Capture NX2 for almost everything, I say almost because LR4 has lens corrections and CS5 has photo stitching and HDR.

This is an ever lasting argument, I guess; a very interesting one though, with no right answer; mainly because it is too much down to the preference of each photographer and the capabilities offered by the different software products, all of them varying continuously. And this is probably why you are now reading this thread.

In my case, I am not too worried about super-productive workflow. I am more concerned about getting the most out of an image, keeping things as simple as possible but without loosing control of what is happening.

I tried tens of different photo editing/cataloguing tools. So far I have narrowed my spectrum down to: a) ViewNX (for quickly browse/organise), b) Capture NX2 (main editing tool, including Color Efex 3 complete), and c) Photoshop (for those VERY rare complex editing jobs). Period.

With sadness, I keep leaving Adobe's Lightroom out of the list. From its very first release I always wanted to adopt it; I tried it and I keep re-trying its new releases in hope that some day it will handle Nikon RAW images as Capture NX2 does. Well...it hasn't so far, and it seems it never will.

I love LR's sleek, intuitive, expansible environment, which translates in a very flexible workflow with very high throughput. NX2 in turn is way sloooooooow, clumsy, unstable, rather limited and is looking rather outdated to say the least.

But:
- NX2 uniquely treats and processes Nikon RAW files mimicking Nikon in-camera's processors: what you see when shooting is a pin-sharp replica of what you get with NX2. There is no other software in the market that can even dare claiming this.
- NX2 saves all the edits non-destructively within the same file; no hassle for portability or administration. LR generates a massive external database which is an unnecessary level of risk and restrictive compexity.
- NX2's U-points are simply great! So simple and yet so powerful.

I hope this could be of help to some of you.
Cheers.

I worked with a bunch of tools, and because I do not like to do post-processing on the photos, I do not spend a lot with them.. but:

1. To preview photos, I use IrFanView free tool. it is fast, supports a large number of formats
2. Most of the PP I do using Photoshop CS3, it does the job and I guess I do not need any more than that.. Although it does not support Nikon D7000 raw conversion
3. I tried Photoshop CS5,nice tool, but need $$$ for getting it, currently I'm not in a position to spend more money on photography... or I will be forced to sleep with my dog in his doghouse..
4. I used/use Nikon Capture 4.4 on my D70s, but that tool will not support my D7000, therefore I'm limited to use Nikon ViewNX2 which I don't like due to its limited capabilities.
5. I tried Lightroom 3.0 till the trail version died.. nice.. but I need to get used to. (The learning curve is not short with all Adobe products)
6. Under Linux, I use RawTherapee and Gimp.. nice tools that evolved a lot since they were first published.. They are free tools and I would take the opportunity to say "thanks" to the developers of these tools. They may not compete with professional commercial tools, but they are not far behind them!
7. For panorama making, I use Hugin free tool, very similar to PT-Gui

Disclaimer: I do not have any relationship with any of the tools mentioned above, I just use them. I have no profit from them.

Hope it helps...

Have a nice day to all..

In the last month Lightroom 3 has fallen form $299.00 (regular price) to $179, then to $150. Something's up. LR4 soon? Maybe Adobe will also have a "big" anouncement later this month as well.

Roka13 said:
Wow this was really helpful but are there any other free ones(like light room)?

You won't get any free ones with the quality that Lightroom provides but you can buy Lightroom for $99 if you're a student or get a student to buy it for you at their college book store.

Anyone have a Nik Software Silver EFEX Pro 2 serial I could use? I'm too broke to buy the trial version for $200 and I tried various cracks already that didn't work. Thanks I know its asking a lot actually...

tcole1983 said:
What is Corel Photopaint x-5? x3 maybe?

And not everyone has $640 to spend on CS5...lightroom cost enough for me.

Nope it's X5 (I still have x3 installed though)

Wow this was really helpful but are there any other free ones(like light room)?

tcole1983 said:
And not everyone has $640 to spend on CS5...lightroom cost enough for me.

Make sure you register Lightroom 3 and tick the "please send me ..... " box
From time to time, Adobe send out, time limited, half price offers for CS5 ( needles to say, mine arrive after I had paid the full price)

Many Adobe products can be trialed free for 30 days

kyoshinikon said:
Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo X2 is archaic. It is like using photoshop 5 (not cs5)

I use Photoshop Cs5, Corel Photopaint x-5, and Lightroom for different jobs... Seldom use NX2 or Gimp these days...

What is Corel Photopaint x-5? x3 maybe?

And not everyone has $640 to spend on CS5...lightroom cost enough for me.

I'm a real cheapskate and use The Gimp for all my image manipulation (JPEG).

Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo X2 is archaic. It is like using photoshop 5 (not cs5)

I use Photoshop Cs5, Corel Photopaint x-5, and Lightroom for different jobs... Seldom use NX2 or Gimp these days...

tcole1983 said:
I had been using View and Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo X2, but I wasn't very happy with the Corel software. I just got lightroom and although I don't know all the tricks yet it is a ton better.

Same here, I was using NX2, Nikon Picture Project, Topaz and PS Elements. I'm still learning everything in Lightroom but Lightroom is so much better than what I was using.

I had been using View and Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo X2, but I wasn't very happy with the Corel software. I just got lightroom and although I don't know all the tricks yet it is a ton better.

I know both lightroom and photoshop have end user agreements that allow what you're talking about—installing to one desktop computer and one laptop—as long as only one copy is running at a time and you own both computers. I don't know about the others.

Well I still only have used Nikon View for editing, if I even do that (mostly cropping pics). Does any of the software mentioned allow you to load it on more than one computer or are you limited to using it on one computer.

For instance I would love to have it on my desktop and my laptop. I save everything to a NAS device anyway.

Beware that you are not comparing apples to apples (Nikon ViewNX is free and Adobe tools are expensive tools)

One of the differences I saw is when dealing with IR photos, Adobe tools do not go so low in temperature... but in other aspects, Adobe tools are superior t ViewNX/ViewNX2.

I use Lightroom 3.x However, when i really want to extract the most details, I too use Nikons Capture NX2. Not for every raw mind you-- there are times when the jpeg is just fine, but when i really want to go to town, use Capture. For some reason, I just can't get LR 3 to match it.

Hope that helps.
J

Indeed, certainly the framework of the application is about as visually appealing as dose of the flu, hence I immediately took a dislike to it when I first installed the software when I purchased the camera...but I should have taken heed of a saying we have over here, never judge a sausage by its skin! ;o)

I suppose you're right, my immediate excitement of NX was simply the drastic improvement over the default image that it displays, that for me was enough to say it was a good piece of software!

Now that I'm more aware of it's usefulness I shall dig a little deeper to see what it can (or can't do) and then I might start encountering some of the bugs you mention.

robtarren said:
but it's clear from what you're saying that NX is a pretty good piece of software in it's own right so why try and mimic what it's doing elsewhere.

Robtarren,

I am glad that talking about our experiences have helped with your choices. In my view, photography is very much about trying things out and learning from those experiments. It could easily be a never ending process!!! :-)

I think you might also like to reconsider the sentence of yours I quoted above...

NX seems to work ok for me (and several others, including you), but to say that it a "pretty good piece of software" is ... well ... in my view, a bit much. Why?

I may be lucky, but Photoshop over several versions, has not ever crashed out on me at all - not once. NX2 has, several times. Bad for NX2.

View NX2 does not do it all... far from it in fact. View NX2 and Transfer NX2 (that came with my dSLRs) have lots of PS type features missing and also how many 3rd party add-ins are there for it? Bad for NX2.

Capture NX2 (you pay extra for it - if it comes with dSLRs now, then its bundled into the cost of the camera so you are STILL paying for it), seems a little buggy, even if it does have some of the features I think are missing in View NX2. It also looks to me like it was written in the days of Windows 3. It really does need a major update too. Bad for NX2.

All that said, NX2 gives (in my opinion) better images. I guess it is all down to the results you want.

<sigh> .....

Aperazzo said:
Had what would seem to be the same issue myself...

D90 RAW files straight out of the camera look great in Lightroom, D7000 RAW were good the first second then Lightroom kicked in somehow and they became way too dark. I didn't have the problem with other viewers etc. Then I read on a forum that it should have something to do with Active -Lighting. Switched that off on my D7000 and the problem has pretty much gone for all pictures that I made since.

If you ask me, Adobe has or had not yet fully figured out what D-Lighting does to D7000 RAW files. Nikon -obviousily- didn't have that problem when they released the latest NX version...

Had what would seem to be the same issue myself...

D90 RAW files straight out of the camera look great in Lightroom, D7000 RAW were good the first second then Lightroom kicks in somehow and they became way too dark. I didn't have the problem with other viewers etc. Then I read on a forum that it should have something to do with Active -Lighting. Switched that off on my D7000 and the problem has gone for all pictue that I made since.

If you ask me, Adobe has or had not yet fully figured out what D-Lighting does to D7000 RAW files. Nikon -obviousily- didn't have that problem when they released the latest NX version...

Thanks guys, some really useful bits of information there. I sooo wish I'd known about the differences when I started shooting all my images in raw when I upgraded to a D7000, as I seemed to spend an incredible amount of time retouching them when initially loading them into PS. I think I just fell into the trap that 'Adobe knows best'!

I only noticed the drastic differences as I've bought a new iMac and had to reinstall all my Nikon software, and when I transferred my latest batch of images across it was NX that popped up as the default viewer...I couldn't believe the difference in the appearance and quality of the unedited photos!

That was the point of my original post, I wanted to try and replicate what NX is doing inside PS, but it's clear from what you're saying that NX is a pretty good piece of software in it's own right so why try and mimic what it's doing elsewhere.

As you say, it's all about preference, there is no right and wrong, I'm sure there are strong supporters in both camps who will vehemently defend their corner, it's just what suits your needs the best.

bjrichus said:
I am waiting for negative comments from my previous post too :-(

Not sure why that kind of thing evokes so much passion in some quarters...

For my money (and it is MY cash I am spending on this stuff), it's what you individually prefer that counts. What I do fits my needs and the qualities of what I get out of it is right for me. I have tried just about all the alternatives I can afford and am happy with my current set up.

Can you recall what the differences were between Capture or any other software you tried?

I wonder if the format of a NEF file originated from Nikon or is it derived from some other format?

There could be an entire software industry in this kind of thing!!!

My workflow is a lot like yours. I edit the raw in Capture NX2(edit levels, white balance, light retouching...etc.) then convert to a .TIFF file and import into PS CS5 and do all my heaving editing and noise reduction then save a PSD, TIFF and JPEG of the final.

I've found that color graduation as well as artifacting is not an issue in Capture and it doesn't look as good in anything else. Not to mention white balance accuracy and overall dynamic range. Everything just looks better in Capture, it's not one particular thing. For me, this works the best.

CaryTheLabelGuy said:
I know a lot of people will flame this comment, but

I am waiting for negative comments from my previous post too :-(

Not sure why that kind of thing evokes so much passion in some quarters...

For my money (and it is MY cash I am spending on this stuff), it's what you individually prefer that counts. What I do fits my needs and the qualities of what I get out of it is right for me. I have tried just about all the alternatives I can afford and am happy with my current set up.

CaryTheLabelGuy said:
I prefer Capture NX2's raw conversion above all else.

Can you recall what the differences were between Capture or any other software you tried?

CaryTheLabelGuy said:
Nobody does NEFs like Nikon.

I wonder if the format of a NEF file originated from Nikon or is it derived from some other format?

There could be an entire software industry in this kind of thing!!!