I'm a Realtor of 25 years who is a better than average photographer. I have been shooting my own listings ever since my first digital camera. Of late I have stepped up my game. Been using a Nikon D80 for a few years. I purchased Photomatix and have pretty well "mastered" HDR with it. I bought a nice used D300 last week on Ebay, and I'm pretty excited about that.
Since day one I have been cataloging pictures in Camedia 4.1...don't laugh. My final processing is in Photoshop 7.0. I started shooting RAW lately, and am I confused.
I have to load the images in Nikonview NX (comes with D80 and D300), then process in Photomatix. When that is done, any touch up that I want to do in in Photoshop 7.0....which will NOT open a jpeg from Nikonview NX??? I have to move them back to trusty old Camedia, and then back to Photoshop. When touched up, I then I end up with approximately 9 meg files...our MLS system wants a much smaller file, so I end up crunching them down in Photoshop, and I find the batch processing function in Photoshop 7.0 to be pretty unfriendly. As you can imagine this is rediculously time consuming. Someone please help. Nikon Capture...Adobe Lightroom...what the heck do I need?
Question From a Newcomer...be kind
(51 posts) (13 voices)-
Posted 1 year ago #
-
Adobe Lightroom 4 should do everything apart from HDR
but then so should Photoshop ElementsPosted 1 year ago # -
Lightroom 4 with the Nik Software 'HDR Efex Pro' plug-in will do everything you have said you need.
HTH.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I started out using both Capture NX and Lightroom. This post made me think about it, and I don't believe I've used NX in over a year now. I agree with spraynpray, LR4 with Nik HDR Efex Pro will amaze you.
Posted 1 year ago # -
if you want to go from better than average to good. use lights and go easy on the HDR. there is a glut of overdone HDR in real estate where I am, and it just doesn't look natural.
I move into my new house on the 27th, and I was put off looking at some houses, by the HDR images, that made them look freaky.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Hey Guys...I am blown away by all these great helpful hints. What a relief to think that one Program, LR4, could be that much help. Adobe does apoor job of explaining what it can do in their ads.
I love the comments about HDR. You said it!!! The over use of 10mm lenses around here is even worse. Some of these guys can make a condo look like a gym. I believe in truth in advertising.
Thanks again.Posted 1 year ago # -
The other good thing about Adobe, is you can download it for free, try it out for 30 days. That should give you enough time to figure it out before you actually have to buy it.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Hi,
Photoshop Elements is also good, too, and has an organizer that is helpful. It has a good HDR tool, and I'm not a big fan of HDR, it can come in handy for some images.
My best,
Mike
Posted 1 year ago # -
Mike Gunter said:
Photoshop Elements is also good, too, and has an organizer that is helpful. It has a good HDR tool, and I'm not a big fan of HDR, it can come in handy for some images.+1 as that sounds more like your current workflow and anymore it really comes close if not exceeds to what your current version of Photoshop can do. Lightroom is great as well and will work with your existing HDR programs files.
Basically you are using all outdated software and it is time to update.
Posted 1 year ago # -
OK, I'm going to add my question here then. As someone who hates editing pictures with a vengeance, but reluctantly uses view NX when called upon, and owns a copy of CS4 Extended but took one look at it and never opened it again (do you get where I'm at?). As I know my way round view NX very well now, I was planning on trying to catch up with the 21st century by buying a copy of Capture NX2. Bad idea? From the comments above it would seem most of you are Adobe generally and lightroom more specifically people? I really do find life too short to learn a new program, Is NX2 really that bad for someone who only processes NEF's or do I really need to learn new tricks?
Posted 1 year ago # -
-
SkintBrit said:
OK, I'm going to add my question here then. As someone who hates editing pictures with a vengeance, but reluctantly uses view NX when called upon, and owns a copy of CS4 Extended but took one look at it and never opened it again (do you get where I'm at?). As I know my way round view NX very well now, I was planning on trying to catch up with the 21st century by buying a copy of Capture NX2. Bad idea? From the comments above it would seem most of you are Adobe generally and lightroom more specifically people? I really do find life too short to learn a new program, Is NX2 really that bad for someone who only processes NEF's or do I really need to learn new tricks?Best you download it and try it Skinty. It is really good and the way you can add plug-ins so never leave the LR non-destructive workflow is something I like. I struggled to get my headround the way it takes over file and catalogue storage tho. LR4 is a good place to start too being quite a jump better than 2 or 3.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Non destructive workflow / takes over file and catalogue storage? Explain.
Too late, I've just taken the cowards option and bought a copy of Capture NX2 on eBay. I got it for £60 so I'm not risking too much. If I struggle to get on with it I suppose I can always sell it again?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Non destructive workflow means that Lightroom keeps tracks of all modifications, and saves that in its library/catalog, so any changes you do you can go back and undo or modify later.
It does take some time getting used to the workflow, but once you get used to it, I couldn't imagine using anything else.
Posted 1 year ago # -
SkintBrit said:
. As someone who hates editing pictures with a vengeance,When I used NX, I hated editing too
but since I switched to LR, editing, filing and finding past photos is a joy
if do make the switch, treat your self to a months subscription of Kelby Traing and watch Matt Kloskowski lessons on LR4
Posted 1 year ago # -
Are there any advocates of NX2 here? It must have some redeeming features?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Well, it is used by plenty in the club I go to - they all seem more into photoshop than I am tho.
Just to clarify, LR is 'database driven' which is jargon that means the original is always there untouched no matter what you do. The 'catalogue' is the database. You can keep snapshots of your alterations along the wayy so if you like something you don't have to stop there, and when you export the picture as - say - a jpeg, it still leaves the original plus any snapshots or virtual copies there untouched for you to play with - or not.
Don't install the NX2 so you can sell it, go to LR4 it is an absolute bargain.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I have rather hijacked this thread sorry, but I'm not sure I fully understand what you are saying spraynpray. If I get you correctly LR has a system for keeping track of any changes you make to a RAW file (or any other), a bit like clicking "save as" each time? I can understand how that might be useful, but doesn't it mean that an enormous amount of HD space is used? Or does it only save the difference between each change to a file and not a complete new copy? You mention about keeping the original file untouched, but surely everyone does this already? Even View NX asks you if you want to replace the original or make a duplicate. Did you say a free trial of LR4 can be downloaded? And I notice that some vendors are selling "commercial licence" copies, is this a version for photographers who may use the program for business purposes like myself? Whichever program I go with I want to do it right first time, I can't be wasting time learning my way around multiple programs. What are the main differences between LR4 and the CS4 extended I already have? Should I just force myself to learn that? Sorry for so many questions, I quite understand if you don't get round to answering them :-) I didn't send them as a personal message as I hope some of the forum "lurkers" might gain some insight from the responses.
Posted 1 year ago # -
SkintBrit said:
I have rather hijacked this thread sorry, but I'm not sure I fully understand what you are saying spraynpray.You cannot hijack anything when the old lady is around, ha, ha,ha.
I use LR4 and what I think is happening is that instead of actually changing anything in the original DNG, the changes are recorded elsewhere. Kinda like if you had a bunch of cars sitting around, the "original" files, and when you wanted to look at one you had ordered changes to, i.e., add radio, paint blue, add fender skirts, add whitewall tires, etc., the LR4 software generates this image for you to look at. If you like it, it sends it out in an export to where ever you want it to go. Yet what is in the "warehouse" is the original cars, untouched, along with a list of the changes you like for each one.
Does that make sense?
And if I am completely screwy please let me know. I do know that I can add 50 changes to an image and see the long list on the left see of my light table, and very easily click at any point in the list of changes and see exactly what the image looked like at that point in the adding of changes.
So, maybe I will learn something here if I am wrong....
Posted 1 year ago # -
SkintBrit said:
If I get you correctly LR has a system for keeping track of any changes you make to a RAW file (or any other), a bit like clicking "save as" each time? I can understand how that might be useful, but doesn't it mean that an enormous amount of HD space is used?I don't KNOW how LR and Aperture do this, but after a lifetime of working in IT I visualise it as follows...
LR stores your original images (format is irrelevant)
You open an image in LR, and straighten it by rotating it (say) 7 degrees clockwise. LR stores '7 degrees clockwise' in a location linked to your original. '7 degrees clockwise' is a tiny, tiny amount of data.
You crop the photo. LR stores the x/y coordinates of the four corners of your cropped image (again, a tiny amount of data).
You tweak the white balance to 4270K. Again, LR stores this tiny amount of data.
You go off for a cup of coffee, work on some other images, before returning to the image in question.
When you open that image, LR opens the ORIGINAL because that is the only copy it has.
It then reads '7 degrees clockwise' and rotates it accordingly.
It reads the x/y coordinates of the image and crops it accordingly.
It reads 'white balance 4270K' and adjusts the WB accordingly.
So all that is stored is the original image and a series of tiny instructions.
One or two decades ago, this would have been impractical, but home computers are so much faster these days. even now, when you select the image there's a momentary hesitation before the image appears properly.
Posted 1 year ago # -
SkintBrit said:
but doesn't it mean that an enormous amount of HD space is used? Or does it only save the difference between each change to a file and not a complete new copy?It makes no changes to the original RAW file. It creates a database of 'metadata' that stores a few kinds of information about each image file imported into LR. For example, it stores something like a 'script' of changes made to each file during editing, and thumbnails of the image file too. It also stores data for 'virtual copies' of the image you may create during editing, tagging information, etc. along with backups, and whatever wizardry is required to make it all work.
There are 36k images tracked by my copy of LR4 at the moment. My lightroom catalog directory is 38.8 GB, and contains 53,353 files in 36,753 folders Very loose math puts catalog growth at approximately 1MB per image tracked.
To put that into perspective, I'm a casual enthusiast shooter that 'touches' every image I take, whether it be through an automated action (I recently set LR up to auto lens correct images on import), or through deliberate edits.
A 40 GB catalog might seem like a big deal but I'm sure pro shooters of any kind would far, far exceed that amount in a year of shooting. And the data is useful - it lets us travel back in time and fix our mistakes years after the fact. ;)
Thoroughly hijacked.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Skint Brit
Anaxagoras is right. LR stores the the information for any "modifications" you want to make,in a data base , but does not implement these changes until you "export" using whatever format, size, resolution, you choose. You can include as little or as much meta data as you want, you can also add a watermark .
You can keep the exported jpeg if you want, or delete it. If you delete it, LR can easily make another copy. You can make "virtual copies" of the same image with out filling up your hard drive
I could go on and on
The solution is simple, get a 30 day free trail, then treat your self to a months subscription of Kelby Training and watch Matt Kloskowski lessons
Yes, like switching from film to digital, there is a lot to learn, but once you have mastered it, you will wonder how you managed with out it
if you need the special effects of CS4, LR allows you to edit in CS4 then save your image in the lightroom data base
Posted 1 year ago # -
elvishefer said:
There are 36k images tracked by my copy of LR4 at the moment. My lightroom catalog directory is 38.8 GB, and contains 53,353 files in 36,753 folders Very loose math puts catalog growth at approximately 1MB per image tracked.I use a Mac with Aperture. Just for comparison...
I have around 40k images stored 'straight-from-camera/scanner' taking up 200GB. Until recently they were on an external Firewire drive.
The catalogue is around 60GB.
OK, so that's a size overhead of 30%. But well worth it. Non-destructive editing is so easy, brings so much peace of mind and encourages you to be adventurous.
Without any doubt, Aperture is the most useful software I've bought. Ever.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Thank you all so much for all your replies, you've all really helped. LR4 certainly seems to come highly recommended. I am a bit concerned about the amount of disk space you all seem to say your portfolios are taking up, as my only computer is a windows vista laptop with a 3/5 full HD, I'm a bit concerned about trying it? Can it be installed and run on an external drive? Also as I asked earlier, do I need to buy a commercial license copy of LR4 for professional (paid) use, or can I use/is there only a consumer version?
Posted 1 year ago # -
There is no "consumer" version, but it really isnt as expensive as photoshop. The cost is $150.00 I think thats a fair price for a really great piece of software. As far as diskspace, you can certainly run your catalog on an external hard drive if needed.
Try it out. You get 30 days free.
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
