Nikon Capture NX2 + D800 - help!!!

Started Jul 14, 2013 | Questions
Ernie Misner
Senior MemberPosts: 1,831
Like?
Re: Nikon Capture NX2 + D800 - help!!!
In reply to j_photo, Jul 16, 2013

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

All adjustments on RAW files are the bit depth of the file.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13

It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Kaj: I don't claim to know. I've read elsewhere that the exposure compensation in quick fix is superior to adjustments made in later steps. But it's possible I remember incorrectly or the information was just wrong.

The only problem is I don't think there is a way to apply edits within the Quick Fix area selectively, only globally.   So yeah, use them sparingly and wisely but globally.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jurwees
Regular MemberPosts: 338Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon Capture NX2 + D800 - help!!!
In reply to RichCutler, Jul 16, 2013

RichCutler wrote:

Have discovered two things already though:

  1. Sharpening is on by default, and is crude and horribly aggressive - even level 1 creates halos! I'll do my sharpening in Photoshop as usual!
  2. Resampling is also on by default, so cropped images are resized to set dimensions. Again, no thanks!

Is there anything else I should generally select/deselect, or otherwise note?

With the D800 in Capture NX2 my standard sharpening routine is:

1. In the Picture Control section set Sharpening to 0 or 1.

2. After all other editing has been completed, apply Unsharp Mask in 2 stages:

3. First stage: Intensity 70, Radius 4, Threshold 0, Opacity Lighter 55%

4. Second stage: Intensity 70, Radius 4, Threshold 0, Opacity Darker 75%

-- hide signature --

Jur

 Jurwees's gear list:Jurwees's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Nikon AF-S Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G +16 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
hiro_pro
Regular MemberPosts: 257Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon Capture NX2 + D800 - help!!!
In reply to Ernie Misner, Jul 16, 2013

... Another fun tip is to get Nik's Cool Efex Pro 3 that works as a plug in right inside of NX2. It becomes part of the Edit List. This is not to be necessarily used as gimmics, but as very useful tools..... and fun to boot. PM me if you want. And remember, when you begin doing selective editing with the brush or a CP, literally all of the edits available in the list plus the Nik plug in can be used this way. I almost always just leave the brush at full soft setting and vary the size with the { + } keys.

-- hide signature --

+1.  the nik plugin is great.  i use the tonal contrast for sharpening as well as a number of other filters.

does anyone know if you can still get the nik plugin for capture?  i thought google dropped support for nikon when the bought nik

 hiro_pro's gear list:hiro_pro's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Tamron SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Tamron SP 70-200mm F/2.8 Di VC USD Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
j_photo
Senior MemberPosts: 1,373Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon Capture NX2 + D800 - help!!!
In reply to Ernie Misner, Jul 16, 2013

Ernie Misner wrote:

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

All adjustments on RAW files are the bit depth of the file.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13

It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Kaj: I don't claim to know. I've read elsewhere that the exposure compensation in quick fix is superior to adjustments made in later steps. But it's possible I remember incorrectly or the information was just wrong.

The only problem is I don't think there is a way to apply edits within the Quick Fix area selectively, only globally. So yeah, use them sparingly and wisely but globally.

-- hide signature --

I'm not talking about global vs local adjustments. The following is from a recent thread on the Flickr board that gets at what I'm talking about. As I said, I don't claim to know for sure. But I've seen this discussed before. Here is the link to the discussion: http://www.flickr.com/groups/capturenx/discuss/72157632570813600/

adjustrments made in the development module are not adjusting Pixels or Pixel Values.

those adjustments are altering the Development Process

they are changing how the Data in the RAW file is interpreted
before an Image containing pixels is actually rendered
the RAW data may contain up to 2 stops of Data beyond the limit of Blown Highlights that can be recovered with an adjustment to the Data Processing

IE there is more data there than you can squeeze into a TIFF
so you can reprocess it to use Data from different areas
in film work it would be the equivalent of using a different temperature
or a different developer or a different length of time to develop the same Exposed Negative

in the adjustment Module you are adjusting Pixel Values of an image already formed
akin to printing from a developed Negative you can only mess with what is already there you can't go back to square one and start again

 j_photo's gear list:j_photo's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon Df
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ernie Misner
Senior MemberPosts: 1,831
Like?
Re: Nikon Capture NX2 + D800 - help!!!
In reply to j_photo, Jul 17, 2013

j_photo wrote:

Ernie Misner wrote:

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

All adjustments on RAW files are the bit depth of the file.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13

It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Kaj: I don't claim to know. I've read elsewhere that the exposure compensation in quick fix is superior to adjustments made in later steps. But it's possible I remember incorrectly or the information was just wrong.

The only problem is I don't think there is a way to apply edits within the Quick Fix area selectively, only globally. So yeah, use them sparingly and wisely but globally.

-- hide signature --

I'm not talking about global vs local adjustments. The following is from a recent thread on the Flickr board that gets at what I'm talking about. As I said, I don't claim to know for sure. But I've seen this discussed before. Here is the link to the discussion: http://www.flickr.com/groups/capturenx/discuss/72157632570813600/

adjustrments made in the development module are not adjusting Pixels or Pixel Values.

those adjustments are altering the Development Process

they are changing how the Data in the RAW file is interpreted
before an Image containing pixels is actually rendered
the RAW data may contain up to 2 stops of Data beyond the limit of Blown Highlights that can be recovered with an adjustment to the Data Processing

IE there is more data there than you can squeeze into a TIFF
so you can reprocess it to use Data from different areas
in film work it would be the equivalent of using a different temperature
or a different developer or a different length of time to develop the same Exposed Negative

in the adjustment Module you are adjusting Pixel Values of an image already formed
akin to printing from a developed Negative you can only mess with what is already there you can't go back to square one and start again

Hey that's cool that fllickr has a NX2 User's Group.   I like it.   I think we actually agree.    They are saying it's advantagous to do as much as you can in the Quick View (NX2) because of the higher bit depth or whatever.   Yes, sounds to be true.   What I added to that is it's unfortunate we can not "select" certain areas while still in Quick View.    So after exiting Quick View we still often need to resort to selecting areas for edits and go to work on those areas only.   And although the highlight recovery and shadow lift in Quick View should select just those areas, they don't do a good job of that.

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kaj E
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,954Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon Capture NX2 + D800 - help!!!
In reply to Ernie Misner, Jul 20, 2013

Ernie Misner wrote:

j_photo wrote:

Ernie Misner wrote:

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

All adjustments on RAW files are the bit depth of the file.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13

It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Kaj: I don't claim to know. I've read elsewhere that the exposure compensation in quick fix is superior to adjustments made in later steps. But it's possible I remember incorrectly or the information was just wrong.

The only problem is I don't think there is a way to apply edits within the Quick Fix area selectively, only globally. So yeah, use them sparingly and wisely but globally.

-- hide signature --

I'm not talking about global vs local adjustments. The following is from a recent thread on the Flickr board that gets at what I'm talking about. As I said, I don't claim to know for sure. But I've seen this discussed before. Here is the link to the discussion: http://www.flickr.com/groups/capturenx/discuss/72157632570813600/

adjustrments made in the development module are not adjusting Pixels or Pixel Values.

those adjustments are altering the Development Process

they are changing how the Data in the RAW file is interpreted
before an Image containing pixels is actually rendered
the RAW data may contain up to 2 stops of Data beyond the limit of Blown Highlights that can be recovered with an adjustment to the Data Processing

IE there is more data there than you can squeeze into a TIFF
so you can reprocess it to use Data from different areas
in film work it would be the equivalent of using a different temperature
or a different developer or a different length of time to develop the same Exposed Negative

in the adjustment Module you are adjusting Pixel Values of an image already formed
akin to printing from a developed Negative you can only mess with what is already there you can't go back to square one and start again

Hey that's cool that fllickr has a NX2 User's Group. I like it. I think we actually agree. They are saying it's advantagous to do as much as you can in the Quick View (NX2) because of the higher bit depth or whatever. Yes, sounds to be true. What I added to that is it's unfortunate we can not "select" certain areas while still in Quick View. So after exiting Quick View we still often need to resort to selecting areas for edits and go to work on those areas only. And although the highlight recovery and shadow lift in Quick View should select just those areas, they don't do a good job of that.

Fortunately it is not true. Just check the histogram when editing and compare edits in quick fix to to edit list. No difference in gaps on radical adjustments (once you let the software take its time to display the true edit).

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alchin
Senior MemberPosts: 1,174
Like?
Re: Nikon Capture NX2 + D800 - help!!!
In reply to Janoch, Jul 20, 2013

Nice collection thanks for posting.

Cheers.

AC//

Janoch wrote:

RichCutler wrote:

Anyone any tips for someone coming to Capture NX2 for the first time

Over time I've collected *all* articles a.o. NX2-related stuff from the web. As I often read them off-line, everything is saved in PDF format.

The collection can be downloaded here: http://www.mediafire.com/download/mtu2265nv0f689z/Capture_NX2.zip

Btw., for reading PDF, SumatraPDF is highly recommended!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kaj E
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,954Gear list
Like?
Re: Edit steps can produce better results than Quick Fix
In reply to Kaj E, Jul 20, 2013

An example of when the edit steps produce better results than Quick fix. Try to recover highlights and shadows in a file severely under or overexposed:

1)With shadow/highlight protection in quick fix.

2) With Adjust > Light > D-lighting, better quality in edit.

You will notice that d-lighting is much less prone to haloing.

Use the right tools for the job. Quick fix is as the name implies a quick way of doing adjustments, but not always the best.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
j_photo
Senior MemberPosts: 1,373Gear list
Like?
Re: Edit steps can produce better results than Quick Fix
In reply to Kaj E, Jul 20, 2013

Kaj E wrote:

An example of when the edit steps produce better results than Quick fix. Try to recover highlights and shadows in a file severely under or overexposed:

1)With shadow/highlight protection in quick fix.

2) With Adjust > Light > D-lighting, better quality in edit.

You will notice that d-lighting is much less prone to haloing.

Use the right tools for the job. Quick fix is as the name implies a quick way of doing adjustments, but not always the best.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Kaj, to be clear, the claim made by many in the Flickr group is that the exposure compensation slider, not the other quick fix adjustments, works on a larger data set than later edit steps. I've seen numerous discussions on this point. In my own experience, I do find the exp. comp. slider an important adjustment ahead of other edit steps. So maybe there is something to it. I don't know for sure.

 j_photo's gear list:j_photo's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon Df
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nathany
Contributing MemberPosts: 703Gear list
Like?
Re: Nikon Capture NX2 + D800 - help!!!
In reply to RichCutler, Jul 20, 2013

All problems I faced with NX2 were laptop power and abilities related. Try a D700 or smaller file and I doubt if you'd see any issues.

Nathan

 nathany's gear list:nathany's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8G
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kaj E
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,954Gear list
Like?
Re: Edit steps can produce better results than Quick Fix
In reply to j_photo, Jul 20, 2013

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

An example of when the edit steps produce better results than Quick fix. Try to recover highlights and shadows in a file severely under or overexposed:

1)With shadow/highlight protection in quick fix.

2) With Adjust > Light > D-lighting, better quality in edit.

You will notice that d-lighting is much less prone to haloing.

Use the right tools for the job. Quick fix is as the name implies a quick way of doing adjustments, but not always the best.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Kaj, to be clear, the claim made by many in the Flickr group is that the exposure compensation slider, not the other quick fix adjustments, works on a larger data set than later edit steps. I've seen numerous discussions on this point. In my own experience, I do find the exp. comp. slider an important adjustment ahead of other edit steps. So maybe there is something to it. I don't know for sure.

In any RAW converter the natural workflow is initial adjustments of exposure and white balance and any other global adjustments. The exposure slider affects what you see in the histogram as does D-lighting, not the bit depth of the file or the editing steps IN CNX2. Amazing how the internet generates urban legends.

All highest quality edits in CNX2 have their specific use and are at full bit depth independently of where the steps are located in the editing interface.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
j_photo
Senior MemberPosts: 1,373Gear list
Like?
Re: Edit steps can produce better results than Quick Fix
In reply to Kaj E, Jul 20, 2013

Kaj E wrote:

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

An example of when the edit steps produce better results than Quick fix. Try to recover highlights and shadows in a file severely under or overexposed:

1)With shadow/highlight protection in quick fix.

2) With Adjust > Light > D-lighting, better quality in edit.

You will notice that d-lighting is much less prone to haloing.

Use the right tools for the job. Quick fix is as the name implies a quick way of doing adjustments, but not always the best.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Kaj, to be clear, the claim made by many in the Flickr group is that the exposure compensation slider, not the other quick fix adjustments, works on a larger data set than later edit steps. I've seen numerous discussions on this point. In my own experience, I do find the exp. comp. slider an important adjustment ahead of other edit steps. So maybe there is something to it. I don't know for sure.

In any RAW converter the natural workflow is initial adjustments of exposure and white balance and any other global adjustments. The exposure slider affects what you see in the histogram as does D-lighting, not the bit depth of the file or the editing steps IN CNX2. Amazing how the internet generates urban legends.

All highest quality edits in CNX2 have their specific use and are at full bit depth independently of where the steps are located in the editing interface.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Is there any decent documentation on this? It's something I've wanted to understand better for a while.

 j_photo's gear list:j_photo's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon Df
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kaj E
Veteran MemberPosts: 8,954Gear list
Like?
Re: Edit steps can produce better results than Quick Fix
In reply to j_photo, Jul 20, 2013

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

An example of when the edit steps produce better results than Quick fix. Try to recover highlights and shadows in a file severely under or overexposed:

1)With shadow/highlight protection in quick fix.

2) With Adjust > Light > D-lighting, better quality in edit.

You will notice that d-lighting is much less prone to haloing.

Use the right tools for the job. Quick fix is as the name implies a quick way of doing adjustments, but not always the best.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Kaj, to be clear, the claim made by many in the Flickr group is that the exposure compensation slider, not the other quick fix adjustments, works on a larger data set than later edit steps. I've seen numerous discussions on this point. In my own experience, I do find the exp. comp. slider an important adjustment ahead of other edit steps. So maybe there is something to it. I don't know for sure.

In any RAW converter the natural workflow is initial adjustments of exposure and white balance and any other global adjustments. The exposure slider affects what you see in the histogram as does D-lighting, not the bit depth of the file or the editing steps IN CNX2. Amazing how the internet generates urban legends.

All highest quality edits in CNX2 have their specific use and are at full bit depth independently of where the steps are located in the editing interface.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Is there any decent documentation on this? It's something I've wanted to understand better for a while.

Capture NX2 and RAW converters like ACR operate in 16-bits. Otherwise they would not be true RAW converters that could take advantage of the RAW file bit depth.

Maybe what you are referring to is a misunderstanding. If you save a NEF or any other RAW file in a non-RAW format (even as a 16-bit tiff) without recovering lost highlights or shadows, this part of the information will be lost in the new file format.

I would recommend reading any book on digital photography and RAW conversion.

You can easily on your own check out the bit depth in a file (16 or 8-bits ) and editor by doing for instance a simple radical adjustment (for instance levels) that spreads out the tones. You will see a clear difference in combing or gaps in the 8-bit compared to a 16-bit file/editor.

http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/histograms/histograms3.htm

For instance Photoshop Elements has a 16-bit RAW converter (A simplified ACR) whereas the editing steps are done in 8-bit only.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ernie Misner
Senior MemberPosts: 1,831
Like?
Re: Edit steps can produce better results than Quick Fix
In reply to Kaj E, Jul 21, 2013

Kaj, thanks for bringing us back to reality.    Your PBase site is marvelous!

-- hide signature --
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
j_photo
Senior MemberPosts: 1,373Gear list
Like?
Re: Edit steps can produce better results than Quick Fix
In reply to Kaj E, Jul 21, 2013

Kaj E wrote:

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

j_photo wrote:

Kaj E wrote:

An example of when the edit steps produce better results than Quick fix. Try to recover highlights and shadows in a file severely under or overexposed:

1)With shadow/highlight protection in quick fix.

2) With Adjust > Light > D-lighting, better quality in edit.

You will notice that d-lighting is much less prone to haloing.

Use the right tools for the job. Quick fix is as the name implies a quick way of doing adjustments, but not always the best.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Kaj, to be clear, the claim made by many in the Flickr group is that the exposure compensation slider, not the other quick fix adjustments, works on a larger data set than later edit steps. I've seen numerous discussions on this point. In my own experience, I do find the exp. comp. slider an important adjustment ahead of other edit steps. So maybe there is something to it. I don't know for sure.

In any RAW converter the natural workflow is initial adjustments of exposure and white balance and any other global adjustments. The exposure slider affects what you see in the histogram as does D-lighting, not the bit depth of the file or the editing steps IN CNX2. Amazing how the internet generates urban legends.

All highest quality edits in CNX2 have their specific use and are at full bit depth independently of where the steps are located in the editing interface.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Is there any decent documentation on this? It's something I've wanted to understand better for a while.

Capture NX2 and RAW converters like ACR operate in 16-bits. Otherwise they would not be true RAW converters that could take advantage of the RAW file bit depth.

Maybe what you are referring to is a misunderstanding. If you save a NEF or any other RAW file in a non-RAW format (even as a 16-bit tiff) without recovering lost highlights or shadows, this part of the information will be lost in the new file format.

I would recommend reading any book on digital photography and RAW conversion.

You can easily on your own check out the bit depth in a file (16 or 8-bits ) and editor by doing for instance a simple radical adjustment (for instance levels) that spreads out the tones. You will see a clear difference in combing or gaps in the 8-bit compared to a 16-bit file/editor.

http://www.sphoto.com/techinfo/histograms/histograms3.htm

For instance Photoshop Elements has a 16-bit RAW converter (A simplified ACR) whereas the editing steps are done in 8-bit only.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

No, I'm not referring to a .tiff conversion. Thanks for the info.

 j_photo's gear list:j_photo's gear list
Nikon D800 Nikon Df
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads