Nikon capture nx-d vs viewnx 2 free.What is the different between all these Nikon software?
Looking for:
Nikon capture nx-d vs viewnx 2 free - |
Nikon capture nx-d vs viewnx 2 free
If you would like to post, you'll need freee register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here we keep узнать больше two sites separate for security jikon. Forums New posts Search forums. What's new New posts Latest activity. Log in Register. Search titles only. Search Advanced search…. New posts. Search forums. Log in. Install the app. Captue a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser. Взято отсюда starter dabhand16 Start date Mar 4, Find out more about its updates and enhancements in our review. Nick B. Just got the Nikon e-mail and downloaded it.
Haven't had time to try it out but it looks nnx-d. BobG Member Supporting Member. Hermann Active member. BobG said:. Click to expand Warren D Well-known member. Hermann said:. So do the latest нажмите для деталей of NX-D. I'm quite interested in how this new software продолжить чтение. I'll give it a try.
What I don't know is whether it will mess up my present installation of NX-D. I guess I'll have to try to run both on one of my nikon capture nx-d vs viewnx 2 free machines before I put it on my main nikom. Davej Member. It leaves NXD on my mac. NX-i is no longer required and is nikon capture nx-d vs viewnx 2 free. Download very straight forward and there are manuals for Studio and Transfer. James C. I just got the e-mail from Nikon this morning about their new NX Studio photo windows xp professional x86 free software.
I'm currently trying to learn how to use Affinity Photo. Thanks for your input. It is completely free! Free so no harm in having a look? I have downloaded and used nikon capture nx-d vs viewnx 2 free on my laptop and my experiene match those who have already posted. I did notice that in the top toolbar, vjewnx is no longer a box at the right for Dual Rfee. Does anybody have any experience with Nikon Studiio with two monitors? I could not find this addressed in the manual for Studio.
I plan to test out the speed of rendering RAW images in the browser. One of my issues with View NX-i is that once you star rate the images or add keywords, the rendering is much slower по ссылке without anything added to the image. I want to see ve Studio performs with respect to this matter. You must log in or register to reply here. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor nikon capture nx-d vs viewnx 2 free jx-d and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies. Accept Learn more….
Nikon | Download center | ViewNX 2
LR has a solution that works to some degree, but I have never tried the Nikon solution. I never knew it was there. So something good DID come out of this article. If you could fix that in PP you would not need sharp lenses. This cast happens in areas outside the definitions of aberrations, so the only thing that can be done is selecting the lens carefully.
Trying to correct it is like trying to correct bokeh with a lens profile. So how do you correct bokeh other than choosing a different lens? It is a question of whether all or only part of the unsharp information is there.
With a perfect recording process information would not be lost, but "merely" unintelligible and could possibly be recreated with an appropriate algorithm.
I already stated the same thing you write in this thread. This thread is however about SW testing. It is about comparing what two pieces of SW can do. Try to look up "piximperfect". That genius guy has a youtube tutorial on how to 3D map an image in Photoshop and render whatever bokeh you like. A pin-sharp 20mm F0. No problem. Add bokeh balls - no onion structure! All perfectly matched to distance in front of and behind the focus plane.
You use the eyedropper picker in LightRoom to pick the unwanted, artefact outline color in front of and in back of the focus plane respectively. Sometimes it is very successful and all the cast in usually the branches disappear magically in th eentire image. Sometimes it only works in some small parts of the image and not in other parts of the image, and sometimes it only partly removes the outlines.
Hence you take "it cant be fixed" is wrong. Happy shooting! This statement is useless to the ones that seek pros and cons of the sw: "I'd wager that most NX-i users won't have the first clue what "axial color aberration" means" My guess is that the same users will not know what Chromatic Aberration means either.
Instead of guesses I would have appreciated some inkling of how this actually works in comparison to Adobe's sw. They would. Axial CA is a fancy name for the greenish cast towards the back, or red towards the front of areas in sharp focus. Not at all keen on anything from Adobe since their user information database has been hacked - at least two times.
HI I'm surprised that one compares a paid software and a free software, I'm surprised that are not compared Darktable, RawTherapee, Ufraw, which are all free and very powerful. The interest was to compare a builder software free with other free software. I'm surprised that the editor could compare these softwares and give an opinion on a laptop screen, maybe not even calibrated Finally, taking this test seriously, I find it very surprising that this same editor accepts the color drifts given by adobe.
Astonishing all this! Moreover, you cant calibrate the laptop monitor. Its not possible to hardware calibrate a laptop monitor. The only thing you do is that you software calibrate the graphic card in only 8 bits.
Fantastic article. People smarter than I have created all sorts of useful profiles including a very convincing Tri-X and a not-bad Kodachrome. For jpeg shooters, the ability to load custom presets into the camera is a powerful feature, one that Adobe cannot touch. Thank you for your trouble and Nikon is pretty much out of the picture with a non-flexible noise reduction routine, because I never use Capture NxD because I am still! Just using one tool sounds like not possible at all. I need 3 tools because they supplement each other, each adding unique functions.
Sometimes I use no. If the perspective gets crazy I change it in Photoshop which is where I also add missing pieces in my handheld panoramas. I find "Less pleasing color than Nikon's software by default" and "Leaves significantly more noise in images by default" as cons for ACR just weird, since raw converters are about profiles. Why not just start the raw converter software with a profile that suit your taste, since there are many profiles included - no matter the name of the software.
See my comment above. The idea that Nikon profiles are some sort of perfection is a little weird. OOC generally steeper. Thanks for the very detailed review. My concern is that the review turned an ACR advantage into a disadvantage. Nikon's noise control was shown to be overly aggressive and uncontrollable, tending towards plasticy looking images. ACR on the other hand is very controllable and can remove a lot of noise if required, all be it, at the expense of sharpness.
The review stated this as a problem with ACR when its controlability is actually a benefit. The reason why there are two programs is that in the old days, ViewNXi was offered for free, whereas Capture-NXd was a paid program.
View came free with each camera, Capture did not. View is no longer needed, though, and even if it has some adjustments that Capture doesn't have, I think it is completely superfluous. The article should have concluded so, and suggested that users stick with Capture and forget about View.
The View NX software was always free. As a raw processor it doesn't get very much better than that. For those who need the color editor or tethering you can upgrade to the Capture One Pro version.
We use C1 for all our work except for our Hasselblad cameras and it is stellar. Nikon has indeed been removed from Capture One Express. Implying you went through their entire website? I think not. A lot of websites are organized like junk. Always google where you want to go, if you want to advise others. Just make double sure :- I did google before my first post, but the C1 site 2 took ages to load for some reason.
And yes, it is confusing, that they have a page with only Fuji and Sony, but keep calm and google some more and ye shall find LOL. Not bad. I highly appreciated these interesting comparisons and as retired pro-photographer the most important for me is the easy and fast understanding of an editing photo software, with of course a wide range of really efficient parameters to get the finest desirable result. The free softwares of Nikon are not bad but they don't bring to me what I need, even the "conversion" to another format: Tiff and Jpeg, nothing else though converting a NEF to a DNG would be so appreciated, namely for enabling the future necessary color management of your work creating the camera profile, calibrating the monitor when retouching, the correspondance between the photo colors on screen and its output on the photo dedicated pro-printer thanks to the ICC profiles of the used papers.
Camera Raw enables this because by saving the raw and its chosen parameters in DNG. DNG is really a must for me and Nikon does not enable this I have used Capture NX-d and like it. I have not heard good things about the Fuji raw converter which is based on silkypix. I think you'd have to resort to editing the exif to make that one work tricking the software to think you have nikon files.
Flow - no, I am not talking specifically about this article, but OEM raw editors in general. I am only familiar with CNX-d. But I think every OEM has their own raw editor. I am curious about Fuji - is their raw editor any good?
I have been given to understand that Nikon's software is also based on Silkypix. I used the Fuji version 7 or 8 years ago and it worked pretty much the same as NX-D. Slow, but with some weird and interesting adjustment possibilities. I use View NX-I almost exclusively. It does what I need at this point and as the post says its far easier to use for basic edits that Capture.
But the problem I'm currently encountering and I know I'm not the only one is the blockage of final photo processing with my new MacBook Air M1.
Once the changes are made on the photos, I launch the final conversion and the file remains in the queue. Nothing happens. It's been going on for weeks and, for the moment, no update has solved the problem at least not for the French version of Capture NX-D.
Capture NX-d is slide-car just like lightroom, your edit save is saved to a separate folder which only the software can read. Capture NX like older Nikon capture has u-point adjustment, don't think view has it. For View, you can see your edit on any computers with View if you move or copy the file. For editing speed slidecar is faster, because for View every commends is saved as you edit and you get a short freeze on a slower computer.
While Nikon software looks more like what it should be, I still prefer Lightroom 6 for editing options. Why I open capture nx along with lightroom sometimes to make sure I know what the color color is. I do have calibrated duel monitors. What, ok thanks for the update. I guess I haven't gotten the latest version. I just use capture nx d. Good to know. That is because Adobe is miles ahead of any other software for AI Auto that actually works.
I used the auto adjustments for a short period and still find them occasionally useful Smart Lighting can bring shadows up without compromising highlights quickly and well, lens adjustments are great if you want an absolutely clinically optically correct image — I often don't.
For NR, I find that a setting around 12 for DeepPrime and 20 for Prime almost always provide the most natural looking results. Generally no longer a fan of automated clarity as images basically look oversharpened in every program: if you are looking for more clarity, the Fine slider in the Contrast section is the most important tool for natural looking pop. Returning to automated settings, DxO Photolab will adjust all of the above on opening any image if that's the preset you choose.
I've got my preferred settings as the starting preset, as that gives me the exact starting point I like for my own corrections. If a given set requires a tweak to that starting preset, it's easy to build takes about ten seconds.
I'll step in and put in a good word for CNX-D. It's free, it's full function, and I find it easy enough to use. With these things, it always comes down to familiarity and I've been quite a few years now. First View NX is not designed for editing- it is a viewer. Capture NX-D is. Second the Nikon softwares produce more accurate colour than Adobe.
The Nikon softwares LACK the ability to increase micro-contrast with the far better noise reduction and sharpening that DXO has, and Adobe softwares are handicapped by the crude 0. I regularly use 0. DXO also provides a better gradation to Nikon Raw files over the Adobe softwares, which are convenient but hardly able to do justice to anything as the sharpening is so very crude with high res images.
If you like Nikon software colors better, that's fine, but don't get carried away. Lightroom's sharpening is the best I've found with the best balance of artifacts and detail. It's nice to have all those controls all together in one spot. If you don't want to become a professional computer jockey instead of a photographer - CNX-d is so much faster to get good colors than playing with dials and switches in ACR all day long.
Lightroom's Camera Standard is one of the best raw conversions available without any need for neurotic color twiddling. No, actually, Lightroom's interface is by FAR the easiest, fastest and most intuitive. Tutorials are available if you're having trouble. String - then, the camera? Because apart from custom white balance - most people just let the camera choose and then do adjustments in post.
I would rather spend my time with contrast white point, black point, and curves than spend all of my time fiddling around in ACR trying to get good color. NX-d give me good color easily.
You have no need to use ACR, that's what LR is for; make, buy or download a custom profile and set it up to apply to all your nef files on import These little low res thumbnails are moronic, and thats being nice about it. The interface is a essentially a cross platform java app-style, and it looks inoffensive but nothing close to a modern UI stack. The single most outdated, not modern looking interface is that of Lightroom Classic.
No other application or codebase is older, slower and less user friendly than that one. Capture One is way more modern, as is every other image editing application that like Affinity Photo or Pixelmator.
The Lightroom modern apps are a different story but they lack so many features that you cannot compare them to Capture One. My favorite interface is Capture One on Mac. It is slightly less great on a Windows computer but that is more down to Windows.
DaVinci is such a great interface on Windows that it doesn't support proper scaling on high-resolution screens without getting blurry. So not. It looks like more could have been done with the Nikon software.
Some of the images look like shadows are not raised enough in the View NX-i recipe. That makes skin look dark and unnatural. The exposure looks cranked up in ACR. That along with some simple white balance chagnes in View could have made the images almost identical.
Having just got a good Nikon camera an having read this i decided to download both view and capture on windows 10, in download window it says something about antivirus no additional antivirus other than windows anyone got any clues as to what to do, cheers in advance.
It provides much more control than you would expect for a free RAW developer provided by the camera manufacturer. For cataloging the images I am using a specialized program which interacts quite well with Capture NX-D by also managing its side car files. If you have ideas and wishes for this program, please let me know. It is under active development. Your program fotoarray looks interesting Julian.
Could you point to some independent reviews of it? As you mention, U-points are fantastic. I've paid hundreds to have them in DxO Photolab where the interface and workflow are truly a joy.
Free in Capture NX-D is a wonderful opportunity for Nikon photographers to get started with u-points. As mentioned - the demo is practically not restricted it shows a banner and a message from time to time. The setup exe is digitally signed by my company, the OSX version is notarized by Apple.
There is also a ZIP which just requires unpacking for launch without admin rights. The windows version also runs in the "Windows Sandbox" - although a bit slower, since there is no hardware acceleration. The concept of fotoARRAY allows its use as a catalog browser - with software, catalog and image files being stored on a hard drive to manage the photography "legacy". Even now the stacking into one instance variable feathering.
Nikon u-point is not even close. The radial filter is my favorite feature of LightRoom - It is a quick possibility to enhance exposure or apply a vignette. This makes it is a good tool to make local color adjustments. I am actually not against the subscription per-se. The price is also pretty low, compared to prices for lenses and similar. But I see a problem to have an image catalog based on rented software. I maybe want to locate images in the future or give the catalog to somebody else who does not have a subscription or cannot install the software required to open the catalog.
I would rather have my teeth drilled without benefit of novocaine than process raws in any Nikon software. It's so fast and easy; no other program opens RAW files so quickly.
The new programs also lack the capacity to create new RAW files. Unfortunately my D is the last camera that's compatible. One of the nice things about NX-D is the color control points, for adjusting hue, saturation, brightness, contrast etc.
Not as advanced as the ones in Capture NX2, but still very nice. I have compared sharpness and details when using NX-D to LR, Capture One, DxO, Acdsee etc, and it provides the absolutely best details and sharpness "out of the box" and with the least effort, where the other apps require a lot more work and then some of them can't even provide the same level of details.
One thing that is quite annoying with NX-D is that it is really slow a loading large folders with images. Regarding the menus and layout of NX-D it is just a matter of getting used to and I don't think it is more confusing than LR was the first time I used it. I almost stopped using LR, even though it is more advanced, due to the dreaded catalog that quite often got corrupted. NX-D just creates a sub-folder with one little file with the edits for each image.
Capture One I don't care about because it costs far too much for what you get. Reilly, there is no way that fine detail is any more detailed with Adobe Lightroom than DxO. If that's the case for you, you don't have the right settings dialed in DxO which has many different modules to allow photographers to increase resolution without oversharpening.
If you are talking about oversharpening, then Adobe is almost unmatched. The atrocious Luminar might have taken the crown for oversharpening though in its last two versions. You'd fail in a double blind test on these. I would too. If the Adobe conversion looks like a smartphone to you - then so does the Nikon conversion The difference between the Nikon software and others, generally, is when you have strong colors.
Red, blue, yellow, etc. Facial tones up close in good lighting. The sample you show has no colors except gray and muted blue, and grayish blue. Capture NX-D isn't exactly the pinnacle of free software available for Nikon users. It's just another SilkyPix rebadge, with some Nikon custom profiles added and a reskin. Sure - but that's a good thing. I see no faults in this program. The one thing it misses are layers, but it has U-Points for local color correction.
Well, it's not the full version of Capture One, but there is a free version of Capture One Express for Nikon available here:. The free version of CaptureOne is basically a demo. It's horribly crippled. Might just work for someone who doesn't really care to do any post-production on his or her photos but has decided to shoot RAW anyway. One does benefit from the decent colour profiles CaptureOne does offer very good Sony profiles unlike Adobe.
I looked at the Capture One Express for Canon and some other manufacturers. Crippled junk. Barely more than a conversion tool. It appears that Silkypix designed the background software structure.
Nikon designed the subroutines for the colors, contrast curves, white balance ranges, etc. Nothing is perfect, but it does a very good job for most photos. Not as good for poorly exposed photos. If you habe used Silkypix you will notice a very great difference in the two programs. I really want to see the article on Olympus Workspace vs. Given the current situation of Olympus, will there be?
The reason why I want a more professional comparison is because I really can't adjust the beautiful Olympus colors with ACR. DPR would agree with you about Oly default colours as well.
They often say how good the ooc jpg colour is. Check this out:. The "ACR colors suck" is basically internet echo chamber drivel. Owning equipment from "the dark side" one of the issues with RAW converters is the ability to correct the lens profiles well. As optical design almost always requires corrections for chroma and distortion , having an up to date software is paramount.
I find this a dual edged sword, Adobe seems to cover a variety of lens manufacturers , but the camera manufacturers use their free tool to tie users to their lenses. How does this work with Nikon? This is a worthy comparison but must be placed in context. As stated in the article, freebie software is not exactly freebie.
However, it sure is way cheaper than 3rd party software. In that respect, one can't expect too much from it yet it sure does a wonderful job. Why do they offer it at all? Not all need or are willing to pay ongoing PP software fees. In hindsight, I wished I had stuck to camera branded software but chose to buy LR and am now virtually enslaved by the Adobe ecosystem :.
RawTherapee is pretty painful to use outside of a Linux environment. I'm a software UX designer so it's not for lack of background or lack of trying. RawTherapee offers the second most powerful NR on the market, free or paid.
There's also Photivo, which can do some pretty amazing things but has the scariest user interface of any imaging software I've ever seen -- you're directly manipulating the imaging pipeline -- and install reaches new heights of pain, pretty much requiring build from source of both it and some packages it uses.
Because those apps UI are trash. I downloaded all of them late last year, and they all got deleted. Open source tools get the latest research products integrated a lot faster than commercial systems, and RawTherapee definitely does a few things better than any commercial software. Photivo can be even more spectacular, but it's a raw processor for signal processing researchers more than for photographers.
Seriously, Photivo's interface is more natural to audio engineers used to setting up signal processing pipelines than to photographers. Of course, on designed-to-be-highly-portable open source projects, UI integration with operating system interfaces and other tools is generally poorer than for products made for a specific platform, so there's another reason people might be scared off.
Downside is obviously that details look a bit different. If you want to test this, RawTherapee has quite large selection of different algos to test. Also for "normal" Bayer cameras, you can squeeze maximum details with it. Just a bit harder to learn, but once you do, its very easy. Also can be automated a lot. And its free. There's a lot of HDR going on in the Nikon software. Lots of haloing. Is that switch-offable? It's called ADL - active dynamic lighing, it can be turned off in the camera to exclude from the jpegs, and it can be turned off for the raw files as well.
It's one of the first things to do when you set up your new camera. Thanks for that, DimensionSeven. I'm aware of ADL in camera, but I was curious about it because it seems they left it on for most of, if not all, the shots posted here, and it's a bit difficult to compare between the two when the Nikon software is always doing that.
I've been shooting Nikon digital for 18 years, but I've never actually tried their software! This all lines up exactly with my experience with Nikon's software. Not just with usability, but capability. Anyone says otherwise needs to get a life Even with years of experience I find it impossible to achieve true and pleasing color with Adobe ACR.
It is so easy to achieve the best possible color with NX-D - try getting a white dress as pure true white while maintaining the rest of the image colors true, its just not possible. Adobe has improved over the years but still not good enough. The only problem with Capture NX-D is that it is slow but at least results are achievable on almost first attempt.
The major problem is the highlight recovery which does not exist except for what you can get with the Active D-Lighting , ACR is excellent in this regard. I found this out years ago. I switched from Canon to Nikon and had been using Lighroom. I beat my head against the monitor for months trying to get good colors and images. Then I tried CNX-d. It was like light breaking through the clouds after a storm. It handled the nef files in such a natural way.
None come close to CNX-D. Capture one is the closest. You folks may prefer the CNX colors, but that means squat to those of us who prefer the Adobe colors. If you want to ruin the capabilities of the fine Nikon. It is stuck in time, it might have been good in but back then Capture NX-2 was the King of all software. NX-D is a huge downgrade to NX-2 with zero improvements at all. ACR is very bad with colours, yes. But there is other software too, like CaptureOne for example.
Last picture of the Palm tree shows the difference clearly. I am sure the sky was never that greenish blue nor the leaves that plastic-y green shown in ACR. CNX-D is much more natural.
I agree that it may not be the best in terms of bells and whistles or speed, but color wise, impeccable. To me, color matters more than anything else unless I have a strong need for advanced stuff of C1 or DXO.
But I'm also sure the leaves didn't have halos in reality but yes, Landscape with little contrast is the strength of NX-D so that picture is close to a best case scenario. On1 despite other issues with them might be the most effective because at any time you can go back into the Develop module and re-adjust. ACR color sucks is just internet echo chamber blather. Sony has just released a trio of impressively small, light, ultrawide lenses for APS-C. These lenses are designed for vloggers, so Chris decided to film himself and find out how they perform.
Holy moly, this thing is tiny! We take the adorable Sigma mm F2. Here's what's new and what we think so far We've been able to spend some quality time with Fujifilm's APS-C flagship, and we have plenty of opinions! How do you make weird lens even weirder?
Put a periscope on it! We check out the new Laowa Periprobe 24mm F14 2X and explore some of the creative things you can do with such a bizarre lens. What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? So do the latest versions of NX-D. I'm quite interested in how this new software performs. I'll give it a try. What I don't know is whether it will mess up my present installation of NX-D.
I guess I'll have to try to run both on one of my old machines before I put it on my main machine. Davej Member. It leaves NXD on my mac.
NX-i is no longer required and is removed. Download very straight forward and there are manuals for Studio and Transfer.
James C. I just got the e-mail from Nikon this morning about their new NX Studio photo processing software. I'm currently trying to learn how to use Affinity Photo. Thanks for your input. It is completely free! Free so no harm in having a look? I have downloaded and used it on my laptop and my experiene match those who have already posted.
I did notice that in the top toolbar, there is no longer a box at the right for Dual Monitor. Does anybody have any experience with Nikon Studiio with two monitors? I could not find this addressed in the manual for Studio.
I plan to test out the speed of rendering RAW images in the browser. One of my issues with View NX-i is that once you star rate the images or add keywords, the rendering is much slower than without anything added to the image.
I want to see how Studio performs with respect to this matter. You must log in or register to reply here. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register. By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies. Accept Learn more….
Comments
Post a Comment