison_k. Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>In all honesty, Tim, if you're reluctant or having trouble with Bridge and Photoshop, buying more software isn't the magic bullet. Bridge is awesome. Aside from keywording and collections, it's also a great browser for your entire system that allows you to open any file type from it. Bridge is the first thing I open after I boot-up. It's so easy in Bridge to move and drag and drop files and folders and not have to wait (& worry) like you would do in LR.</p> <p>I suggest a $28 for a month of Lynda.com and watching Bridge tutorials before you plunk down even more money on additional software.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indraneel Posted April 1, 2011 Share Posted April 1, 2011 <p>Capture one costs a bunch! I believe the hasselblad software is also free and supports third party raw. Anyone test that yet?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted April 2, 2011 Share Posted April 2, 2011 <p>Try not to bombard you with suggestios, but you can download a trial version of light room. See if the interface suits. It is pretty much all in one if you don't want to use bridge/ACR/CS4. But don't toss out CS4 if you switch. You may want to learn how to use layers etc. Besides. I've always found it fastest to spot in Photoshop if I have to.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now