Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

sblasl

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Apr 25, 2004
844
0
Heber Springs, AR
I have read that to really get the best results out of your Nikon RAW images that you really need to use Capture NX. Is this the spiel coming from Nikon or is this an accurate statement?

If you are using a Nikon, are you using Capture NX?

Thanks,

Scott
 

jayb2000

macrumors 6502a
Apr 18, 2003
748
0
RI -> CA -> ME
I am not, I am using Picassa until 10.5 comes out.
Then I will probably use lightroom or aperture, going to test them both.

Oh, I shoot with a D200 if that matters.
 

Karpfish

macrumors 6502a
Sep 24, 2006
661
0
Nope, Lightroom.
When I dl'ed the NX demo i thought it had a very clunky interface, which I didn't like.
 

Mr.Noisy

macrumors 65816
May 5, 2007
1,077
4
UK™
Tried capture once, version 4.3, never again, after conversion the colours seemed flat,now use CS3, Photoshop is the Daddie,
but a few months back i was standing next to a young lady purchasing her
1st Nikon DSLR, and the 'expert' at Jessops gave it the Nikon Spiel when she asked about shooting in RAW,"to get the best blah blah blah Nikon capture NX."
 

Westside guy

macrumors 603
Oct 15, 2003
6,400
4,266
The soggy side of the Pacific NW
I don't use it, although I've heard very good things about it. I keep meaning to trial it...

Right now I just pull the NEFs directly into Aperture, and I think Aperture will always be at the center of my workflow. So unless Capture can actually modify exiting NEF images without a format change (meaning saving the changes as NEF rather than as a TIFF, PNG, etc.) it's somewhat difficult to see exactly where it'd fit in. I could see using it as a pre-processor, if that makes sense - but I'd still want the flexibility to do RAW-level adjustments in Aperture.
 

hanschien

macrumors 6502
Oct 2, 2006
337
13
Houston, TX
While NX's UI is clunky, the results you get from the RAW conversion is superior to Aperture, Lightroom and ACR because in-camera optimizations like saturation, tone, sharpness, etc... are ignored.

I used to swear by Aperture until I gave NX a try. Now my workflow consists of a batch conversion to JPG from NX and then import them all to Aperture to tag and catalog.
 

James.Paul

macrumors regular
May 19, 2002
194
0
Northallerton, England
I use Nikon Capture and find it's interface quite awkward to use. However, the program seems to take advantage of Nikon camera features far better than any other 3rd party application (includes Aperture, Lightroom etc) and for me it is far quicker to get the results I want. I do have to use something like Photoshop Elements though to use the healing brush and add borders for dust removal and the addition of borders.
 

dakis

macrumors member
Aug 23, 2004
79
0
I have read that to really get the best results out of your Nikon RAW images that you really need to use Capture NX. Is this the spiel coming from Nikon or is this an accurate statement?

If you are using a Nikon, are you using Capture NX?

Thanks,

The main reason why anybody would use Capture NX is the fact that NX is the only software that actually reads the additional image-info that Nikon cameras place in their NEF/RAW files. If you set your colors to "vivid" in-camera, NX will display the image accordingly while all other RAW processors will discard that info and overwrite them with a standard profile. Other settings, like noise reduction etc. are also lost in NEFs.

I personally use Aperture and PS CS3 for image editing because I like to edit myself rather than having my camera do some pre-processing.

I have tried NX and found it quite nice for some tasks (e.g. easily and quickly changing the exposure of selected image areas) but I personally don't think it's worth the money (for me).

dakis

http://www.peterkisphotography.com
 

thr33face

macrumors 6502
May 28, 2006
381
0
i am using Lightroom

i heard good things about Capture NX so I gave it a try. It is super flexible and allows for far more than Lightroom but the User-Interface just didn't appeal to me.
 

compuwar

macrumors 601
Oct 5, 2006
4,717
2
Northern/Central VA
I have read that to really get the best results out of your Nikon RAW images that you really need to use Capture NX. Is this the spiel coming from Nikon or is this an accurate statement?

If you are using a Nikon, are you using Capture NX?

Thanks,

Scott

In the comparisons I've seen, no 3rd party software is able to best NX in a side-by-side comparison. I use it probably 70% of the time.
 

Clix Pix

macrumors Core
I have NX loaded into my Mac Pro but for the most part I use Aperture or occasionally CS2 (haven't gotten around to updating to CS3 yet). The once or twice that I took a look at NX I was not comfortable so backed off.... For me, Aperture fits the bill 99.95% of the time.
 

JeffTL

macrumors 6502a
Dec 18, 2003
733
0
I find Lightroom better because of its organizational features. If I need full use of in-camera optimizations, I just shoot JPEG and put that into Lightroom, but I've been almost all raw lately and everything seems as nice as ever.
 

drbrog

macrumors member
Apr 29, 2005
92
0
Chicago
NX= Yes!

I feel Capture NX is a terrific product. On my Mac Pro, it is very fast and is a big improvement over NC 4.4. NX is a little slow on my powerbook.
I believe that NX processes RAW files better than ACR and I love the control points.

Jay
nobodyphotography
 

compuwar

macrumors 601
Oct 5, 2006
4,717
2
Northern/Central VA
Going from NEF to JPEG between Adobe Camera Raw from CS3 (ACR,) Aperture (APR) and Capture NX (NX,) I see a pixel shifts, with NX and ACR being fairly close (probably a pixel difference,) and APR shifting things right a few more pixels. Doing white balance with each of the NEFs produced different results- though I may have been off in my WB point selection between images.

Contrast was different, likely due to ACR settings. Overall, I thought the NX JPEG was more "true" and the ACR JPEG was next. APR's rendering was disappointing compared to the other two, and I'll probably stop using it for JPEG conversion unless I can tweak the settings to make the results better.

Zooming in to 500% there were clear differences in details, though I'll have to play with sharpness settings to be confident of the results.

When I'm near a photo printer, I'll probably do a print-from-NEF test as well as test the TIFF converters of each program. This may change my workflow if I find I have to import to NX, then export out- I haven't checked Bibble Pro yet, but it's going to get tested too and then I'll figure out at what point I'm going to have to do wide angle lens correction.

Methodology:

I simply made three copies of the same NEF file, opened one in each converter, used a wall to set a white point, saved to maximum JPEG, then opened the JPEGs in Photoshop, turned two of them to layers and clicked on and off the view for each layer to compare them two at a time. Then I zoomed in to 100% and 500% and compared the details.
 

uMac

macrumors 6502
Mar 27, 2007
250
0
Canada
No, I use photoshop.
I'm going to be trying out lightroom & apeture to see if they add anything to quicken my workflow.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.