Which software?

[a_tang1]

<p>Hi all, looking at either Adobe photoshop elements or Lightroom 4. Would like to shoot raw and mostly B&W. Which is better? Are there ant other options?</p>

[purplealien]

<p>As you have posted here, can I assume you are a Nikon user?</p>

<p>If so, I would recommend Capture NX2. I find it does everything I want (well 99%); and I much prefer the interface to that on the Adobe products. I have Photoshop Elements 9 as well, as there are a few things that NX2 can't do, but I haven't used it for months.</p>

<p>Why not download it and give it a try. Its free for the first 60 days, and reasonably priced if you want to purchase it after that.</p>

<p>Chris</p>

[a_tang1]

<p>Hi Chris, yes I use a D7000. I had Capture NX when i had my D80 but found it awkward to use. I was looking at Lightroom as it's had great reviews and is supposedly easier to use. I'm certainly not a computer buff and still prefer film but i'd like to improve my digital photos. Thanks</p>

[purplealien]

<p>I got into digital quite late, so I never got to use Capture NX. From what I've read on here NX2 is much better, but if you don't get on with the interface it does sound like you'd be better off with an Adobe product.</p>

<p>I do use PSE occasionally. It does a nice job of B&W conversions IMHO, and layers (later versions only) are very handy for selective colouring/dodging and burning etc. It's a pretty powerful package, but I don't get on with the interface and find the restrictions Adobe have built in (to persuade users to buy Photoshop) rather annoying e.g. being restricted to 8-bit colour for some functionality.</p>

<p>I can't comment on Lightroom, but it seems to be pretty popular on here.</p>

<p>Best of luck<br>

Chris</p>

<p> </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>I'd go with Lightroom for efficiency and flexibility, mostly because I usually work on several similar photos in succession. It offers most of the editing tools I need and the workflow is excellent - intuitive and quick with a reasonably powerful computer.</p>

<p>Software like Elements or Paint Shop Pro are good if you prefer to work on only one or two unique photos per session, or are comfortable with the batch editing process for editing multiple similar photos per session.</p>

<p>I've never cared for Nikon's software so I'm biased against it. While Nikon's own software is arguably better for Nikon's NEFs (raw files), I now prefer Raw Therapee for my older D2H NEFs. The noise reduction tools are excellent and Raw Therapee offers a choice of various demosaicing algorithms.</p>

[Two23]

<p>I've been shooting a LOT of b&w all summer long, mostly using a Rolleiflex MX, Leica IIIc, or Chamonix 045n. I've been using HP5 for my b&w conversions. :-) I've done a little bit with my Nikons D300 & D5100 too. I think, IMO, the best options for the money are to download the free Nikon ViewNX program to use to take a NEF to a TIFF. PSE is a very good general purpose software, but for b&w there is something better. Now, for b&w I heartily recommend SilverFX software. It's great! It's made by NIK and is very refined. It is designed to do exactly what you want to do. It's as good as HP5. Well, almost. ;-)</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[jose_angel]

<p>(Hmmm, Kent, I`m currently in my honeymoon with FP4+... I`m getting older, HP5 is too fast fo me... )</p>

<p>I find NX2 the faster and easier to use. I remember bad times with NX, but I also had an obsolete computer in that times.</p>

<p>Elements is also a good choice for editing, but as Chris says it`s limited to 8-bit in some areas. The good thing is that is so cheap (mine was for free with a flat bed scanner).</p>

<p>The good one is Photoshop, but it`s quite expensive and I find NX2 good enough and easier for small adjustments. Anyway, it could happen that Elements is enough for you... almost all the work I do on my images is be done with Elements.</p>

<p>I also used Aperture for a time, but the system it uses seem not so practical to me. I got bored of it.</p>

<p>Right now I use Transfer NX for downloading, View NX for image management and NX2 for image processing. NX2 doesn`t work with layers (very useful, e.g. if you want to add words to your images), then I have to use either Elements or Photoshop (as mentioned above, Elements is more than enough for me).</p>

<p>Don`t know Lightroom... I used it time ago (when I was in the same point as you) and found it... maybe not so "friendly". Now, I`m tempted again, I have read many good things about it and will a little more experience. I now have too many images to manage, and maybe it`s the way to go... I`d like to read other user`s comments.</p>

[jose_angel]

<blockquote>

<p><em>the workflow is excellent</em> (Lightroom) <em>- intuitive and quick with a reasonably powerful computer</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>I have always read that NX2 is very demanding about computer resources. Could Lightroom be even more demanding, or maybe similar to NX2?<br>

(I`m "reasonably" fine using NX2 with a 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo @ 4Gb RAM).</p>

[mccosh]

<p>Lightroom 4 all the way.</p>

<p>Lightroom is the only program that is non destructive, I believe. Meaning your original image is never altered and you can always undo anything or go back to your original image. You can also create virtual copies of your image and create multiple versions of the same image with different adjustments.</p>

<p>Lightroom is also the quickest editing program especially once you have set up your own preset system. One click editing.</p>

<p>Lightroom will also catalouge your library of images and allow you to set up multiple Collections including smart collections based on criteria that you have set up, these collections will automatically be updated.</p>

<p>Try Lightroom for free. Agreed Lightroom is not the total solution it won't do image multiplication and you will still require Photoshop for this. 99% of my editing is done in Lightroom with no problems.</p>

<p>Cheers<br /> John</p>

[purplealien]

<p>John, NX2 is non-destructive as well.</p>

<p>As I understand it, NX2 saves the original NEF plus a list of editing steps. You can save as many different versions of the image as you like in the one file and click between them, or go back and adjust any of the individual editing steps at any time.</p>

<p>Chris</p>

<p> </p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"Lightroom is the only program that is non destructive, I believe."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Picasa doesn't alter the original JPEGs either. It's pretty good for quickly editing lots of photos that are basically in good condition and don't need major work. However it's less useful for raw files, doesn't offer any noise reduction or some other features that would make it more useful for raw editing. It's best for quickly tweaking JPEGs for web display or prints on uncalibrated systems - the auto edits are pretty good.</p>

<p>Picasa is actually a pretty useful tool for getting the hang of the Lightroom workflow. I've used Picasa for years and found the transition to Lightroom earlier this year fairly intuitive.</p>

<p>Another advantage to Lightroom - there are lots of very good free video and illustrated tutorials online. Lightroom is practically unmatched for this type of support, so almost anyone can begin at their own level and progress at a comfortable pace. The 30 day free trial gave me enough time to get the hang of the editing workflow, but not the details of using it for digital asset management.</p>

[mccosh]

<p>Hi Chris,</p>

<p>I didn't realise that NX2 was non destructive as well so that is a big plus for it.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>All RAW editors are non-destructive - not to say Lightroom would be no good, it is, but this feature is certainly nothing particular.<br>

I would recommend downloading trials to see which User Interface you prefer. Personally, I never quite liked Lightroom, something about it doesn't work for me, but this is a personal thing. Equally personal is liking CaptureNX2 or not - I happen to be another happy user of it (and version 2 is a whole lot nicer than version 1).<br>

Another program that's certainly worth a look is CaptureOne. Version 6 Express is quick, easy to use and delivers great quality conversions. Unfortunately, it's B&W conversions are a bit rudimentary (though good), the Pro version does great B&W work, but costs a lot more. Regardless, worth the shot, I think.</p>

[nigel_farmer]

<p>I had Elements 8 and then upgraded to Elements 10 (also elements+ for $12 is a must). In the last few weeks I have bought Lightroom 4 and mus say it is fantastic. The catalogging is much better than in Elements though to be fair I think Elements does a very good job at this until you reach a large amount of images. You get much better RAW editing capabilities and the workflow is really good.<br>

I think LR and Elements (or PS for that matter) work very well together as a complete solution.</p>

[adamczyk]

<p>Lightroom and get the silver efex plugin from nik. To me that is the ultimate in BW.</p>

[mac_hordam]

<p><em>"looking at either Adobe photoshop elements or Lightroom 4. Would like to shoot raw and mostly B&W. Which is</em> better?"<br>

and<br>

<em>"I'm certainly not a computer buff and still prefer film but i'd like to improve my digital photos."</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

I've glanced through the other replies and don't think anyone has mentioned it but do be sure to shoot raw and do your conversion later rather than use the b&w setting on the camera, allowing it do the conversion with no prior input from you. It sounds like that's your intention but I wanted to underline it.</p>

<p>Of the two programs you're considering it's Lightroom all the way for my vote. The raw conversion is more fully featured, you can work in 16bit and the b&w conversion is also more fully featured than PSE. Also if you can get your head around the fact that the price you'll now pay for LR4 and PSE11 together is about what you would have paid for LR3 only, it means you get the benefit of layers (albeit in 8bit) for free. Get both. There are free options for layers (still in 16bit) if you're not willing to buy both though, viz <a href="http://www.ononesoftware.com/free/">http://www.ononesoftware.com/free/</a> <br>

<em> </em><br>

<em> </em></p>

[jcuknz]

<p>Surely as to if a programme is destructive or non-destructive is immaterial if you organise your files properly and keep a copy of the original file separate and safe from the copy you are working on. In anycase what you work on is merely a copy of the file in the working section and so long as you do not use the 'save' command but alwys 'save as' and give the worked up file a different file name only that particular copy of the file has been destroyed [ or improved :-)]</p>

[mccosh]

<p>JC, you are right but if your shooting lots of images you will need a huge hard drive as your way of working will double your database of images or even greater if you do one or more edits on each image.</p>

<p>A typical wedding I would shoot around 800 images all are edited with the top 100 or so images supplied in both Black & White and in a range of effects. Your way of working would mean that I would be saving 1,800 images on my drive. In lightroom only the original image and a set of commands and preview of each copy of your image is saved. <br /><br />Now I have 80+ Weddings on my drive and increasing by around 20 per year.<br /> 80 weddings = 64,000 images stored in Lightroom + 1.05GB for Lightroom Catalogue.<br /> Your way of working would require me to store 144,000 images.</p>

<p>I know storage is cheep but still not really an option for me to have to store this many images. With the added advantage of Lightroom collections I can keep track off all my images. With one click I can see all my images taking at each venue from all my weddings, or my top 50 images etc..</p>

<p>With Lightroom your able to go back at any stage and undo any previous adjustments or add adjustments to your image. I can also load and keep track of my images on my Smugmug libraries <a href="http://mccosh.smugmug.com/">http://mccosh.smugmug.com/</a><br>

<br /> To me and my workflow Lightroom is the best thing since slice bread. I couldn't image doing this any other way.</p>

<p>John</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>That's only one reason why non-destructive editing is useful. There are others. For example, one can send an image in to a client, have them say the tones are a bit warm. You can go back and change the white balance without altering anything else. You can't do that with a copy that has been worked on and turned into a TIFF or JPEG. Cropping options are much easier with non-destructive editing, there are choices after you have created that other copy. Output options are always the same, unlike with a finished copy. There are similar equivalent reasons, there is no way that destructive editing gives you the same choices.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<blockquote>

<p>"I have always read that NX2 is very demanding about computer resources. Could Lightroom be even more demanding, or maybe similar to NX2?<br /> (I`m "reasonably" fine using NX2 with a 3.06GHz Intel Core 2 Duo @ 4Gb RAM)."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Jose, my desktop is comparable to yours: AMD Athlon II quad core 3GHz, 4GB RAM. And if I'm recalling correctly my hard drive is 5400 RPM. Adequate but no speed demon, but it handled Lightroom 3 & 4 fine, after working out some quirks. But my largest files were from a 10mp digicam, nothing that would really test the limits.</p>

<p>Raw Therapee is actually more resource intensive than Lightroom, especially the micro-contrast and sharpening options. The CPU would heat up enough to kick the cooling fan into noise quick cooldown mode. Using Windows 7 power management I throttled the CPU down to 90% of maximum which keeps it running cooler and I don't notice any significant speed loss in Raw Therapee.</p>

<p>Raw Therapee is a bit sluggish on my laptop (AMD 1.6GHz APU) but tolerable if I save the sharpening step until last and do something else while it batch edits. I haven't tried Lightroom on the laptop yet.</p>

<p>Come to think of it, I haven't tried the most current version of NX2 on the new desktop. I'll give it a try on my older Nikon D2H NEFs - although I'm not sure Capture NX2 is compatible, since Nikon lists only the D2Hs in the compatibility list. But I doubt I'll keep it after the trial period expires. Raw Therapee handles my D2H NEFs just fine, including the very good noise reduction - a must with D2H files above ISO 400. It's a noisy bugger.</p>

[tudor_apmadoc]

I shoot raw, find that I can do 90% of what I need to do in Lightroom. I use Photoshop for the rest. More and more

photoshop plugin authors are including lightroom plugins, it saves steps. There are a lot of export plugins available for

lightroom as well.

 

I find that lightroom is a great, flexible, extensible platform

[jose_angel]

<p>Thanks Lex. I think I`m switching to LR soon. </p>

[kylebybee]

<p>No one has mentioned PS CS5? With Bridge and mini Bridge. Any opinions? my wife is teacher so were able to purchase this for $200.00. Still learning it, purchased Scott Kelby's book to help learn it.</p>