New - NX Studio

Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
19,496
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
I prefer not to immediately ingest my image files into some program; I prefer to have the choice and the control over what I'm going to do with the images and where they'll go.

That's fine. I just want to make sure that people who are following along don't get the incorrect impression that when we make the decision to immediately ingest image files into a program doing so removes any control whatsoever over what we are going to do with our images or where they will go.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 9, 2005
Messages
28,984
Location
Moscow, Idaho
I prefer not to immediately ingest my image files into some program; I prefer to have the choice and the control over what I'm going to do with the images and where they'll go.
I am NOT ingesting files into a program. They are on my HD and accessible by ALL my programs. And a backup copy goes automatically, and simultaneously to my backup disc. Nikon Transfer allows me to create a new folder, or sub-folder, or use an existing one. I can rename files to something meaningful,
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,527
Location
Alaska
Real Name
Dan
I am retired, I have plenty of time on my hands and I hardly consider clicking on a folder and dragging-and-dropping it from the card reader to the desktop is a huge "extra step." Sure, if I were a wedding photographer, a portrait photographer, a sports photographer or someone else with an employer or a client base and time was of the essence in promptly processing and editing the images to deliver to them, that would be a much different scenario.
Good reminder that we all have different needs based on how/what/how many images we shoot. I got by for years using Nikon View NX as my RAW converter by simply exporting images one at a time as needed in TIFF format for further PP in other software. I grudgingly started using LR when I started high volume shoots. Now it would be hard for me to give it up or switch to another DAM program.
I prefer not to immediately ingest my image files into some program; I prefer to have the choice and the control over what I'm going to do with the images and where they'll go.
I'm by no means familiar with every software package but have used at least half a dozen or more. I've yet to run across one that does not provide the option for the user to dictate where the files are stored. They may default to placing files in certain locations unless told to do otherwise but I've yet to see one that takes control of the directory.
 
Joined
Sep 23, 2006
Messages
1,127
Location
Pennsylvania
I've never used Nikon software. There are so many very good software options available today there is just no reason for me to try Nikon s/w.
I used to use the older program (NX-D ?). It did the job but was slow. Now I already have a combination of relatively low cost or free programs that I use on Mac and PC and it's hard enough remembering how to use those, so I wouldn't want the challenge of learning the quirks of yet another program. I did download it to take quick look at it and it seems to have everything one would want so I might give it a try in the future if my other programs fall short for some reason.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
18,717
Location
Hong Kong
Real Name
Phil
Aside from being free, the use of Nikon "picture control" settings is the only advantage to the Nikon software. So if one wants SOOC results with RAW files it's really the only option. Or someone who shoots RAW+jpeg and wants to start editing a NEF file that looks like the jpeg version.

Early on I reasoned that no one knew more about converting NEF files than Nikon so I used the Nikon product (I forget what it was called) as my RAW converter and output TIFF files for pixel crunching with other programs. The software back then was actually written by Nik and used their control point feature. Like any software one of the big challenges was getting used to the interface. But ultimately as someone stated above Nikon is in the camera business. They stink at writing software. After they parted ways with Nik things went downhill IMO. At any rate we each have our own needs/requirements and whatever works is fine. When I started doing high volume shoots I switched to LR for RAW conversion. Never did really use the in camera "picture control" settings so didn't lose anything with the switch.
If I remember correctly, in those early days, Nikon software was the only one that could get the white balance right.
 
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,527
Location
Alaska
Real Name
Dan
If I remember correctly, in those early days, Nikon software was the only one that could get the white balance right.
That's correct. Early on Nikon would not release the necessary code for anyone to interpret the WB info in the NEF file. Developers figured it out anyway. Though even now what is the "right" WB. If I open a NEF file in Nikon software, DxO, or LR, the WB/colors look different in each. Also if you look at the k value and tint for the various presets(e.g. "daylight") they all use different numbers. So ultimately I'm not sure that any of the RAW processors generate the "right" WB. As users we each just have to figure out what works in a given program.
 
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
19,496
Location
Northern VA suburb of Washington, DC
So ultimately I'm not sure that any of the RAW processors generate the "right" WB.

That's exactly why I always use Auto White Balance set in the camera. I rarely have to change the white balance during post-processing but when I do have to change it, I can't imagine that using any particular raw converter would prevent that. When I'm doing studio stuff with gels on all of the light sources, I should change the white balance to a particular K value, but I rarely remember to do that. It's a good thing my style of photography doesn't require absolute color accuracy.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,200
Location
New York State
Certainly leave WB on Auto in the camera anyway —although it doesn't do so well under very low-voltage Tungsten, Candlelight or discontinuous spectrum lighting (such as Fluorescent or Sodium) light sources. That way, the shot will look presentable on the camera's back screen.

For final editing, I find it essential to create my own Camera Profiles with a set of different Light-sources for each individual camera.

Explore the use of something like xRite's Color Checker Passport and use it to create your own Camera Profiles. Then use editing software which will permit you to load those Camera Profiles.

Then shoot RAW and save yourself the trouble of messing around with those Nikon "Picture Controls" which honestly have absolutely no value — unless you mistakenly believe that it is possible to check exposure and colour-correct accurately by looking at an sRGB JPG Preview representation on a Non Colour-Managed camera screen!

Even the in-camera Histogram is of very limited value because it only indicates the data in the displayed JPG Preview but not the full range of data captured in a RAW NEF.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom