Nikon Capture NX vs. LightRoom

I have to say my experience with LR is the opposite.

I have not had any lock-ups.

I can only comment on slowness relative to PS CS and they are about the same, perhaps faster for LR because it generates a preview during import. The only slowness I ever experience is when I tell LR to check the integrity of the DB. I have several thousand pictures although not all in one folder and it responds fine. I use a 2.4G P5 and my pictures are on a SATA disk. 99% of my pictures are in NEF, the remaining in JPEG.

I have not printed directly but rather converted to JPEG and used outside print services. My experience is the choice of print service has a significant impact on how good (or bad) my pictures come out - same source files from LR each time.

Like some other posters, I found the NX interface a bit overwhelming although I probably could have gotten used to it. It would still have been awkward use PS since the PS interface is similar to LR.

Hope this helps.

A Ahearn said:

I have to say my experience with LR is the opposite.

I have not had any lock-ups.

I can only comment on slowness relative to PS CS and they are about
the same, perhaps faster for LR because it generates a preview during
import. The only slowness I ever experience is when I tell LR to
check the integrity of the DB. I have several thousand pictures
although not all in one folder and it responds fine. I use a 2.4G P5
and my pictures are on a SATA disk. 99% of my pictures are in NEF,
the remaining in JPEG.

I have not printed directly but rather converted to JPEG and used
outside print services. My experience is the choice of print service
has a significant impact on how good (or bad) my pictures come out -
same source files from LR each time.

Like some other posters, I found the NX interface a bit overwhelming
although I probably could have gotten used to it. It would still
have been awkward use PS since the PS interface is similar to LR.

Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

A Ahearn:

And, I run current updated versions of Adobe Lightroom, CS3, Nikon Capture NX, and Aperture all on an older iMac G5 Computer; sometimes with all of these editing programs running at the same time ------- and, they still run quite fast ----- no "slowness" at all.

--
BRJR....(My cameras & lenses are listed in my profile)

Lightroom is great.

I process all my photo's with it and love the speed of the workflow and the results. Don't bother with it if you have an aging computer though, it's quite demanding. But if you have the hardware for it then it runs like a dream.

--
Visit my gallery: http://kabes.zenfolio.com/

Photo-Wiz said:

I haven't tried NX. But Lightroom has been a major disappointment
for three reasons.

1. I have about 5,000 photos and Lightroom is very slow when
browsing through the photos.

2. Printing is hit or miss as far as colors. Sometimes it prints
okay, and sometimes the colors are faded. I'm sure this is some
software selection item within LR. But I've used several other
photo software with no such issues including Elements, Acdsee, and
Photo Impact. Don't know why setting are so mysterious in LR.

3. The program freezes up often enough. NO such problem with any of
the above programs.

Click to expand...

Photo-Wiz:

If, you have Lightroom and haven't already read the book at the link below (Scott Kelby, Lightroom Book), I recommend it highly:

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=5168281

--
BRJR....(My cameras & lenses are listed in my profile)

Adambomb said:

Lightroom is great.

I process all my photo's with it and love the speed of the workflow
and the results. Don't bother with it if you have an aging computer
though, it's quite demanding. But if you have the hardware for it
then it runs like a dream.

--
Visit my gallery: http://kabes.zenfolio.com/

Click to expand...

Adambomb:

1. Yes, I agree with you.

2. And, it's a no-brainer, that one should use a more "state-of-the-art" computer with todays software programs, and not just for image editing programs. Memory alone, sometimes makes a big difference, and it's cheaper than ever before.
--
BRJR....(My cameras & lenses are listed in my profile)

I've tried both, but Lightroom tends to show faded colors than NX. I opened two copies of the same pic in both programs and side by side Lightroom gave me much less saturated colours. I performed this in two different computers. I like Lightroom interface and speed but I think that NX shows my RAWs as they really are.

Greg, I'd agree. NX seems to bring the best out of the NEF files, both colours and detail. I've tried to get the same results from Lightroom and not quite got there.

Lightroom has a much better interface and I would love it if someone could share some tricks on how to get the best from the NEF files.....

Currently, I'm using PSE to organize the jpg's and to further edit them (if needed) because I much prefer PSE's interface to DXO's (which is based on their own 'better than Windows' interface). So there is more editing capability with DXO, but it is not very usable.
I'm trying to understand what my new workflow might be.

I guess it depends on what you like and what you do. That is the process I follow. I find NX to do the best NEF (or RAW) conversion.

I save the files as TIFF, which keep the 12 bit per channel information, which gives me more latitude to work with once in CS3 (Photoshop).

The files are larger, but these days, file size is not the most important thing. I guess once you are done you can save a JPEG file, but I do keep my original NEF file in archives.

--
Lito
D80 ~ 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ~ 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 VR ~ 50mm f/1.4 ~ SB-26 ~

this reminds me of the debate D-76 x Rodinal for B&W film, it depends on what you want, both are interesting and produce quite distinct results.

Dark/ClearRoom is part of the fun of photography, and the more, the merrier.

--
rhlpetrus
equip in profile

Depending on the type of edits you've to make, you can do a fair bit in NX on the .NEFs themselves instead of working in PSE
--
Photographs: http://www.flickr.com/photos/allengeorge/
Terminal Musings: http://www.allengeorge.com

BRJR said:

lockandload:

1. And, whether one likes it or not, no other programs can do all
that either Adobe Lightroom or CS3 can do singularly; and, especially
when the two are used together as intended !!

2. Now, I am aware that a some do not need, want, or understand all
these features, or will take the time to learn them ------ but, for
me, they certainly are nice to have for times you do want or need
them.

3. Why any serious amateur or photographer hobbyist would not have
the interest or want to use or want to learn an "industry standard"
for photography, remains beyond my understanding.

4. And, Adobe Photoshop CS3 Extended, is similarly fast becoming the
standard in manufacturing, the medical professions, architecture,
engineering, and scientific research.

5. In my Area, Adobe Photoshop, is the standard software editing
program approved for use even in "high-school" level photography
classes/courses, no matter which camera the participants decide to
purchase and use.

--
BRJR....(My cameras & lenses are listed in my profile)

Click to expand...

Great response. All anyone really needs to read. Especially thats last part, "regardless of camera".

Adobe knows how to make software. I've used countless Adobe products over the years and all are excellent. They really do a great job of taking a lot of features and making them as user friendly as anyone could possibly make them. Others like to beat up on Adobe about how "complex" it can be, but none of them would dare offer all those same features because they know they would be exposed for complaning with no actual solutions of their own.

And as far as Apple products are concerned....sigh. I'll restrain myself as this isn't the place.

I tryed the earlier version of NX , and found it good , but after trying Lightroom , I decided to go with Lightroom , and the new update to Lightroom (version 1.1) has added better noise enhancements , and better sharpening .

For me , Lightroom makes it so easy to keep things in order , this alone is well worth it , and using of the sliders is extremely easy , also , raw workflow is excellent along with conversion to jpeg .
What I can't do with LR , my PS7 does the rest .
--



http://wildwally.smugmug.com/

I'm about 10 days into my LR trial and I have processed hundreds NEF files already. The tools in LR are fantastic and the user interface is very easy to use, I watched some of the tutorials on the Adobe website and I was off and running. In LR it is easy to catalog my images, and the development tools are awsome and very easy to use. I especially like the ability to switch between loupe view, before/after view, and crop overlay. I have developed some very nice slidshows and printing is a snap. Colors of the one image I printed on my HP 8450 came out very well.

However, all of that running came to screaching hault, when I converted the images from LR to JPG to post on my Pbase site (temp gallery - not open to the public). After viewing the images on Pbase is seems that the colors were faded and some detail apeared to be lost. So I compared the image in Pbase with those in LR and the pictures seem better in LR. So I then compared the image in LR with the same image edited in NX and again the image in LR appeared to be washed out and skin tones appeared to off (compared with the version edited in NX), not a huge amount but definately noticable. I also compared the image from NX with the Pbase image and diference in image quality favored the NX image. I then converted the NX image to JPG in NX and uploaded to Pbase and again the NX image was much better. I also edited the NX image using control points, WB, and color mode and imported to LR to see if using both tools would be a way to effectively use both programs and the results indicated that the NX version was still superior to the LR version.

Now, even though I like LR's ease of use and fantastic tools I'm left wondering if spending the money on LR is worth it if the end result favors a better image from NX. It appears to me that a NEF image quality is degraded when it is imported into LR and degraged even more when the LR image is converted to JPG.

For now, I will continue my trial of LR to see if I can get an image to look as good in LR as the end result of using NX and make my decision in the next 10 days. I also need to consider if buying updates for both NX and LR makes sense.

Right now, my experience with both products and the prospect of needing to purchase upgrades for two programs instead of one has me leaning towards NX.
--
T.Gehring
Pinckney, Michigan
http://www.pbase/gehringmi

NX is displaying the NEF file with your in-camera settings. Lightroom displays essentially a flat file as it does not know the Nikon settings as they are proprietary so you need to adjust contrast and saturation from there. With enough patience you theoretically could duplicate these settings in Lightroom and save as a preset for subsequent imports.

I have been playing with the latest NX trial and think it's pretty cool, particularly the control points. But for workflow I've become too accostomed to Lightroom. I'm hoping I can find a decent approximation of my in-camera settings to use as an import preset, though.

greg towers said:

I've tried both, but Lightroom tends to show faded colors than NX. I
opened two copies of the same pic in both programs and side by side
Lightroom gave me much less saturated colours. I performed this in
two different computers. I like Lightroom interface and speed but I
think that NX shows my RAWs as they really are.

Click to expand...

If the images looked fine in LR but not in JPG form then chances are you exported with the wrong colorspace. Export your JPGs with sRGB colorspace.

--
Visit my gallery: http://kabes.zenfolio.com/

Adambomb said:

If the images looked fine in LR but not in JPG form then chances are
you exported with the wrong colorspace. Export your JPGs with sRGB
colorspace.

--
Visit my gallery: http://kabes.zenfolio.com/

Click to expand...

Yea I was going to say the same thing. Quality can really be effected by a good deal of settings during export.

Thanks! I'll give it a try.
--
T.Gehring
Pinckney, Michigan
http://www.pbase/gehringmi

What I really wish Lightroom has that works great in NX are black and white control points. Lightroom has the neutral eyedropper but that's it. NX allows for exceptional control over these points. Plus has a double threshold overlay to make it easier to spot the brightest and darkest parts of the image.

Thank you all very much. I thought I have replied a few days ago, but I must did not commit.

I downloaded both software trail, yes, i like Lightroom far better. I agree lightroom is the one for me.

Thanks,

Jin