Reading mode: Light Dark

What advantage does NX offer?

Go to last post
I tried to process portrait NEF files with NX2.2 and was not happy with the results.I get consistently better results with Capture One Pro than NX2.2 when it comes to portraits.For Landscapes and other genre I guess NX2.2 is promising but for portraits I believe CaptureOne is far superior.To me,I find alot easier to work with CaptureOne Pro than NX.
 
Whois said:
Where in the settings? Do you mean the Preferences? Where exactly?
Click to expand...
Hi,
Preferences - General - Check Box Keep All Steps Active.
--
Best regards
 
If you are planning to download the trial version of CNX2, check out the free YouTube tutorials that are very helpful in getting you started with the interface. It is not Photoshop but once you see the tools in action in a video tutorial, it makes it much more understandable and you'll move more quickly to an understanding of the interface.

Check out tcampbell711 tutorials.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEMHSyZqVSU&feature=PlayList&p=00ED3A77225AECB7&index=31

HTH
 
When Nikon decides to make their NX2 software work with Vista 64bit or any 64bit OS, then I might give it a try, till then I will be using CS4 and Lightroom.
--
D200 with MB200,
Nikor 70-200VR/2.8, Nikor17-55DX/2.8/Nikor TC 1.7
Sigma 150 2.8 APO Macro DG HSM,Sigma 50 2.8 DG Macro
SB-800/SB400
Sigma EM-140DG/Macro Flash
MC35 remote triger
http://cybertec.smugmug.com
 
SatoriGFX said:
cybertec69 said:
When Nikon decides to make their NX2 software work with Vista 64bit or any 64bit OS, then I might give it a try, till then I will be using CS4 and Lightroom.
--
Click to expand...
Work fine here on Windows 7 64bit.
Click to expand...
Likewise here, works perfectly with Win 7 Ultimate 64 bit, on an Intel quad core Asus board with 8 gigs ram (although it runs as a 32 bit app). Perhaps the OP meant when CNX is a true 64 bit app?

= Dan =
 
Send me a raw file and perhaps I can convince you - or maybe not. The proper use of ACR does take some practice, but I doubt that a NX user can do anything I can't in ACR. I have NX sitting on my shelf after laboriously testing against ACR for an entire week. Sure there are a lot of lovely features in NX but there simply is no way you can extract more detail or better color. On the other hand, if speed is needed (think batch) I can convert a D700 raw to 16 bit tiff in one second on my computer (which is pretty fast but not THE fastest). Try that with NX.

Please review the raw results dpreview.com got on the D3x and D3s using different converters. No real difference in detail.
--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com
 
Others probably have said that before me, but I guess repeating it makes the fact more evident. NX is not good for editing tons of photos, and dont even think about using it for cataloging your images. The only thing it is good for, and worth every penny too, is converting the photo with the most stunning quality, and giving more leverage to dynamic range. For everything else, use Lightroom.
 
Kaj E said:
Kaj E said:
Kaj E said:
I find the colours, greens in particular, are less 'mushy', better separated somehow. No more jagged reds at night (car lights, traffic lights etc).
Click to expand...
You can get similar colors in any modern RAW converter. Defaults in NX are a bit more conservative than ACR.
Click to expand...
Similar is not close enough for me.
Click to expand...
At the levels in question, "similar" means "adjust to your preference". Maybe you prefer the default NX treatment, but that doesn't mean it's not just as available in LR. Anyone using default processing settings in these programs is completely missing the point.

 
Regardless of camera settings, NX does a better job with RAW skin tones than PSCS4.
I use NX RAW processing for portraits and finish in PS.
 
I agree with Steve, In experienced hands NX2 or ACR/LR/PS will give you excellent results.

We already had an extensive RAW conversion challenge on dpreview. Both ACR/LR/PS & NX2 gave excellent results. http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=29657326

FWIW, some of the worst submissions in this challenge were from NX2 users. I believe that's because many Photogs new to digital (and Nikon DSLRs) try NX first.

Cheers,
JB
Steve Bingham said:
Send me a raw file and perhaps I can convince you - or maybe not. The proper use of ACR does take some practice, but I doubt that a NX user can do anything I can't in ACR. I have NX sitting on my shelf after laboriously testing against ACR for an entire week. Sure there are a lot of lovely features in NX but there simply is no way you can extract more detail or better color. On the other hand, if speed is needed (think batch) I can convert a D700 raw to 16 bit tiff in one second on my computer (which is pretty fast but not THE fastest). Try that with NX.

Please review the raw results dpreview.com got on the D3x and D3s using different converters. No real difference in detail.
--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com
Click to expand...
 
I have been following this thread and was recently trying to decide whether I'd pay for NX2 to process my NEF files or try to learn how to get as good a conversion with Photoshop. I am nowhere near experienced enough to work out how to do the Adobe RAW conversion and achieve the same results as NX2 (which I tried on a free trial basis) -- and I'd love it if someone could explain to me how to do such a conversion as I vastly prefer Photoshop CS4 for the particular kind of work I do.

However, I found a no-cost solution which I think works just as well. I have been using the latest version (1.5.2) of ViewNX just to do the initial conversion from RAW to JPEG, and then work on the JPEGs in CS4. It seems to me that ViewNX uses the same converter as NX2, judging by the quality of the photos, and it usefully includes a few basic tools (highlight protection, shadow protection, D-lighting, sharpness etc) which work well.

The only trouble with ViewNX is its well-known ability to crash every few conversions or so. But it is easy just to close down the program and re-start it.

I'd be interested in anyone else's thoughts on the use of CaptureNX in this way, as for me it has certainly saved me over £100 (in the UK).
 
If you need high quality large print
If you need CMYK high quality right of NEF.

If you want high quality picture with all the details and you prefer RGB curves right in converter without using LR or PS.

As an addition to all previous if you use your custom curve in camera with Picture Control "Portrait", D2x modes.

And finally, NX2 is a tool for properly made photos. If your shot is to be totally remade because it was done terribly that just forget it.

If your purpose is speed and web then new LR3 would be a great choice.
--
http://darthtape.livejournal.com/
 
Brooks Lester said:
Regardless of camera settings, NX does a better job with RAW skin tones than PSCS4.
I use NX RAW processing for portraits and finish in PS.
Click to expand...
Agreed - I have a LR preset that precisely (read: much better than Adobe's) matches the Nikon Neutral color scheme for D3 . . . but skin tones are not rendered as well. It appears Nikon has done "something" to the tone curve in that very narrow color range, because everything else in my preset is spot-on.

--
John Walker
http://jhwalker.smugmug.com/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top