D5100 Raw processing

Started Jun 5, 2011 | Discussions
MrRoger Contributing Member • Posts: 710
D5100 Raw processing

I have been using Ubuntu (a popular Linux distro) for some time. I use Bibble for Raw processing. I have just purchased a D5100 and found that it is not supported by Bibble (does this have something to do with Nikon patents?).

I have an XP virtual machine which I sometimes use for Corels' PSP, which I use for complex editing. This does not support the D5100 either, although at least here it seems I could gain support by upgrading to X3.

Of course I am reluctant to upgrade software which won't run natively on my computer. Nikon's supplied software is a joke, and I imagine in a VM this would get even worse.

So, anybody any alternative suggestions?

scandinavian_armor New Member • Posts: 16
Re: D5100 Raw processing

try using gimp with UFRAW addons. im using it on my windows OS

 scandinavian_armor's gear list:scandinavian_armor's gear list
Nikon D5100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon 35mm F1.8G ED Sony Xperia Z1 Compact
Thomas Comerford Veteran Member • Posts: 9,745
Re: D5100 Raw processing

MrRoger wrote:

I have been using Ubuntu (a popular Linux distro) for some time. I use Bibble for Raw processing. I have just purchased a D5100 and found that it is not supported by Bibble (does this have something to do with Nikon patents?).

No, they just haven't added support for it yet.

I have an XP virtual machine which I sometimes use for Corels' PSP, which I use for complex editing. This does not support the D5100 either, although at least here it seems I could gain support by upgrading to X3.

Of course I am reluctant to upgrade software which won't run natively on my computer. Nikon's supplied software is a joke, and I imagine in a VM this would get even worse.

So, anybody any alternative suggestions?

Download the trial version of Lightroom 3, and see what you think of it.

panos_m Senior Member • Posts: 1,412
Re: D5100 Raw processing

Photivo is another option:
http://photivo.org/photivo/download_and_setup/linux
--
Panagiotis

rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 24,921
DC RAW works with Linux

http://linuxappfinder.com/package/dcraw

You can use VNX2 to convert to TIFF and then use it in your fave soft. VNX2 is a good converter, it's free.
--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 V1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 12-24mm f/4G ED-IF Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
OP MrRoger Contributing Member • Posts: 710
Update - still not solved

There are many Linux options, but based on the same libraries, and while they are doing a great job in getting access to the files, they do not pick up the camera settings well at all, so that leads to more work.

For the record I also downloaded the latest and greatest PS version, and it would not load the files saying they were unsupported.

ViewNx2 can batch convert the files to 16bit TIFF files with lzw compression...but thast program is so pathetic it's unreal. I know it's only the lite version but the full Capture NX is really just a pathetic program with more bells and whistles. Just to put it into perspective, I am using a dual core 64 bit processor with 4GB and it needs more than an hour to convert a batch of 50 files.

Is there any reason why cameras can't just save images in a standard open format that uses lossless compression and supports 16 bit color...such as the TIFF output that ViewNX can produce, or the PNG format that is directly compatible with ordinary software such as browsers? Would that just be too easy? Years ago before RAW became all the rage, many cameras could save images directly in TIFF, including my pocket compact camera.

All I can say is in the meantime is that if you are considering a D5100 purchae, download a RAW image and try building a workflow around it BEFORE you buy. If I had know it was going to cause me so much grief I would have at least delayed the purchase until Nikon got their act together.

Thomas Comerford Veteran Member • Posts: 9,745
Re: Update - still not solved

MrRoger wrote:

There are many Linux options, but based on the same libraries, and while they are doing a great job in getting access to the files, they do not pick up the camera settings well at all, so that leads to more work.

For the record I also downloaded the latest and greatest PS version, and it would not load the files saying they were unsupported.

PS as in Photoshop CS5, along with version 6.4 (or later) of the Adobe Camera Raw plugin?

You could also try the latest version of Lightroom.

ViewNx2 can batch convert the files to 16bit TIFF files with lzw compression...but thast program is so pathetic it's unreal. I know it's only the lite version but the full Capture NX is really just a pathetic program with more bells and whistles. Just to put it into perspective, I am using a dual core 64 bit processor with 4GB and it needs more than an hour to convert a batch of 50 files.

Sounds like something is very wrong there. NX2 isn't known for great performance, but some people experience a dramatic improvement in performance after installing certain updates:

http://manishbansal.wordpress.com/2009/02/25/how-to-make-nikon-capture-nx2-run-faster/

Here's a thread where people have compared performance of their systems running NX2. You might find it useful:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=32800226

NX2 is slow and buggy, and many people don't like the workflow but the output is excellent.

Is there any reason why cameras can't just save images in a standard open format that uses lossless compression and supports 16 bit color...such as the TIFF output that ViewNX can produce, or the PNG format that is directly compatible with ordinary software such as browsers? Would that just be too easy? Years ago before RAW became all the rage, many cameras could save images directly in TIFF, including my pocket compact camera.

Ah, but most people who shoot raw don't want cameras to save images... they want the camera to save raw data which is not actually an image. In order to turn raw data an image, you must choose things like White Balance, tone curve, colour space, etc. and even with a 16-bit image those decisions are "baked in" and can't be reversed. If you have the original raw data you can render a new image using whatever parameters (and whichever raw converter) you want.

But to answer your question, yes, it is possible for them to use a common file format but they don't tend to cooperate on stuff like that. Adobe have a format called DNG which is probably the nearest thing to an open format right now, and some camera makers have adopted it.

All I can say is in the meantime is that if you are considering a D5100 purchae, download a RAW image and try building a workflow around it BEFORE you buy. If I had know it was going to cause me so much grief I would have at least delayed the purchase until Nikon got their act together.

OP MrRoger Contributing Member • Posts: 710
Re: Update - still not solved

The only work that must be done is the demosaic algorithm. Most people do not alter that anyway, in fact most RAW software does not give you any choices.

The output can be placed in a 16 bit TIFF file without information loss and subsequently processed by any suitable program without the need for updates and drivers.

Many RAW files are 16 TIFF files, but with extra information including a jpeg thumbnail and shooting info which allows the image to appear by default as the jpeg would appear.

Personally I would be happy with the RAW info. Others who prefer ready cooked but want to retain the possibility of getting a bit more resolution or headroom can opt to have a tone curve, white balance, and sharpning applied to the image. In 16 bit TIFF or PNG format it would be ready for use out of camera, but also allow heavy editing like a RAW file does with very little or no additional information loss.

That would eliminate the mess of jpeg+RAW.

panos_m Senior Member • Posts: 1,412
Re: Update - still not solved

Another option for linux is RawTherapee. If you want the image opened in the raw converter to retain the in camera jpeg settings then only Nikon software on windows or macos.
--
Panagiotis

Thomas Comerford Veteran Member • Posts: 9,745
Re: Update - still not solved

MrRoger wrote:

The only work that must be done is the demosaic algorithm. Most people do not alter that anyway, in fact most RAW software does not give you any choices.

The output can be placed in a 16 bit TIFF file without information loss and subsequently processed by any suitable program without the need for updates and drivers.

No, I don't think it's that simple. We're talking about raw data, and if the sensor technology changes, the raw data will change too. Different cameras have different colour response, different dynamic range, different noise characteristics, etc, so the developers need to at least see sample raw data before they can update the software to produce quality raw conversions.

Many RAW files are 16 TIFF files, but with extra information including a jpeg thumbnail and shooting info which allows the image to appear by default as the jpeg would appear.

Most raw files do use the TIFF spec for their structure but the method of storing the raw data varies. But it'll be either 12 or 14 bit data with only one colour per pixel. Asking the camera to produce 16-bit RGB TIFFs for each image would result in over 90MB of image data, which won't get that much smaller when compressed.

Personally I would be happy with the RAW info. Others who prefer ready cooked but want to retain the possibility of getting a bit more resolution or headroom can opt to have a tone curve, white balance, and sharpning applied to the image. In 16 bit TIFF or PNG format it would be ready for use out of camera, but also allow heavy editing like a RAW file does with very little or no additional information loss.

That would eliminate the mess of jpeg+RAW.

Torgeir Jensen Regular Member • Posts: 255
Re: D5100 Raw processing

Current version Bibble can be used for the D5100, but you have to make a small modification to to the exif-info in the NEF-file. I use the wonderful EXIFTOOL program, you can change the whole directory with a simple line from the command line:

From your raw-file catalog:
exiftool "-NIKON D5100=NIKON D7000" .NEF

This works in Ubuntu, but I think it will work in both Windows and Apple.

Bibble 5 is really becoming among the best raw converter around, current version is 5.22
--
life is raw-file

Torgeir Jensen Regular Member • Posts: 255
Re: D5100 Raw processing

Correction:
exiftool "-NIKON D5100=NIKON D7000" .NEF

life is raw

Torgeir Jensen Regular Member • Posts: 255
Re: D5100 Raw processing

Hmmm
There should be an asterix in front of .NEF ( .NEF)
life is raw

OP MrRoger Contributing Member • Posts: 710
Re: D5100 Raw processing

Works perfectly, I figured out the asterisk

exiftool "-NIKON D5100=NIKON D7000" .NEF

A VIRTUAL BEER IS ON IT'S WAY

Does raise a question: if the fix is so simple, why is their nothing official from Bibble themselves ?!

OP MrRoger Contributing Member • Posts: 710
Re: D5100 Raw processing

That asterisk just disappears.....must be a Dpreview bug!

sshoihet Senior Member • Posts: 2,599
Re: D5100 Raw processing

It's not a bug, the * is telling it to use bold

MrRoger wrote:

That asterisk just disappears.....must be a Dpreview bug!

 sshoihet's gear list:sshoihet's gear list
Nikon D7000 Canon EOS M Nikon D600 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +14 more
Torgeir Jensen Regular Member • Posts: 255
Re: D5100 Raw processing

MrRoger wrote:

A VIRTUAL BEER IS ON IT'S WAY

Does raise a question: if the fix is so simple, why is their nothing official from Bibble themselves ?!

hi and thanks for the beer

The exif-fix works flawlessly for me in Bibble. Maybe there are some quirks somewhere in the NEF-file, where there are a difference between the D5k1 and D7k. Sensor wise, they seems to be identical.

-- hide signature --

life is raw

Susan Morris Regular Member • Posts: 186
Re: Update - still not solved

Just to put it into perspective, I am using a dual core 64 bit processor with 4GB and it needs more than an hour to convert a batch of 50 files.> > > >

Wow....I have quad core, 64 bit processor with 4GB and it took me about 15 minutes to convert over 60 pictures with View NX2. And I thought THAT was slow. I guess not.

Thanks to everyone else that also suggested some different editing software options. I'm going to try a couple of them.

Jack Hogan Veteran Member • Posts: 6,507
Re: Update - still not solved

Susan Morris wrote:

Wow....I have quad core, 64 bit processor with 4GB and it took me about 15 minutes to convert over 60 pictures with View NX2. And I thought THAT was slow. I guess not.

He is using Unix and running XP as a virtual machine, not your typical setup and quite inefficient.

As you can see from the speed test thread linked to above, on a Win7 configuration such as yours, a more typical time for batch conversion while applying several adjustments and then saving as TIFFs in CNX2 is about 10 seconds per image.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads