NX2 vs Lightroom

[Calxoddity]

Hi,
I did a comparison of ViewNX, Aperture and LR RAW processing before I chose Aperture to process my NEFs - I'd more or less decided that Aperture was going to be my DAM after trying LR and it, but wasn't sure about the quality of the processing.

I discovered that whilst Aperture didn't recognise the NEF secret sauce instructions that the camera embeds in NEFs and that ViewNX / C2NX recognise, the processing was better. By better I mean more latitude in recovering underexposure and blown highlights as well as much lower noise in high ISO shots (this really surprised me).

C2NX might be better than ViewNX though - not sure how they compare. Anyhow, I no longer use ViewNX for anything and don't miss it one bit. I was considering C2NX for editing, but after finding PSE6 on sale for $50 (woohoo), that became a non-issue!

If you have an Adobe-shaped brain, you might find LR works better for you. Enjoy the experimentation...

Regards,
Calx (away from the mac and away from home)

[kaiser]

I believe ViewNX and NX2 use the same RAW conversion/rendering engine - View NX simply has less parameters to play with.
Really surprised about your conclusion comparing Aperture with NX2 RAW conversion though - NX2 seems to have overwhelming support as the best quality RAW converter for NEF images. It also has respectable noise handling in RAW conversion, although there are other supposedly better third party options out there (Neat Image, Noise Ninja etc.)

In regards to Light Room, I believe Adobe have released a plug-in / settings that bring its RAW rendering very close to NX2 quality. Any LR users have any experience with this?

I'm still going to stick with the View NX > NX2 combo. The user interface and cataloging isn't as pretty and intuitive - but at the end of the day I still reckon its going to let me get the best quality out of my NEF files.

Coming back from Europe in June with thousands of NEFs to process - its going to be a lonnnng process.
On that note - can any NX2 users reccomend any useful NX2 tutorials/books/eBooks. I have been reading up on the tutes on the US Nikon site but thats it so far. Definitely still on my training wheels for this program!.

p.s - Found this review on NX2 - Praising on some some levels, scathing on many others. Like all reviews, take it with a grain of salt. Everyone has different needs and opinions.
http://diglloyd.com/diglloyd/free/Ni...NX2/index.html

[Calxoddity]

Count me as suprised also. I wasn't expecting the result when I did the comparison.

Straight off the camera, ViewNX does a better job with default colour rendition - more "pop" in the photo that faithfully reflects my settings for higher saturation. In Aperture I need to move a couple of sliders to replicate the effect. Ti was something that I was quite willing to live with though, as Aperture's other features and DAM capability were just not available in ViewNX.

The processing of low noise photos was an unexpected but welcome suprise. I was prompted to do that particular comparison because of an article I read somewhere that bagged or praised Aperture's low noise performance. Rather than take what was said at face value, I decided to test it with a couple of high ISO photos I took of a Darwin sunset.

The photos were ISO 1200, dusk shots and included buildings silhouetted in the shot. Ran the same RAW through Aperture and View NX and looked at the results side-by-side on the 24" screen. Chroma noise was much better on Aperture - there was nastly green and magenta blotching on ViewNX in the building's shadows. I thought Aperture might have fudged the result by smoothing everything out, so I checked the line and edge sharpeness. No problems there - it was again cleaner than ViewNX. Note that both these results had no noise reduction applied, nor any other adjustment - they were straight onto screen.

Regards,
Calx

[arthurking83]

..... as Aperture's other features and DAM capability were just not available in ViewNX.....

Regards,
Calx

I'm curious as to what DAM content is not available in View or Capture, that's available in Aperture or LR..... or any other DAM/cataloguing software.

The metadata tab in View(and Capture) is quite detailed, with a wealth of supplementary info available for embedding into an image, via the XMP/IPTC tab.
Capture and View seem to operate in a similar fashion with the addition of this metadata.
Quite easy to batch edit a series of images detailed info too.

I've found that the latest version of View is great with the manner in which you can add geo-tagged info into an NEF(if that's important to you)!
(Can't see that option in CaptureNX2 though)
One of the reasons I got a Dxxx series camera body is that one day I thought it may be handy to add geo-tagged info into an NEF via a GPS.
Having a cumbersome GPS attached to a mobile little device such as a DSLR is annoying and drains battery power sooner rather than later. It's expensive, if you want slimline/less obtrusive devices too, so imagine if you could do that in the comfort of yoru own home, after you've taken the image.. and on any Nikon digital camera ever amde, not just the higher end models(we're talking about NEF's here remember!)

It's much easier to do that on a jpg without the need for a dedicated GPS on the receiver, but now ViewNX makes it as easy as remembering where you were, and using GoogleMaps to pinpoint the location on their maps.. you simply point the image to that location and you're done!
Not a vital metadata requirement, by any means.. but if the need ever arises where GPS information is required in an image.. or series of images it's there.

It's easier done with jpg images too, as there are many software based alternatives where you can add a GPS tracklog to a series of images, and from that tracklog you can batch edit GPS info into the jpg image... but it's much more risky doing that with NEF images!!.. as I found out recently.
I tried to add geo data into an NEF using ExifTool(via the GUI, ExifToolGUI), and the image became slightly corrupted.
A well respected pro recommended against editing EXIF data in NEF images as there is no guarantee of full compatibility.

I'm assuming that Nikon software is compatible enough not to cause me any issues with NEF's
While you can't edit the exif data within NEF's using Nikons software(and I have no need to do that either) jpg is more standardised file format so there is less risk.
And it's handy having that ability to add geo-tagged info into your negative.

Considering all this though, I have to say I don't use DAM in any of the 40K plus images I currently have stored on my PC ...
I simply use a logical(to me) filing system to find my images.

One day I'd love to start the process of embedding detail info into my images, especially geo-tagged data.. but I currently have too many images to worry about, oh... and more photos I need to capture

If I did find a reason to add value to the metadata information, I can't yet see any limitations in either View or Capture.

I'm curious as to what kind of DAM data anyone adds to their images.. simply to see if I'm missing out on something(that could be important).

[Calxoddity]

The whole DAM thing (oooh... look! a pun!) for me was a case of change now or get stuck with a photo filing system that was becoming increasingly unwieldy. ViewNX was okay at what it did, but I like Aperture much better - more flexibility.

I don't have 40k photos - more like 4k. I can imagine there'd need to be a compelling reason to switch with that many to worry about.

The trial versions of Aperture and Lightroom are readily available if you want to explore their capabilities - much more useful than me trying to justify additional features that may be irrelevant to you (especially as I'm working on my work PC interstate and have no access to the apps in question!!)

Regards,
Calx