Capture NX rant

[Retief]

I cannot for the life of me wish for anything beyond NC 4.4.2 to work on my NEF files. It does everything I need, followed by some finishing touch post processing (mostly presentation stuff, if needed) in PS CS.
I have said so right here since I first laid eyes on NX and say the same today.

Folks said the same thing when the Model T rolled off the assembly line, and I imagine they said that the first time they saw a Train, Horse, Camel, Wheel, on and on.

Do you upgrade your copy of PS?
Your copy of your OS of choice?
Your camera?

Sorry if this sounds a touch harsh, but things do move forward, and in the case of NX the compelling thing for me is the ability to do in one step what took me 4, 5 or more between Capture and PS.

 

[Frits]

Folks said the same thing when the Model T rolled off the assembly line, and I imagine they said that the first time they saw a Train, Horse, Camel, Wheel, on and on.

Do you upgrade your copy of PS?
Your copy of your OS of choice?
Your camera?

Sorry if this sounds a touch harsh, but things do move forward, and in the case of NX the compelling thing for me is the ability to do in one step what took me 4, 5 or more between Capture and PS.

Well Bill, I consider myself quite avant-garde as far as technological evolution goes (I got rid of the Model T some time ago :smile: ).
That said, I do not want the "latest and (supposedly) greatest" of everything, just for the sake that it is new. How many folks aren't dying for the next Nikon, right after getting the latest on the market? - goes with a mind set methinks. That particularly goes for software. I'll get something that really adds value for me. I have had just about all versions of Photoshop, but I did not get CS2 - not worth it to me. I doubt that I will get CS3, but I am not fully up to speed with its features yet, so we'll see.

So, to answer your question:
My Photoshop: CS
OS: XP Professional
Camera: D2x

Now, I am sure that for some (many) the issues are different and that a particular upgrade is very much worth it. They then are correct in their own right.
It is just that needs differ.

 

[ozarkshome]

Bill, I would have thought at your advanced age you would have started with the "horse and buggy".

:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

NX has some cool stuff in it. It does seem to me that I can process photos quicker in Aperture. Likely because I am a bit more familiar with it. The control points in NX is a great concept and very useful from time to time.

 

[andreasb]

Thank you every one for betatesting this product for me and others. I was going to download this version but now I wont, I'll wait for 2.0 and evaluate it then.

BTW ALL of the problems you all describe could have been avoided if Nikon and Nik would have had a proper beta & testing program in place. Not only on the features side but for random bugs like crashing on different systems. It is flat out amazingly incompetent.

Now the question is really which of the other converters one should consider using, that is not Nikon dependent (and Nikon camera dependent should one choose to switch) and that has great color, sharpness, workflow and ideally a web publishing solution. I will spend alot of time th enext months to figure this out what my long term solution is. Nikon Capture is not likely to be the direction I go...

on the shortlist
Bibble
Lightroom
Adobe Bridge/ACR
IView Pro?
Capture Phase one?

what else should one check out?

 

[Dayo]

I Love NX!!!!!!!

Yes it is not perfect but it gives me the best photo quality and that's what counts to me. This may be because I don't shoot weddings etc and have never even used the batch feature.

I wish they will fix a few things but I will continue to use NX + PSE3.

 

[Retief]

Well Bill, I consider myself quite avant-garde as far as technological evolution goes (I got rid of the Model T some time ago :smile: ).
...
It is just that needs differ.

Apologies for being a touch "over-snippy" this AM, being awakened at 4:28AM by a chirping Smoke Alarm has detrimental affects on mental stability :redface: :redface:

You do make a great point regarding "differing needs", and often just switching to the "latest and greatest", without understanding consequences, can be quite a bad idea for sure.

 

[MontyDog]

#1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;

 

[Retief]

Thank you every one for betatesting this product for me and others. I was going to download this version but now I wont, I'll wait for 2.0 and evaluate it then.

BTW ALL of the problems you all describe could have been avoided if Nikon and Nik would have had a proper beta & testing program in place. Not only on the features side but for random bugs like crashing on different systems. It is flat out amazingly incompetent.

what else should one check out?

Andreas, in general I don't disagree with your assesment, but this is sure not just a Nikon/NIK phenomenon. I have dowloaded Lightroom and find quite a bit to like, but they had a very long, very public, Beta program, and while I have not had LR crash on my yet, I sure have had some "strange behavior", which I have asked about here as well as on the LR forums at Adobe. When you see some of the complaints, it is obvious to me that Adobe has some of the same issues with dev priorities, and they can't even fall back on not having a Pulic Beta.

I'll be interested to here your comments on this as well.

I have yet to download CS3, I want to be sure I have detrimental affects caused by having such a plethora of competing apps on my system first. My problem, not that of any of the programs.

 

[Philippe Roger]

Lightroom Questions Thread, mine are near the bottom. I'm trying to give LR a "fair shot", but I'm running into some simple things that I can do in NX and PS that don't seem possible in LR. So far I haven't found a reason for spending another $200, although I find that v1 does render NEFS much better than early Beta's.

Bill, Indeed I can't see a way to keep individual steps in the history and trash others (like you use layers in Photoshop and Edit Steps in NX).

However, I'll point out that Capture (NC 4.4) does not have this feature, nor do lots of other graphic programs. Even PS has a history palette that works like Lightroom does: I don't think that layers were intended to be used as you do, but that's the beauty of PS, there are so many different ways to do the same thing!

What many programs do have is undo capabilities and sometimes multiple levels of undo. Lightroom has multiple undo in a way that is actually pretty easy (keep typing control-Z and it tells you what was undone), and visual, if you refer to the history panel, which I hardly ever do.

Now, I am not trying to tell you that you are wrong, but that Adobe and many others don't necessarily offer non-linear history, which is what you are asking. Yes, it would be nice to have, but no, it's not a deal breaker (for me! :wink...

Ranting on NX is fine, but I really do, strangely serious for me, question why everyone is giving Adobe a pass on the stupid things in Lightroom? It is not like this is a $50 piece of software, but for some reason we want to rant, complain, moan about Nikon products but ignore all the simple things, like no Dual Monitor Support, in Lightroom, and I can list another 5 or 6 for that matter. But, after all, this is an NX rant, and I sure wouldn't dare hijack Rory's thread :biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:, in any language...... :wink:

Lightroom is a different kind of program compared to NX or NC or PS, where the workflow is what is being optimized as a whole. I understand it is similar in concept to Aperture and they both depart from the browser + developer (Bridge + ACR, or Nikon View + NC/NX). People have been pretty vocal about things they didn't like (such as not exposing the file structure in the database) and Adobe listened. Not here, but where it belonged: in the Adobe's forum after doing a Beta program (lasting what? 6+ months?). Well, Nikon didn't do that and probably never will... and they will keep getting flack after the release, because that is the first opportunity that people have to complain, and people do like to complain, don't they? :wink::smile:

 

[andreasb]

You're right! NX is not the only one; Lightroom has it is issues, It is clearly a rushed out program that lacks very important functionality (sharpening and dual monitor support to name a few...).

I believe it is a response to Aperture. As suchs it holds promise and the next version that should not be to far out (I'm sure they have been working in paralell on it) should address at least these two issues and also speed. I would love to see a Windows Vista version that handles images through Directx 10, with Image and graphics performance that blows us away, gives us a real reason to upgrade to a Vista Machine. We know Adobe can do fast graphical performance, like superfast hardware zooms from CS2, thats another thing we need in Lightroom.

Andreas, in general I don't disagree with your assesment, but this is sure not just a Nikon/NIK phenomenon. I have dowloaded Lightroom and find quite a bit to like, but they had a very long, very public, Beta program, and while I have not had LR crash on my yet, I sure have had some "strange behavior", which I have asked about here as well as on the LR forums at Adobe. When you see some of the complaints, it is obvious to me that Adobe has some of the same issues with dev priorities, and they can't even fall back on not having a Pulic Beta.

I'll be interested to here your comments on this as well.

I have yet to download CS3, I want to be sure I have detrimental affects caused by having such a plethora of competing apps on my system first. My problem, not that of any of the programs.

 

[Retief]

Bill, Indeed I can't see a way to keep individual steps in the history and trash others (like you use layers in Photoshop and Edit Steps in NX).
...
Lightroom is a different kind of program compared to NX or NC or PS, where the workflow is what is being optimized as a whole. ...

Well, Nikon didn't do that and probably never will... and they will keep getting flack after the release, because that is the first opportunity that people have to complain, and people do like to complain, don't they? :wink::smile:

Thanks for the response, and you have actually hit the crux of my issue right on the old nosey, that of optimizing workflow. So far my choices, none of which I like, are to accept that sometime inexplicable things may happen in NX that I may or may not be able to recreate. In Lighroom, so far I have to accept that a standard workflow I had in Photoshop which saved me a lot of time and trouble, and which by the way I can easily do in NX, is not available. I'm confused as to how LR has "optimized" my Workflow, unless, of course, I CHANGE my workflow. And look at the other "optimizations" such as sharpening and such without an equal analog from the workflow that current folks are doing. I grant the "good bits" are really nice, the Targeted Changes for example are very much like Control Points in NX, but if other bits cause me to take more time, I don't see much "optimization", unless a good case can be made for why this is "better", rather than just "different".

As to Nikon and Complaints after Release, I'm not sure which is worse. We complain about Nikon because they have some sort of "selective" BETA which doesn't seem to suit most of us, but Adobe has a very public BETA which ends up with a "released" version missing fundamentals like Dual Monitors, and looking at the Adobe forums, that has been a complaint from the beginning. Which is worse? I don't know, as noted, I think the both stink :Confused: :Confused:.

 

[Retief]

You're right! NX is not the only one; Lightroom has it is issues, It is clearly a rushed out program that lacks very important functionality (sharpening and dual monitor support to name a few...).

Andreas, I've got an idea, but don't tell anybody, just between you and I. How about we form a company, you are the smart guy who can figure out the marketing and funding bits, where we figure out how to mash the good bits from NX into the good bits from LR, now THAT would be the ticket, eh?????

Wait a minute, then Rory would start a Rant on Andreas and Dumb Old Dewey thread, hmmmmm, I think I'll think on this idea a bit longer ......



Don't know about you, Andreas, but I'm getting to old and feeble to keep going through this stuff ...., we should leave it to the Young Whipper-Snappers like Rory and Philippe :biggrin:

 

[annedi]

Anybody tried LightZone ??

It is unusual -- based on a 16-zone system -- very Ansel, eh?
The Zone Finder window works kind of
like a combo of Threshold in PS and Color Points in NX.

A bunch of goofy Life Events happened during
my 30-day free trial, so I didn't get to fully investigate LightZone.
But I was definitely intrigued by it and plan to try it again
....when I finish cleaning up the mess my hard
drive crash made of things....groan !!

 

[andreasb]

I think that the difference is that Adobe knew full well these features where missing, and I bet they have a team working on addressing it. Lets hope that doesnt take to long!


I bet the felt they had to release a response to Aperture now to stem the tide a bit...

Who knows what Nikon is up to in this regard ....

Thanks for the response, and you have actually hit the crux of my issue right on the old nosey, that of optimizing workflow. So far my choices, none of which I like, are to accept that sometime inexplicable things may happen in NX that I may or may not be able to recreate. In Lighroom, so far I have to accept that a standard workflow I had in Photoshop which saved me a lot of time and trouble, and which by the way I can easily do in NX, is not available. I'm confused as to how LR has "optimized" my Workflow, unless, of course, I CHANGE my workflow. And look at the other "optimizations" such as sharpening and such without an equal analog from the workflow that current folks are doing. I grant the "good bits" are really nice, the Targeted Changes for example are very much like Control Points in NX, but if other bits cause me to take more time, I don't see much "optimization", unless a good case can be made for why this is "better", rather than just "different".

As to Nikon and Complaints after Release, I'm not sure which is worse. We complain about Nikon because they have some sort of "selective" BETA which doesn't seem to suit most of us, but Adobe has a very public BETA which ends up with a "released" version missing fundamentals like Dual Monitors, and looking at the Adobe forums, that has been a complaint from the beginning. Which is worse? I don't know, as noted, I think the both stink :Confused: :Confused:.

 

[barrymt]

Just downloaded NX1.1. On my computer it is slow. No crashes though.

My workflow tends to be based on results of a Ron Resnick class last year with some modifications.

1) I tend to review my NEF files in CS2 Bridge and select keepers from there.
2) Adjust as much as possible in NC 4.4.2.
3) Save as max quality jpg.
4) Load in PSCS2 (when in bold mood use CS3 Beta) and complete layers stuff, add signature, bevel, drop shadow and then print if required.

Yes I prefer NC 4.4.2, but it doesn't do much that PS does. NX1.1 is an upgrade, but not suree it will ever be a complete stand alone

I am curious about my workflow and if you have any comments.

Barry

After posting noticed the next listing here are positive comments re NX by Andrea B. (Annedi) and her comments re J Odell's tutorial helping out. Thanks for the comment. I will be ordering his e-book and see if that doesn't solve some of my problems with NX
Barry

 

[hillrg]

Oh dear, what have I started

Workflow and raw conversion is a very personal thing. Either you like a program or you don't. While I am officially on the LR two monitor bandwagon, it is not a deal breaker for me - after working with the LR UI I actually like the single monitor UI. However, to learn to like it you have to learn a bunch of keyboard shortcuts and practise until they become second nature. Also, this was an excuse for me to get the Dell 30" LCD :biggrin: I suppose you could do the same thing with NX - no wait, NX does not have many shortcuts

LR has several inovations that I really like: the new curves adjustment, the new crop paradigm, the targeted adjustments, the simple print module and a fast/fun workflow. And most of all, adobe gets it - programs have to be fast and stable.

However, every program has its shortfalls, so I expect to be using several for a while to come. If I could only have one program then I suspect it would be Bibble.

 

[hillrg]

Rory,

You are my hero - thank you for expressing exactly what I feel (and pretty much my experiences, too) so eloquently!

I agree 100% with the issues you have highlighted.

Shucks :redface:

On that note, I better get my butt in gear figuring out how to make Ditto work with LR :smile:

 

[Retief]

You, sir, are just a royal Trouble-maker, and I hope you are thoroughly ashamed, shame, shame , shame on you :biggrin: :biggrin: I just wish I could tell you that you are wrong, but if I did, I couldn't "type" it with a straight face.

You bring up a great point regarding how much a "personal taste" thing this is. For me, it is often an issue of what 'clicks' in my brain, and frankly, I wish that some of those "cool things" you note were not in LR, because then I could rationalize ignoring the danged thing. To me, the dual monitor thing is more what I consider a lack of Adobe paying attention to their current user base than a "deal breaker". NX does have a bunch of shortcuts, unfortunately they have also forgotten a bunch, such as one to apply all the settings with a single keystroke rather than forty-eleven mouse clicks, or to provide a way to change the default and turn off that stupid "override" dialog when you do want to past settings. I sure wish NX didn't have some really cool things like Control Points and Edit Steps so I could rationalize just dumping it. Wait, didn't I just say much the same about LR????????

Yeah, I hope you are proud of yourself, for putting this old, senior citizen into such a dither. It's all YOUR fault :wink: :wink: :tongue:

It is good that we have the competition, hopefully this will yield something that each of us can make good and efficient use of.

In all seriousness, for a brief moment, I do want to thank Rory for all the help, both public and private, for helping sort through all these nitty-little-bits that really are incredibly important to what we do.

Oh dear, what have I started

Workflow and raw conversion is a very personal thing. Either you like a program or you don't. While I am officially on the LR two monitor bandwagon, it is not a deal breaker for me - after working with the LR UI I actually like the single monitor UI. However, to learn to like it you have to learn a bunch of keyboard shortcuts and practise until they become second nature. Also, this was an excuse for me to get the Dell 30" LCD :biggrin: I suppose you could do the same thing with NX - no wait, NX does not have many shortcuts

LR has several inovations that I really like: the new curves adjustment, the new crop paradigm, the targeted adjustments, the simple print module and a fast/fun workflow. And most of all, adobe gets it - programs have to be fast and stable.

However, every program has its shortfalls, so I expect to be using several for a while to come. If I could only have one program then I suspect it would be Bibble.

 

[brianjb]

I couldn't agree more with the OP. I started to get turned off by Capture after I realized how slow it is in comparison to Bibble. Bibble has really opened my eyes allowing me to see what Capture should really be like in terms of speed and effeciency of the UI.

Capture is the slowest RAW program out there, and with NX it got even worse. I see all these posts talking about how much faster version 1.1 is. The problem is that it went from unusable to turtle slow. So yes it is faster but still not as fast as anything else out there. I want to be taking pictures and other activities rather than waiting for a poorly written program to finish a task that is instant in other programs.

 

[brianjb]

Andreas, in general I don't disagree with your assesment, but this is sure not just a Nikon/NIK phenomenon. I have dowloaded Lightroom and find quite a bit to like, but they had a very long, very public, Beta program, and while I have not had LR crash on my yet, I sure have had some "strange behavior", which I have asked about here as well as on the LR forums at Adobe. When you see some of the complaints, it is obvious to me that Adobe has some of the same issues with dev priorities, and they can't even fall back on not having a Pulic Beta.

I'll be interested to here your comments on this as well.

I have yet to download CS3, I want to be sure I have detrimental affects caused by having such a plethora of competing apps on my system first. My problem, not that of any of the programs.

Every new product will have issues regardless of the testing procedures put in place. There are simply too many unique situations to completely eliminate them all which is why bugs are still found years after a product is released.

IMO the biggest difference between Adobe's approach and Nikon's is that Lightroom is much more polished than NX was at release and still is at version 1.1. Sure they both have problems, but it is clear that Nikon is using paying customers to do their beta testing. In fairness, I doubt Nikon has the development team that Adobe has for Lightroom.