View Full Version : Nikon Software or other?
FTO13
12-23-2006, 07:51 AM
Does anyone have any preference of the Nikon Picture Project software over Photoshop's new Elements 5.0, or any others that I may not be aware of? I've loaded the Picture Project package that came with my camera and I've downloaded and installed the demo version of Photoshop Elements 5.0. I've just kind of browsed through each one and loaded images from my camera with both, but I can't tell at the outset any major pros and/or cons of each. Thanks to all for their input. If the Photoshop Elements proves to be the better package, I'll go ahead and purchase it, just because of their reputation and features and it's a good price compared to the full version
Nikon Capture NX is the best but here is a list in my own order, others may disagree...
1. Nikon Capture NX
2. Adobe Photoshop CS2
3. ACDSEE Pro 8.0
4. Adobe Lightroom Beta
Like I said, results may very but I have used those 4 and thats my top list. For Nikon NEF RAW files, nothing beats Capture NX.
wh0128
12-23-2006, 02:59 PM
1. Nikon Capture NX
2. Adobe Photoshop CS2
3. ACDSEE Pro 8.0
4. Adobe Lightroom Beta
For Nikon NEF RAW files, nothing beats Capture NX.
For me I've only used 3/4, the one I haven't used is ACDSEE Pro 8.0, I've never heard of it so I can't give an opinion. For me NX and CS2 are a tie. NX seems to produce NEF/RAW files better straight out of the camera without any auto settings. And CS2 has a lot more features to play around with to get what you really want. I'm jumping between the two, actually between NX and CS3 Beta:D (which is free if you have CS2). Adobe Lightroom is also another great program and is free until February, so you can get a hold of that and see how you like that, and buy it when it comes out for purchase if it suites your photography needs. Lightroom has a very fast workflow, imo, because it sets out pretty much what you need to do in steps, and you just go through your workflow in steps. And you can also create slideshows to post online, and print directly from Lightroom.
Overall, I'd have to go with Photoshop for adjustments, NX for Raw converting, and Lightroom for fast output workflow.
There is nothing wrong with Elements many people use it and are very happy.
I'd stay away from Capture NX or full Photoshop CS until you really decide what you want or that there are features you want that Elements can't provide.
I would recommend that you have a go with the Lightroom beta though as it is developing into a very good program that will ultimately sit between Elements and Photoshop but be geared entirely towards photography (Photographers use about 5% of Photoshops features and for the vast majority is actually a waste of money)
You can get Lightroom beta here. (http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroom/)
There is nothing wrong with Elements many people use it and are very happy.
I'd stay away from Capture NX or full Photoshop CS until you really decide what you want or that there are features you want that Elements can't provide.
Capture NX has a 30 day trial so no need to stay away, you can play with it for free to see if it fits your needs.
toriaj
12-23-2006, 04:30 PM
FTO13, you don't mention if you shoot in RAW or JPEG. Many of us begin in JPEG and then transition to RAW when we get better :D I still shoot in JPEG. The reason I bring this up is that the basic PictureProject is for JPEG images; Nikon Capture is for RAW.
I only use PictureProject for one thing: loading the images. I like the filing and numbering system, and I like one feature: that you can view the images in slideshow size and mark them. I use that feature to decide which pictures I want to keep. Then I open just those pictures into Corel Paint Shop Pro (roughly equivalent to Elements) for processing.
PictureProject is very basic. The only tasks it can do are basic brightening, sharpening, cropping, etc. If you want more complex tasks, such as removing an object, brightening one part of a picture but not another, or using selective coloring, then Elements will probably do the job for you.
wh0128
12-23-2006, 11:42 PM
The reason I bring this up is that the basic PictureProject is for JPEG images; Nikon Capture is for RAW.
Nikon Capture can do JPG also...
toriaj
12-23-2006, 11:47 PM
That's good to know! I'll have to try out my own Capture software.
davew
12-24-2006, 05:40 AM
there is also a free program called paint.net
works for a basic auto adjust and crop
http://www.getpaint.net/features.html
Unholymoondog
12-24-2006, 07:46 AM
IMHO you really cannot beat NX for RAW processing NEF's.
I also use CS2 but I don't think you need to spend all that cash for it, just go for PSE 4 or 5 and you won't go far wrong.
corndog
12-26-2006, 08:21 PM
My 2c:
NX Capture: No bueno. Dont waste your time learning this software. It will make it harder for you to learn Photoshop later, which is where we all end up.
Photoshop CS2: Its the industry standard. Better start getting used to it. As for the cost, im sure some will find this comment disturbing but, nobody pays for this stuff these days.
Adobe Lightroom Beta: The easiest, most intuitive, and basic, freebie out there. You cannot beat this software for basic JPEG/RAW "development" no matter what the price. I will really consider buying this one assuming its in the sub $100 range. If you need a quick, lightweight, and basic, editing tool, this is about as good as it gets.
JASC Paintshop Pro: This is the poor mans Photoshop. Even so, its a very respectable program, and worth the money. Its also setup like photoshop so its not such a stretch when you someday move up to photoshop.
As you can see, my emphasis is on Photoshop. I truly believe this is where most people end up as they start to get serious about photo editing. As people should always mention, these are just my opinions, and no decision should be made on the opinion of just one person. With that said, good luck!
these are just my opinions, and no decision should be made on the opinion of just one person.
Thats the only thing you said in your entire post that I agree with. Nobody should base their decision on what you just said.
For you to tell someone not to test software is completely wrong and BAD information. Its a free trial, why not experiment? If they then come to the conclusion they dont like it, oh well, but to tell them to stay away from it is completely wrong.
Capture NX is the BEST for editing NIKON files, it reads its own files better than any other program out there. If you shoot NEF, Capture NX is the way to go and if Capture NX makes it "harder for you to learn photoshop" then maybe you need to rethink what you are doing. NX is very easy to use and has useful features you cant get with photoshop.
I do use NX, CS2, Elements 5.0 and Lightroom. I will say it again, NX and CS2 are the best, with NX clearly better. I have done may tests on my own with editing the same photos with all the editing software, NX always comes out with better color.
If you like to admit you illegally pirate software, thats on you, but not wise to do so on a public forum.
corndog
12-26-2006, 10:35 PM
I certainly didnt mean to offend you, after all its just friendly chatting on the internet. The guy is asking for software opinions, and im sharing my experience.
I never told the guy not to try stuff out. Maybe he is asking for help so he doesnt have to try everything out like most of us have. Maybe hes asking for help to save himself some time.
My opinion is simply that CS2 is the industry standard. And for learning the program, there are some awesome video tutorials out there. And just a few for Capture NX.
http://www.radiantvista.com/video_tutorials/
Maybe learning the ins and out of software comes easy for you, it doesnt for me. I wish I wouldnt have spent so much time messing with other programs instead of Photoshop. I would be much further along than I am now. For someone like me, learning Capture NX is a waste of time. Im not sure how I need to rethink what im doing...but thanks, ill give that a try.
Also, I concede that these are just my opinions. But what do you say?
I will say it again, NX and CS2 are the best, with NX clearly better.
Why dont you concede that this is just your opinion? Just because its the best for you, doesnt mean its the best for everyone. This mentality is is like saying, "hamburgers are the BEST", and then getting mad because someone else likes hotdogs.
I never told the guy not to try stuff out.
Oh you didnt?.....
NX Capture: No bueno. Dont waste your time learning this software.
Maybe learning the ins and out of software comes easy for you, it doesnt for me. I wish I wouldnt have spent so much time messing with other programs instead of Photoshop. I would be much further along than I am now. For someone like me, learning Capture NX is a waste of time.
If learning NX was hard for you, I dont understand how you can use photoshop, that is much much harder to decipher. Thats why there are so many tutorials for it. NX is just like lightroom in the way its set up, has all the basic editing tools on the right hand side. Oh and lets not forget, Nikon Capture NX was MADE for Nikon files, photoshop requires a plug-in to read Nikon NEF files. If you would put a Nissan car part into a Ford car, thats on you. I choose to use software that was made for my camera.
Yes, opinions are opinions, but some are more factually based than others. I suggest to try everything out there and see whats best, you tell people not to "waste their time".
I did not intend to offend, just simply proving your post had holes and didnt want anyone to be persuaded from capture NX based on what you said.
erichlund
12-27-2006, 02:52 AM
My opinion is simply that CS2 is the industry standard. And for learning the program, there are some awesome video tutorials out there. And just a few for Capture NX.
I will admit I have never used Photoshop in any form. Can't get past that $600 price tag. Especially when Capture NX does everything I want to do to a photo for about $90 (upgrade, full price is about $150).
Yes, tutorials are a cottage industry for Photoshop. If the program were simple and intuitive, this would not be necessary. Control points in NX are amazing. Nikon really hit a home run when they shopped Capture NX development out to a third party vendor. I liked Capture, but NX stands head and shoulders above Capture.
I just wish Nikon would get their act together on the new version of View. I really hope this is still in work, because the design plan for view was to interact with NX in a way that would create a very good workflow. But I haven't heard anything about View in months.
As for the cost, im sure some will find this comment disturbing but, nobody pays for this stuff these days.
Thief!
If you steal my car you would be considered a criminal.
As you obviously by your own admission steal software then you are a criminal and should not bother posting on this or any legitimate Internet forums again.
Thief!
If you steal my car you would be considered a criminal.
As you obviously by your own admission steal software then you are a criminal and should not bother posting on this or any legitimate Internet forums again.
Agree 100% K1W1!
corndog
12-27-2006, 03:13 PM
Yes thats right, I didnt pay for my copy of Photoshop CS2, because my mom did when she bought it for the family computer last xmas. Im saying that in my experience, within the small group of people I know and meet, nobody pays for it.
Your replies are amusing none the less. Lets all butt out and let other people give their software opinions since that is what this thread is all about.
personally i prefer NX cos i find it easier to use. haven't spent a whole lot of time with PS though, just watching friends who use it. to me it seems pretty hard to get around. i also like the fact that NX is ailored for nikon. don;t know if that makes a difference in reality but it makes me feel better. :D gotta say though, i think it's poor form for nikon not including a free RAW software processor with the D80.
as for the illegal software question, i guess the people with comments about illegally validated software have never burnt a CD, never copied a tape, never taped a TV show from network TV, never downloaded music without paying for royalties, never burnt a DVD etc etc etc
what do they say about glass houses ?:cool:
as for the illegal software question, i guess the people with comments about illegally validated software have never burnt a CD, never copied a tape, never taped a TV show from network TV, never downloaded music without paying for royalties, never burnt a DVD etc etc etc
what do they say about glass houses ?:cool:
Completely different, and if you cant see the difference then there is no explaining it to you.
Burning CDs, recording a television show for later viewing, and DL music(if paid for, i.e. ITUNES) isnt illegal. Pirating software is.
Please, next time, if your going to post and pretend you know the law, make sure your facts are right!:D
i think it's poor form for nikon not including a free RAW software processor with the D80.
It does come with Nikon Picture Project. For that matter, the D200 doesn't even come with NX. Heck, the D2Xs doesn't even come with a flash and check out how expensive that camera body is compared to the rest. ;)
Completely different, and if you cant see the difference then there is no explaining it to you.
Burning CDs, recording a television show for later viewing, and DL music(if paid for, i.e. ITUNES) isnt illegal. Pirating software is.
Please, next time, if your going to post and pretend you know the law, make sure your facts are right!:D
i won;t get into a long drawn out arguement on what is or is not legal. i get the feeling some people need to get laid and lighten up.:cool:
It does come with Nikon Picture Project. For that matter, the D200 doesn't even come with NX. Heck, the D2Xs doesn't even come with a flash and check out how expensive that camera body is compared to the rest. ;)
PP is great for quick view/ download etc. but it won;t do RAW, (i think ?:confused: ). the sony and canon both have fully licenced RAW imaging software, i'm just a tad surprised that nikon didn't go the same way.
BTW: have you used the 18-200 nikon VR lens ? just wondering what your thoughts would be on that one for low light shots. i noticed Sir Rockwell's praise of it but seeing you seem to be a low light pic master i wouldn't mind gettng your take on it if you have expereinced using it.
Though limited, PP does have adjustments for brightness, D-Lighting HS, Color Booster, Photo Effects, Sharpening, Straighten, auto enhance, auto red-eye, and so on.
No, I haven't tried the 18-200VR since I don't plan to purchase it because it's F/3.5-5.6 and because I pretty much have F/2.8 glass covered throughout that range. I really don't believe in a one "all" lens, especially at those F-stops.
i currently have the kit lens which so far is doing ok but i wanted the VR and a longer zoom. my camera store will swap it over if i pay the difference in lens price so it will be a replacement for my existing 3.5.
have never seen so many conflicting reports on one lens. some think it's great others are really panning it for poor sharpness. wonder if it's a quality control problem from nikon to keep up with demand ??
i may just stick to my kit lens as my walkaround and pick up that 50mm baby you are using.
Since it's F/3.5-5.6, it's probably fine in "good" lighting. However, when zooming out toward 5.6 and/or in low-level lighting situations, that's probably when the quality of the photos are going to decrease. I know my "full" F/2.8VR far surpasses my other VR.
yepp, you are right. the only thing i need to consider really is whether the 18-200 with it's VR and xtra range is $500 better than the kit lens. both are 3.5-5.6 from memory.
That's probably going to depend on the type of photos you want to take and only you can answer that question.
Sometimes one never knows where one is headed and sometimes it is better to pay once, instead of twice. Myself, I paid twice in some regards since I first paid less by purchasing my two original Sigma lenses (28-90mm F/3.5-5.6 and 70-300mm F/4-5.6), then paid more when I upgraded to the faster Nikkor 70-200mm F/2.8 VR lens. Than once again, I settled somewhat when I purchased the second VR lens (24-120mm F/3.5-5.6 VR). However, I decided NOT to do that again and that is why I purchased the 50mm F/1.4 and the 17-55mm F/2.8. The Sigma 135-400mm F/4.5-5.6 APO I purchased slightly used from a local who moved here and have yet to really use it--zoo, mountains, etc. My next lens will probably be the 10.5mm F/2.8. Basically, the pattern is toward--fast glass.
Based on what I know now, if I were to recommend any lenses they would all have fast glass since they would better suit most shooting environments, i.e. 50mm F/1.4, 17-55mm F/2.8, and 70-200mm F/2.8.
i won;t get into a long drawn out arguement on what is or is not legal. i get the feeling some people need to get laid and lighten up.:cool:
You have just shown your immaturaty and that you actually had nothing intelligent to say, next time youre in that same scenario, STFU:cool:
You have just shown your immaturaty and that you actually had nothing intelligent to say, next time youre in that same scenario, STFU:cool:
GOOD ONE !
:rolleyes:
That's probably going to depend on the type of photos you want to take and only you can answer that question.
Sometimes one never knows where one is headed and sometimes it is better to pay once, instead of twice. Myself, I paid twice in some regards since I first paid less by purchasing my two original Sigma lenses (28-90mm F/3.5-5.6 and 70-300mm F/4-5.6), then paid more when I upgraded to the faster Nikkor 70-200mm F/2.8 VR lens. Than once again, I settled somewhat when I purchased the second VR lens (24-120mm F/3.5-5.6 VR). However, I decided NOT to do that again and that is why I purchased the 50mm F/1.4 and the 17-55mm F/2.8. The Sigma 135-400mm F/4.5-5.6 APO I purchased slightly used from a local who moved here and have yet to really use it--zoo, mountains, etc. My next lens will probably be the 10.5mm F/2.8. Basically, the pattern is toward--fast glass.
Based on what I know now, if I were to recommend any lenses they would all have fast glass since they would better suit most shooting environments, i.e. 50mm F/1.4, 17-55mm F/2.8, and 70-200mm F/2.8.
great stuff ! thanks for that.:D
erichlund
12-28-2006, 11:25 AM
PP is great for quick view/ download etc. but it won;t do RAW, (i think ?:confused: ). the sony and canon both have fully licenced RAW imaging software, i'm just a tad surprised that nikon didn't go the same way.
BTW: have you used the 18-200 nikon VR lens ? just wondering what your thoughts would be on that one for low light shots. i noticed Sir Rockwell's praise of it but seeing you seem to be a low light pic master i wouldn't mind gettng your take on it if you have expereinced using it.
Yes Sony and Canon both both have licensed RAW imaging software. But you really don't hear much about pros using it. They use Photoshop because the bundled software is not adequate. If you survey this and several other sites, you will find a significant number of pros that use Capture and Capture NX due to the quality of the product. Yes they also have and use Photoshop, because Capture doesn't do everything.
I have the 18-200. If you are talking low light action, forgetaboutit. The lens starts at f3.5-5.6. It's good for stills. The VR really works, though you can still do better with a good tripod.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.9 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.