What is easiest RAW software to use?

ken6217

Forum Enthusiast
Messages
308
Reaction score
16
Location
Manalapan, NJ, US
I have for many years taken jpeg images and now wanted to finally shoot RAW. On the other hand, I'm not super computer savvy and also not looking to spend a lot of time working on each image. Of course the more time you put into something the better it can be, but I'd like to strike a balance of converting from RAW but not needing a class to do so and it into be tedious.

I have a Nikon camera. What software is good and has an easy learning curve? Also will I have to then using something like Elements or Photoshop in addition afterwards.

Thanks,

Ken
 
Reilly D's LR settings
Reilly D's LR settings




Lightroom 4 is fast and easy once learned. Try the above settings using the "Camera Neutral" Preset, then add plus 10 vibrance and clarity, minus 8 black. "Enable lens profile" and "Remove Chromatic Aberration" should be clicked on. Once you have a typical picture dialed in to your satisfaction, save it as a preset to be applied to all your future imports.

I call it "rawpeg" because it all happens automatically on the input and you have a very beautiful picture with no fuss at all but with the ability to lift shadows massively and pull down highlights better than anything else on the market. The new brush tool can selectively adjust white balance, noise, etc. LR's output sharpening is excellent and easy to use.
 
Hi,

Aren't the modifications that you are making dependent on the pictures you took and with the camera you have though?

Also, do I have then use PS or Elements after the RAW conversion?

Thanks- Ken
 
I don't use it so I'm no a good example! (Nikon VeiwNX2). But I think the one that comes with your camera is always the safe bet. Once you want to take the next step at least you will have a grasp of what Raw is all about.

regards
 
ken6217 wrote:

Hi,

Aren't the modifications that you are making dependent on the pictures you took and with the camera you have though?

Also, do I have then use PS or Elements after the RAW conversion?

Thanks- Ken
Yes. It makes no sense to think that one preset works with all photos. If you take 50 photos in the same exact place with simmilar light then you can adjust the first photo and use that as a starting point for the rest.

ACR is built into PS and Elements (Elements version has fewer adjustments). You only need to use PS or Elements if you want to make additional adjustments that you can't make in ACR. ACR for Elements only makes adjustments for the entire image, while the version with PS allows for selective adjustments for parts of the image and has lens distortion correction. Lightroom, as an phot, editor, is basically just the full version of ACR from PS, but sold separately. It also comes with a very robust photo cataloging program.

RAW editing is not very difficult especially if you are just using global adjustments to the entire image (just move the sliders back and forth . But, that does not mean you do not need to learn how to use the adjustments. Watch some videos on youtube for the version that you buy or get a book by Scott Kelby or Martin Evening.
 
Raw conversion is like playing the piano, golf, or tennis. The more you learn snd practice the better you will get. Elements 11 has a stripped down version of Adobe Camera Raw that works very well for those just starting.
 
A bit of extra tweaking will normally be needed for individual pics you care about. To crank out fifty or a hundred photos that look really good with no extra work, the preset that I outlined works much, much better than the out of camera jpgs from any DX Nikon of which I know. Everyone sees differently, but there really is a group of settings in there that will work for you almost all the time. Save a couple of different presets for different circumstances, by all means. One huge advantage to LR is that you can select (highlight) a group of images from the grid which will automatically synch them up such that your current adjustments and/or selected settings from the popup box will be applied to all:



Synched
Synched

I recommend the Scott Kelby Lightroom book, which will make you an expert in about two weeks. Compared to CNX2 (which I also own) with its horrendous interface and carpal tunnel-inducing sliding boxes, it's fast, powerful, and most importantly, gives beautiful results with color and sharpness that just look right on a gut level. Adobe has made a great piece of software here. I use Photoshop along with it, which is good for layers and masks, content aware fill and much more. But Lightroom has more than enough speed and power for most users who don't want to get buried in software expense and training. It will be the best $150 you ever spent to improve your pics.
 
Turns out, there is no such thing on the market right now.

The simplicity of RAW software doesn't connected to it's interface or manufacturer. Eventually, RAW-converter is a set of sliders that you can apply to the whole image or a certain area of one. Cataloging thing - that's what creates whole complexity.

Here's what I see as the easiest RAW software:
  • requires no installation, always up to date (rich inetrnet application with multi-user database as a catalog);
  • accepts any camera format and store it in the cloud (no more dealing with backups or lack of space);
  • collaboration through internet (enables someone else to drag sliders if learning curve is a challenge for you);
  • robust organizaitional system: ratings, color tags, events, people, etc.
>will I have to then using something like Elements or Photoshop in addition afterwards

You probably will have to use it. Especially if you shoot arcitecture and want to remove perspective distortion. I think that's some kind of strategy to sell Photoshop and Elements alongside with Lightroom.
 
I would suggest that you gather a list of editors (Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Elements, Adobe Lightroom, DxO, Corel Paintshop Pro, etc)

Then go to the appropriate site and review the comments they list for their product, next download their trial version (they all have a trial version) and work your way through them until you find one that satisfies your needs and ability.

Every person you ask will be quite happy to provide the name of the software they use but unless you have looked at the software yourself you will have no idea what is best for you. There is no one that, not really knowing you and your ability and requirements, can be reasonably expected to wave a wand and tell you what is best for you.
 
Ken,

My 2¢

Let me give you a slightly different explaination on what RAW converters do.

To do that you should understand the array of jpeg adjustments in your camera. Not the primary exposure settings but the stuff down in the menus that let you adjust how the jpeg looks. = Color, contrast, stauration, white balance, etc.

What using RAW does for you is to separate those tweeks from the time of capture to post processing time. And, as everyone has been telling you, tweeking a RAW file gives you so much more data to play with. Raw lets you make those tweeky decisions with plenty of time to think about them.

At some base level that's all a RAW converter does for you. That's why others have said you may or may not need to pass the file along to Photoshop or some other editor.

The next thing that was commented on is creating standard processing to be applied to all RAW files coming from your camera. We are telling you that that approach won't be much better, or at all better, than the camera jpeg processing can do. What the import preset does is to give you a starting point for images you wish to put more effort into. Or something about the same as your cameras jpeg if it's just a snapshot. It also gives you a learning project = Shoot RAW and jpeg, use the comparison to create your import preset and learn how each control changes the image.

After you gain experience you will begin to see differences between the RAW processing programs. But right out of the box, you will find one program easier to use than the others. Try them, start with the one that feels good to you.


And, of course, I have simplified the process, as well as other things that some RAW processors can do.
 
DxO is designed to work automatically with a raw image. All camera specific adjustments are made in their lab, and are installed like a plugin in DxO. When you go to edit an image DxO first checks what equipment took the picture, then downloads the proper module for your camera/lens combination. After the image is created, you can then make adjustments as necessary to suit your tastes. But as a rule, the default adjustments will create an acceptable image.

If DxO has not yet created a module for your camera, you are on your own with the usual adjustment tools. I suggest you check with DxO and see if your equipment is listed:


HTH

****
 
DXO, which I also own for its good distortion correction would be one of the last programs I would ever recommend to someone getting started. It has a very complicated and labor intensive interface requiring many more clicks than usual to accomplish a given task. The "DXO Default" Nikon conversion is muddy and generally terrible. The DXO conversion can be made to look very good, but it takes hours and hours of pixel peeping and slider adjusting.

To the OP: if you want fast, easy and beautiful processing with the bonus of a catalog which makes it easy to find all your pics, you want Lightroom. I've got them all, and there is simply no comparison for speed and ease of high quality output. Do the 30 day trial and see if you agree.
 
If your question really is "What is easiest RAW software to use?" rather that what software package is the easiest/quickest to learn, then I suggest you read the the recent DPReview article on RAW processors. My experience (and I believe confirmed by DPR) is that Lr is hard to beat. Once you learn how to use it, processing image sets can be accomplished in a near automated mode leaving time to concentrate on those truely special images that can be turned into something more than just good snapshots.
 
Actually I'm looking for RAW software from Geico. Something a caveman could do.

Easy to learn. I figure once I learn the basics and know what I'm doing, I could try something more more complex etc.

Ken
 
ViewNX2, works pretty well. Select all keepers and convert to jpg. Keep in-camera sharpening to no more than 3. Can't get any simpler than that.
 
ken6217 wrote:

Actually I'm looking for RAW software from Geico. Something a caveman could do.

Easy to learn. I figure once I learn the basics and know what I'm doing, I could try something more more complex etc.

Ken

If you had a Mac, the answer could be pretty simple: Nothing! RAW files are processed at OS level. Aperture has some fine tuning features for RAW file (which is not the best in the market) but a caveman doesn't need to bother with.
 
Just a comment!!

Why would you bother with Raw if you simply wanted to convert to Jpeg?

For me Raw offers me the opportunity to 'work' on a file. The Raw can also be filed away for future 'use'.

But to do a simple Raw to Jpeg seems a lot of work for something cameras can do well.

Just thinking out aloud.

regards
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top