DSLRUsers.com

A totally new version (not an upgrade) is due to be released tommorow. Considering the grief that Adobe are giving me over changing platforms, NX might become my software of choice.

why a "new" release ?
any news on whats new ? must be some major stuff. hopefull it will be more stable and less of a memory hog.

Nice Nikon lady at PMA comfirmed an improved GUI and better performance.

Its not an upgrade apparently.

kiwifamily wrote:Nice Nikon lady

No such thing.

an improved GUI and better performance.

There's a concept!

Quick Review:

http://www.luminescentphoto.com/article ... eview.html

Mac Download:

http://nikonimglib.com/cnx2/index_en_ns ... -macintosh

Windows Download:

http://nikonimglib.com/cnx2/index_en_ns ... os-windows

Excellent, just got into using NX1.3 and was impressed by some aspects but had some qualms about the interface - looks like these have been addressed.

Just had a look at the Nikon KB, CaptureNX2 isn't an upgrade its a whole new purchase (after the 60 day trial). So now the objective of Nikon giving out Capture NX with the D300 and D3 makes sense

Get em hooked and then they'll upgrade!

No big surprise, really, when its a full new version release, you usually pay for the software.

For me I'll wait a while and probably upgrade from 1.3, I find it a very useful product and actually don't mind the interface, so 2 can only be better. Of course I might be able to get a free copy when I buy my D3x, D300s, D10 or whatever is coming out next

Oh well I only use NX for RAW conversions. I dont use it for anything else. I'll have to have a look at the new version, if it is easier to use then I may shell out for it and ditch CS2/3 and Lightroom. I don't do much post processing, but for some reason I find all this software installed!

I'll give it a play then trash it. I could never betray me beloved Aperture..

Oneputt wrote:A totally new version (not an upgrade) is due to be released tommorow. Considering the grief that Adobe are giving me over changing platforms, NX might become my software of choice.

I have been using Capture NX 1 for some time and find it fantastic except a bit slow to use. U Point is great to use and saved many a shot....... John you will love it........ I will be chasing a copy in the next day or so

i've been using it for a couple of days now. huge thumbs up. being a CNX user i'm very happy with the changes.
the quick fix tab with the highlight/ shadow sliders are great, U point now for every change you want to apply and the clone tool works brilliantly for small dust spots and skin blemishes. the new menus and quick drop downs, (especially for cropping), is excellent. the new style of applying paintbrush is also great.

on the down side:
$100USD for the upgrade...i reckon its a bit steep but i love usign it so i'll fork out the cash.
the clone tool doesnt work well for more complex cloning cos it doesnt seem to allow you to select a site for the clone tool to clone from.
its a bit faster, but still a terrible memory hog and prone to instability if you load it up and have view nx running at the same time. view nx uprade incidentally is also well worth the upgrade, (free). alot of the silly niggly poor design stuff has been removed....especially when viewing the shots @ 100%

I tried the new capture and think it's great. However, I only use Capture NX for RAW conversion (I still think Capture NX provides the best RAW conversion for NEF files) and don't think I will upgrade for now. The only other feature I use in capture NX is d-lighting tool which I think is great and a lot of times works better than Shadow and highlights in PS.

Alex

Here's another review: http://www.diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/N ... index.html

I find it difficult to understand why I should want to upgrade though I'm open to suggestions and comments. The main limitation for me is the relative lack of batch processing in either the old of the new versions. I find Lightroom really good for selecting and initially processing images en masse. I also do quite a lot of batch processing in Photoshop and I've recently been doing a lot of combining multiple images in Photoshop for focus enhancement. I don't really have any issue with the Ligthroom workflow (given that it's a RAW processor without full colour management) or with using layers etc in Photoshop.

I understand that people say it's a much better RAW processor than ACR and I wonder whether that relates to initial interpretation or what you can do with each product if you appropriately understand and apply them. Admittedly I haven't really tried Capture NX out in any significant way but then I don't have any single-image applications at the moment.

Regards,
Murray

both old and new versions have batch processing. what sort of batch processing do you want to do ? if its as simple as WB or an EV change then even View NX can do that.

i dont know whether its a better converter or not, i havent really done any side by sides. i just use it cos i can get good results very, very quickly.

I suppose I'm re-evaluating what batch processing I do at the moment. Before I got the D3 I was doing low light photography with a Panasonic FZ50 and that required a massive post-processing effort which at the highest ISOs would include noise reduction in LAB mode, further noise reduction with Neat Image using a "The Light's Right" mask and then sharpening with PK sharpener, including stops for adjustment at all decision points and adjustment of layers at the end. With the D3 I mainly use the batch processes for sharpening (I haven't checked but I would be surprised if Capture NX is as good as Photokit Sharpener) and resizing etc when the destination is web slide shows.

That's probably not the show stopper, though, because I could still do that from Lightroom or Bridge even if I were to initially process in Capture NX. Maybe what I should try when I find the time is to go through my usual selection and enhancement process in Lightroom. then export selected images to Capture NX (without Lightroom adjustments, that wouldn't be possible anyway) and see whether I can end up with better results than I can get in Lightroom (after adjustments).

For that matter, another thing I should try when I get the time (always a problem) is to calibrate the camera and see whether that makes any difference in Lightroom.

Regards,
Murray

Murray Foote wrote:I understand that people say it's a much better RAW processor than ACR and I wonder whether that relates to initial interpretation or what you can do with each product if you appropriately understand and apply them. Admittedly I haven't really tried Capture NX out in any significant way but then I don't have any single-image applications at the moment.

The default processing by Lightroom of a NEF (from my D70 or my D300 and would be the same with a D3) is absolutely woeful. It doesn't even come close to what the image looks like when you open it with CaptureNX. I set up my camera so that the image is "correct" straight out of the camera, (Yeah, I know the camera is applying some processing, but you get what I mean) and it is all a bit of a waste when Lightroom ignores all that. Most images I can tweak so they look pretty darn close to what they'd look like in CaptureNX, but some images I have not been able to get all the colours correct.

I do love the workflow of Lightroom, though, and I doubt that even the new CaptureNX will come close. Maybe I should download the trial and have a play. For the moment, I'm happy to use CaptureNX to convert difficult images to TIFF and then I can continue to use Lighttoom for everything else.

Murray Foote wrote:For that matter, another thing I should try when I get the time (always a problem) is to calibrate the camera and see whether that makes any difference in Lightroom.

It doesn't. Lightroom ignores all the camera settings. It is supposed to honour white balance, but I even have my doubts about that.

Murray Foote wrote: Maybe what I should try when I find the time is to go through my usual selection and enhancement process in Lightroom. then export selected images to Capture NX

That would not be a good idea, methinks. It's defeating the whole purpose of using NX. Use NX to make (at least) your initial adjustments, and then move the images into PS/Lightroom/your kid's colouring set/whatever. The point being that NX is best for getting your image basics set first ... then do whatever magic you wish afterwards.

gstark wrote:

Murray Foote wrote: Maybe what I should try when I find the time is to go through my usual selection and enhancement process in Lightroom. then export selected images to Capture NX

That would not be a good idea, methinks. It's defeating the whole purpose of using NX. Use NX to make (at least) your initial adjustments, and then move the images into PS/Lightroom/your kid's colouring set/whatever. The point being that NX is best for getting your image basics set first ... then do whatever magic you wish afterwards.

.. but that's what I'm suggesting, as indicated in the next phrase after your quote:

Murray Foote wrote:... then export selected images to Capture NX (without Lightroom adjustments, that wouldn't be possible anyway) ...

i.e. Process images en masse in LightRoom to take advantage of the superior workflow opportunities of LightRoom to end up with a few optimised images. Then export them one by one to Capture NX
without the LightRoom adjustments and modify them in Capture NX. Then reimport the images optimised in Capture NX to LightRoom and compare them with the images previously optimised in LightRoom.

Regards,
Murray

ATJ wrote:

Murray Foote wrote:For that matter, another thing I should try when I get the time (always a problem) is to calibrate the camera and see whether that makes any difference in Lightroom.

It doesn't. Lightroom ignores all the camera settings. It is supposed to honour white balance, but I even have my doubts about that.

I think we're talking about different things here. I'm not referring to anything in-camera - I'm referring to freeware software such as that from Chromoholics. (There are also more expensive versions such as one for about $US600 from ColorEyes). You use this with an XRite Colour Checker card (say $60) to calibrate your camera and record the results in LightRoom under Camera Calibration in the Develop screen. The images you import are then adjusted according to this definition. How well this works as compared to just using CaptureNX I don't know.

Regards,
Murray

ATJ wrote:

Murray Foote wrote:I understand that people say it's a much better RAW processor than ACR and I wonder whether that relates to initial interpretation or what you can do with each product if you appropriately understand and apply them. Admittedly I haven't really tried Capture NX out in any significant way but then I don't have any single-image applications at the moment.

The default processing by Lightroom of a NEF (from my D70 or my D300 and would be the same with a D3) is absolutely woeful. It doesn't even come close to what the image looks like when you open it with CaptureNX. I set up my camera so that the image is "correct" straight out of the camera, (Yeah, I know the camera is applying some processing, but you get what I mean) and it is all a bit of a waste when Lightroom ignores all that. Most images I can tweak so they look pretty darn close to what they'd look like in CaptureNX, but some images I have not been able to get all the colours correct.

I do love the workflow of Lightroom, though, and I doubt that even the new CaptureNX will come close. Maybe I should download the trial and have a play. For the moment, I'm happy to use CaptureNX to convert difficult images to TIFF and then I can continue to use Lighttoom for everything else.

I think the implication of what you're saying here is that I need to make the time to become familiar with Capture NX to find out what it can do according to my own perceptions and preferences.

With my D3 I'm currently shooting live music (high ISOs and saturated colours), macro shots where I combine multiple images and a little bit of landscape. I'm not sure how much landscape I'll end up shooting because I've still got my Gaoersi 6x17 and I imagine I'll keep using that too. I'll also be interested to find out whether CaptureNX has an advantage for particular types of images in terms of gamut, accuracy of colours or subtlety of tone.

Do you have particular criteria for a difficult image that suggests using Capture NX? Difficult tonal range? Mixed lighting sources? Narrow tolerance of colour variation? Or just an image that doesn't seem to work well in Lightroom?

Regards,
Murray

Murray Foote wrote:Do you have particular criteria for a difficult image that suggests using Capture NX? Difficult tonal range? Mixed lighting sources? Narrow tolerance of colour variation? Or just an image that doesn't seem to work well in Lightroom?

I guess it is difficult colours. That's what I find is wrong. For example, simple colour control patches. I could not get the cyan correct, even though the other colours were correct. See: http://andrewtrevor-jones.com/lightroom.html and the fourth set of images down (NEF file with adjustments compared to the JPG).

Ah, thank you for that. I just reread your detailed and informative article.

The LightRoom NEF display problem seems to affect green also, to a lesser extent. I downloaded the Lightroom NEF image and played with it in LightRoom, comparing it with the JPEG image in your article on IE. I found I got the cyan fairly close with an adjustment of the “blue” slider in HSL on the develop screen of Saturation +24; Hue -18 and Luminance +25. I also used what tends to be my standard adjustments of Clarity 70, Vibrance +20 (Basic/ Develop)

If it’s only the colours, then perhaps an adjustment like this to all colours applied as a preset on import would be sufficient for Lightroom to match CaptureNX. Getting a standard contrast adjustment right might be more difficult. Perhaps calibrating the camera might be a worthwhile option.

Since it affects mainly cyan and perhaps to a lesser extent green, I think this probably would be more of an issue for landscape than for available light exposures under stage lighting.

I notice in your 29 March Blog entry you have to workaround not being able to open images directly from Lightroom to CaptureNX as NEFs. I have read that LightRoom 2 Beta (which I have not yet downloaded) is able to open files in ACR in Photoshop. Perhaps it can do the same with CaptureNX.

In the blog entry you wrote:As the TIFF file gets created by CaptureNX from the untouched NEF file, metadata created in Lightroom is lost. I have yet to determine a way to apply the metadata automatically to the created TIFF file but I'm sure there is some way to do it

I have read that the reason for this is that Lightroom uses sidecar files and Capture NX does not read them. If this is so, there is probably no way around it and it probably applies to CaptureNX2 as well.

Regards,
Murray

Nikon’s announcement: http://www.nikon.com/about/news/2008/0603_01.htm
Nikon Brochure: http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imagi ... atalog.pdf
Capture NX2 User Manual: http://chsvlib.nikonimglib.com/archive1 ... HK1102.pdf

Installed it a few day ago and played around. It's based on the dotnet-framework which might be the reason why it's kinda slow and takes so much memory.

Think I'll stay with Photoshop.

Cheers,
Peter