Reading mode: Light Dark

Nikon Capture NX wish list - add yours

Go to last post
Nothing else. But let there be lots of it.
 
My biggest wish is that Nikon is actually working to get NX3 out the door. Silence makes me wonder if they are they abandoning the software.
 
M Lammerse said:
PHXAZCRAIG said:
1. Simple reliability - no crashing
2. Greatly improved performance
Click to expand...
Stabile and fast enough. I use it on Windows 7 -64 bit version
M Lammerse said:
I suspect 1 and 2 are both related, under Windows, to relying so much on
Click to expand...
It might give stability issues for some, for many it seems (me included) not to give any issues.
Click to expand...
I also use it on a Windows 7 64-bit version. Quad core Intel CPU, 8GB of RAM, lots of disk space on multiple disks. And still, first time I launch it for the day the splash screen sits right in the middle of the screen for 31 seconds and can't be moved. Meanwhile there is furious disk activity. If I close it and reopen it not much later, splash screen lasts about 1 second. Must be caching something when I first launch it.

And if I do many picture edits, it eventually (and reliably) crashes. Again, I think there is a caching issue going on, when it reaches some cache limit.

Batch processing is certainly none-too-fast, even with a lot of PC hardware under it. Doesn't seem a bit faster than on my dual-core (E6400) 4gb XP 32-bit PC for batch, though overall it's a little better.
 
What they really should do is push the RAW formatting information out the door, and allow real software companies to write decent programs for it without reverse engineering it.
 
M Lammerse said:
Hi Kev,

Auto masking will be a handy functionality. However I prefer to see an easy mask layer option/copy mask functionality.

Maybe they will add a 'define edge' functionality to the U-point technology.
Click to expand...
As I said in my post above...I don't think that a 'define edge' function can or will work very well with the principle of U-Point/control point masking technology.

The way in which NX2 masks a subject is by colour recognition...using the + and - "selection' masks...so "IF the process became like a more traditional (CS5) isolation/cut-out...then it would loose that ability to create that 'blended' tranformation edge effect.

When one incorporates a 'define-edge' parameter...then in essence...you are simply applying a standard mask (which obviously prevents bleeding)...but at the same time won't offer U-point flexibility.

The NX2 control points don't apply the effect in a 'contained' manner...as the application strength "diminishes" from the centre of the "circle"...outwards to the perimeter. It's this difference in methology ...that allows us to mask more complex subjects very quickly and with a subtle-transform effect.

Like with an image such as this:
http://kvincentphotography.ca/macro/h13dee814#h13dee814

Try masking a flower like this...(which has many variances of edge softness/hardness) with a conventional CS5 masking tool. Firstly, it would be very time consuming and tricky...and second, one would need to then go back in and apply different levels of "blur" to get a perfectly accurate result.

With NX2, this took just 2 mins from start to finish.

IF the actual edge of the mask became "defined" it would just loose that unique ability.

KEV
http://kvincentphotography.ca/stackedimages
http://kvincentphotography.ca/designerflorals
http://kvincentphotography.ca/macro
 
PHXAZCRAIG said:
What they really should do is push the RAW formatting information out the door, and allow real software companies to write decent programs for it without reverse engineering it.
Click to expand...
and also give the upoint as a bonus to the other companies ;-)
 
You're right. Maybe it's good to say that in a way the power of the U-point technology is that it can't define the edges exactly. :-)

In realtion to it. In the trial of Viveza 2 I tried, I felt that the U-point technology was lesser ppwerful than in NX2, I wonder why it is.

Michel
KEVZPHOTOS said:
M Lammerse said:
Hi Kev,

Auto masking will be a handy functionality. However I prefer to see an easy mask layer option/copy mask functionality.

Maybe they will add a 'define edge' functionality to the U-point technology.
Click to expand...
As I said in my post above...I don't think that a 'define edge' function can or will work very well with the principle of U-Point/control point masking technology.

The way in which NX2 masks a subject is by colour recognition...using the + and - "selection' masks...so "IF the process became like a more traditional (CS5) isolation/cut-out...then it would loose that ability to create that 'blended' tranformation edge effect.

When one incorporates a 'define-edge' parameter...then in essence...you are simply applying a standard mask (which obviously prevents bleeding)...but at the same time won't offer U-point flexibility.

The NX2 control points don't apply the effect in a 'contained' manner...as the application strength "diminishes" from the centre of the "circle"...outwards to the perimeter. It's this difference in methology ...that allows us to mask more complex subjects very quickly and with a subtle-transform effect.

Like with an image such as this:
http://kvincentphotography.ca/macro/h13dee814#h13dee814

Try masking a flower like this...(which has many variances of edge softness/hardness) with a conventional CS5 masking tool. Firstly, it would be very time consuming and tricky...and second, one would need to then go back in and apply different levels of "blur" to get a perfectly accurate result.

With NX2, this took just 2 mins from start to finish.

IF the actual edge of the mask became "defined" it would just loose that unique ability.

KEV
http://kvincentphotography.ca/stackedimages
http://kvincentphotography.ca/designerflorals
http://kvincentphotography.ca/macro
Click to expand...
--
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Light is Everything
http://www.fotopropaganda.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9240992@N05/ (my pixel mess on flikr)
http://www.pbase.com/photopropaganda
 
As someone who was extremely proficient and reluctantly switched to lightroom early this year I think it boils down to "baking in" the NEF adjustments. This is what leads to the memory issues and crashes... and after 2-3 years finally they hit me. I had no issues with the other functions.. I Loved the way NX2 handles the Nik Color Efex - much more efficiently than Lr or PS. Same too with the localized adjustments... much better set up than LR.

So deal with the "baking in" each adjustment and the batch processes become faster and memory is not unnecessarily depleted.
  • improve noise redux
  • allow for an adobe readable nef or .xmp option... hey, it is a wish list! Guarantee you increase sales!
 
Ability to configure "save as" folder.
Readiness to color-checker calibration ability.
Re-organizable adjustments once made.

--
Marcin_3M
 
M Lammerse said:
You're right. Maybe it's good to say that in a way the power of the U-point technology is that it can't define the edges exactly. :-)
Click to expand...
True, this is exactly waht sets it apart...even tho it isn't perfect - of course.
M Lammerse said:
In realtion to it. In the trial of Viveza 2 I tried, I felt that the U-point technology was lesser ppwerful than in NX2, I wonder why it is.
Click to expand...
That's simple to answer.

Viveza 2 does NOT include the NX2 "selection" control point functionality....only the NX1 colour control point functions. It's the "selection" (+-) capability that makes NX2 so useful.

KEV
http://kvincentphotography.ca/stackedimages
http://kvincentphotography.ca/designerflorals
http://kvincentphotography.ca/macro
 
Marcin 3M said:
Ability to configure "save as" folder.
Readiness to color-checker calibration ability.
Re-organizable adjustments once made.
Click to expand...
These are great! I'd love to see these abilities!

--
Viktor
'Happy shooting!'
 
devenh said:
1. Ability to reorder the adjustments
2. Clone stamp

3. Better multitasking - e.g. ability to edit while images are being saved which the old Capture (pre NX) was able to do
4. Improved UI
5. 64 bit version
6. Better performance
Click to expand...
These things, although I don't have a problem with the UI. Also I don't need a 64bit version, if they can do 6 without doing 5 then no problem, but chances are to improve the performance they will need a 64bit version.

I'd also add proper plugin architecture, I'd love to use ptlens, I know this duplicates functionality for Nikon lenses but for 3rd party lenses it would be very useful.
 
I'd love to love CNX, but it's just waaaaay too crash prone, and its management of memory & CPU time is just horrendous. Don't need any additional features, but would love a complete rewrite / cleanup of the code to prevent these crashes (plus a dedicated 64bit version). In the meantime, I'll stay with LR3.

Tom
 
Here is my wish list:

1) allow plug-ins like PT-Lens

2) perspective distorsion correction (one of the few reasons to go to PS, but then loose all NEF non-destructive editing)
3) allow Silver efex as a plug-in (again to remain in NEF environment)
 
Rens said:
I went back to Adobe.

So my wish list is short. Change the whole operating structure and make it more intuitive.
Click to expand...
If by Adobe you mean PhotoShop, then I have some difficulties understanding how you can criticize NX for not being intuitive.

PS is powerful, but it's about as intuitive as quantum physics.

--
Phil_L
 
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