- This topic is empty.
RAW editor options?
-
Hi,
Really been meaning for a long time to start taking RAW photos.
I’ve got some sort of editor that can handle RAWs I think – the one that came with my Nikon D50 but don’t think it has much control available.
I was leaning toward Nikon Capture but according to Bjørn Rørslett’s Nærfoto it is really slow – and I presume he’s got a decent enough computer. Slow software is something I could not possible abide – I’d lose all patience and never edit a picture.
So what are my options? What do you prefer, and why?
Thanks a lot,
Alan
I currently use Photoshop Elements 4 which works quite well.
The later versions have a more advanced RAW convertor.
I have tried Elements 7 and it is very good.
You can download a version for most camera manufacturer’s raw files.I downloaded a trail version of Lightroom 2 which looks very good but my
computer is a bit under powered to run it.So I’ll have to make do with Elements 4 for the moment.
Cheers.
John.
I use ViewNX that came with my nikon d90 to view the RAW files. You’re right in saying it can’t do much. I rarely do anything with this except maybe a bit of exposure control. What i do use it for is to dump the files out to TIF format. Then I work away in the Gimp for all my post processing.
Thanks for the replies you two.
I didn’t realise Photoshop could be used for editing RAW files, thanks for that John.
I’ve decided to take RAW pics any when I go on holidays next week – I’ll take Jpegs too. At leaast that way when I get around to picking up a better computer I’ll get a decent RAW editing programme.
Thanks again,
Alan
bingbongbiddley wrote:
Thanks for the replies you two.
I didn’t realise Photoshop could be used for editing RAW files, thanks for that John.
I’ve decided to take RAW pics any when I go on holidays next week – I’ll take Jpegs too. At leaast that way when I get around to picking up a better computer I’ll get a decent RAW editing programme.
Thanks again,
Alan
Hi Alan,
Yes, depending on the version of Photoshop or Elements you use the RAW converter
can be quite comprehensive.
If your version dosen’t handle RAW files from your camera type you can download the
appropriate upgrade from the Adobe site.I think it’s a good idea to save a RAW and Jpeg for each shot if your camera allows.
The Jpeg will probably be ok most of the time but you have the RAW in the event
that you need to get something extra from a shot.
It might also prove useful to have a RAW in the event that RAW software improves
in the coming years.Cheers.
John.
Alan
If you are shoting Nikon then you MUST use capture NX. the results produced by this raw converter are outstanding.
I think Lightroom is a great RAW editor. It has the same controls as Adobe Camera Raw and you can also edit JPEGs. I now use Lightroom for the vast majority of my edits. It also integrates very easily with Photoshop if you need to do more complex work.
As it’s non destructive I’m more inclined to make changes to photos
Mark
Lightroom 3 beta is available to use free until the
end of April 2010.Of course if you get hooked on it or have a load of
images imported to it you may just have to buy it. :)Smart move by Adobe I think.
Cheers.
John.
Try some of the free trials/ downloads. As John says there, you can trial Lightroom 3 but system requirements are quite beefy for this, I’ve found that it doesn’t run well on my machine but as an application, it’s really well presented and I like it a lot.
I’ve tried CaptureNX as well and rumour has it that it provides the best results from NEF files (Nikons RAW format), but it can be quite slow too.
Photoshop Elements I haven’t tried but if it comes with Adobe Camera Raw then that should fulfill most, if not all, your photographic requirements for RAW files.
Try each if you can and find out which runs the best on your setup and which you work best with. Sometimes you might find that the slower app works better for you…
Hi all – I have been using Photoshop for years for graphic work, and all my gear is Nikon. I have Capture NX installed as well as Camera Raw. I have been reading that for Nikon NEF files, most people recommend Capture NX for post processing. Can anyone back this up from experience, and provide some useful links to learn how to get the most from the images.
Thanks.
sawtooth wrote:
Hi all – I have been using Photoshop for years for graphic work, and all my gear is Nikon. I have Capture NX installed as well as Camera Raw. I have been reading that for Nikon NEF files, most people recommend Capture NX for post processing. Can anyone back this up from experience, and provide some useful links to learn how to get the most from the images.
Thanks.
I have been using capture NX and Lightroom for the last 3 years and I can tell you that there is a huge difference, in terms of quality, between the two. Capture NX will always produce a much better result. the colours, the rendition..everything looks much better when processed on capture NX. The only problem with NX is that, compared to LR, it is very slow. I am using NX for shots I want to get the best out of it. For day by day work, weddings, events LR does a great job.
I posted a couple of short NX tutorials on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bM6lhhpNR0s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ8q25UiqwE&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCo_Fxah6nU&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Iok37dAbHw&feature=channelBottom line. if you shoot Nikon, NX is a must.
In the last 4 years i’ve tried Capture NX, Lightroom, and Aperture, and settled for Lightroom. I’m using Lightroom 3 at the moment and will buy it once the beta testing period is over.
I have to say all three of them are excellent in their own way, but it depends on what you need them to do.Capture NX does indeed a great job for Nikon NEF files, and it’s perfect for general adjustments (the U-Point technology is very nice, though useful only to a certain extent), but it’s just too slow, has a very “strange” interface, and for those shots that need more in-depth processing, is almost useless. If you use Photoshop, the combination Capture NX+Photoshop is a good deal, but as a stand-alone product, in my humble opinion, Capture NX is not that good. It’s a great product for Nikon shooters, if your time machine has a flat tire on the way back from 2005. :)
Lightroom, on the other hand, is way much faster, has great backup utility tool, it’s very good at organizing files (if you are, of course), and has 99% of the developing tools that a photographer needs. Since I moved to Lightroom, I haven’t used Photoshop that much, unless there’s advance masking, complex compositing and tons of layers involved. It’s true that Lightroom doesn’t recognize NEF files as Capture NX does, at least at first, but if you shoot Adobe RGB (still don’t know why Nikon makes sRGB the default setting in their cameras) and you use the develop settings in Lightroom, there are all the nikon settings right there in the Camera Calibration panel (Standard, Neutral, Vivid, Landscape, Portrait), and it’s very hard to tell the difference, especially after even the smallest amount of post-production.
The choice of the right software depends on many different things: what kind of photography do you make? what kind of adjustments do you usually make to your pictures (and I mean almost ALL your pictures)? What kind of tools do you need?
Once you have an answer to these question, you can download trial versions of different software and find the one that works best for you.
Hope this helps :)F.
I agree with francesco and the fact that NX has a very strange interface and is indeed slow. I think NX is great for landscape shots. For shots that need to be processed and printed fast then LR is the answer.
I will disagree with regard to the Camera Profile in LR. The Nikon profiles in LR are not anywhere near to those used in NX. Try the Vivid on LR and then try it in NX. You will see what I mean.
Francesco. if you shoot NEF it means you use raw so color space doesnt matter.Thanks guys for the replies. I will have a look at both options and compare the results on similar photos with similar steps taken.
121FOTO wrote:
I agree with francesco and the fact that NX has a very strange interface and is indeed slow. I think NX is great for landscape shots. For shots that need to be processed and printed fast then LR is the answer.
Precisely my point: it depends on the kind of pictures you take and the amount of post-production you like. If I shot mostly landscape pictures I would probably pick Capture NX for post processing (or Aperture).
I will disagree with regard to the Camera Profile in LR. The Nikon profiles in LR are not anywhere near to those used in NX. Try the Vivid on LR and then try it in NX. You will see what I mean.
I noticed that in the first versions of Lightroom, when I was trying it, and you’re right, though I don’t know if Adobe has made them better for L3. I have to say I don’t switch camera profiles that much (actually, at all): I have tweaked the standard setting in camera and I use that all the time, and once I import the pictures in LR I move on from there. IMHO, camera profiles are overrated :D
Francesco. if you shoot NEF it means you use raw so color space doesnt matter.
my bad. You’re 100% right. I edited the post taking out references to Jpeg and got confused :D
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
