Nikon Capture NX2 usage.

[arthurking83]

Nikon software in effect have no DAM tools.
The keywording ability is there, that's for sure, and I use both ViewNX and sometimes CaptureNX to add data into the keywording, but there is nothing that you can do with this data other than to read it back when the file is opened.
You can't search for any of the keywords using Nikon's software(which seems a ludicrous concept. They allow you to add it, but make it close to impossible to search for it.

I use IDImager for my DAM management, it reads all the keywords in all their gory detail, and searching for them all is quick and easy

[I @ M]

Seeing as some people who have used CNX and expressed the thoughts that it is slow I thought I would conduct an experiment regarding the speed CNX2 works at and the time taken with "work flow" the way I do things and present some pretty accurate times.

I selected 10 NEF files from the same series and folder that were similar enough to be used as a batch processing experiment.
All were between 15 and 18 mb in size.
I put the stop watch on one to see how fast it opened to be ready to process = 6 seconds.
I did fairly standard / typical processing and for the purpose of the experiment added 2 filters from the Nik Software range.
I saved that file which created an 85mb cache file. Saving time = between 3 and 4 seconds.
I then saved and named the settings that I had used as a .set file to apply to the 10 images I had selected.
I then told CNX to batch process those selected files and to apply the same enhancements with the saved .set file and to out put them as 100% quality JPEG images.
From starting the batch process to having 10 images processed and saved = 77 seconds or 7.7 seconds per image.

Given that some people who have used the program and found CNX to be slow, how do those results compare to the program/s that they have replaced it with.

[arthurking83]

Sounds about right to me Andrew(but you cheated!.. you have two of the fastest hdd's available to read from and write too! )

CNX is all about hdd speeds. Faster is an advantage for running CNX quickly and smoothly.

if your drives are slowish, you will see sluggish performance from Capture.

As an example, a file opened in CNX where the file is stored on my Samsung drive, the image is rendered sharp and smooth in about 1sec flat. Some already processed images may take 5sec to render completely.

Same files on my slower WD drives, which I've had since about 2005, produce woefully slower results. Same routine takes about 20 sec or so if the files are stored on the WD drives.
As a guideline: I have three Samsung F3 hdd's. Two with a model number of 103SJ(being the important faster versions, and and one 103SI variant being slower greener 5400RPM drive.
The SJ models easily sustain transfer speeds of 90 odd Mb/s and transferring files to and from these drives is markedly faster than any other drive on my PC(I have 5!.. plus the two externals.. 7 in total)
The Si drive only sustains about 45Mb/s over the long haul, and I've seen short bursts of 60-70Mb/s. The SJ's can give short bursts of up to about 120, but for a shorter duration than the SI's 60-70 short burst.
The old 250G WD drives only give about 30Mb/s by comparison over the short term, and can slow down to 20Mb/s or less over many hundreds of gigs of data. Of course your current remaining space availability is also going to make a difference too.

The performance difference is chalk and cheese.
I accidentally placed the OS/Programs on the slower SI drive instead of one of the SJ drives, and this makes the entire system run slightly slower overall.
When I did have the entire software system on the the faster SJ drives, everything felt perkier. CNX was instantaneous in it's operation. And I've said this before about the performance of it.
I don't disbelieve all those comments about it's sluggishness, and in fact I can imagine them all to be 100% accurate, but it does take a small concerted effort to set up your PC to get CNX to run smoothly.

As not many people are divulging their PC and software setups, I can only imagine that Capture is set on a slow drive, with the cache file set to the same OS/software drive and where the actual images(being edited) are also stored.

Setting all these parameters by hand to speedier drives can make a difference on a slower system.
All these variables are available for tweaking in the preferences section.

I'm curious as to whether anyone experiencing sluggish CaptureNX performance has ever tried to configure these settings and had any success?

FWIW, I've run CaptureNX since day one and never really experienced any problems with it. It used to run slower on my old PC(10 year old PC mind you), but so did everything else.
I did have trouble with v1.5 of ViewNX some years back where a dll caused me issues in opening any image files. Stuck with v1.4 until VNX2 came out and had no issues henceforth

Some months back I did strike a peculiar issue with colour management tho. no idea on what happened, but my mono toned images all looked different in CNX when compared to all other image viewers. LR3 is always different so that one didn't count as part of the group. I ended up having to set my colour space profile with my monitor calibration profile's ICC setting to get CNX to conform to what the image actually looked like.
it was the only way to make any sense of an image edited in CNX when viewed in another image viewer program.
Then without warning it seemed to correct itself(I think), where I had this crazy looking image on screen one day after opening CNX, and had to reset the colour space profile back to the default sRGB ICC profile.
The really weird bit was that the difference in rendering was only affecting the tonal rendering of monochrome images. All colour images were rendered exactly the same.

So I'm the first to admit that CNX is not without faults(and this one was very weird, self correcting(so far) and could have been due to some compatibility with my screen calibration software instead!?
But if I were to rate the usability/stability/performance of CNX and LR3 over the course of time I've used them, CNX would easily get 10/10 as I've hardly had any issues with it(long term), whereas I've had far too many crashes and bugs with LR3, where in dual monitor mode it continually crashed, always wanted to link/sync to my Bt connected PDA(where I rather it didn't!!) and there didn't appear to be any way to stop it doing that.
I remember being totally impartial to the Photoshop workflow way back when I first began digitally processing images, and I much preferred the simpler WYSIWYG do/undo method that every other software appear to use effectively.
I prefer my software to be at least more configurable in many ways and while CNX is not perfect, LR3 is even less configurable in some of the the most basic concepts!

[mongo]

Mongo uses it purely as a viewing aid for Nikon RAW (NEF) files and as a bulk resizing and bulk file conversion tool.

[farmer_rob]

Both CNX and VNX are resource heavy. There is something about the .net framework base that just sucks on older computers. I'll freely admit that on a computer better configured, it probably runs better. (PSE is no speed demon either and I suspect that Cs5 would barely start on my machine.) I'd have persisted with CNX if it had either a DAM function or could intergrate a bit more tightly with the PSE catalog. (I know there are alternatives for DAM, but I don't want to recatalog my existing library.)

[CarlR]

Used the trial version of CNX and liked it. Managed to get educational pricing for LR and PSE so have become a convert.

[I @ M]

Both CNX and VNX are resource heavy.

the other program that I tried recently was lightroom and it was using 18% more cpu to run an image than NX

Maybe a new machine helps Rob but those cpu usage figures I measured are from mine running View NX and Capture NX at the same time.
When I noted the lightroom figure the program was only running by itself.

The machine is a 64 bit OS with 8gb of ram.

Lightroom is a 64 bit program that should have been able to make us of all the goodness available.

View and Capture are only 32 bit programs and not able to use all the goodness yet they run faster and require less resources than lightroom.

On the old machine both Nikon programs were slower ( but still not as painfully slow as some ) and after following Arthur's advice about hard drives, the Nikon programs run faultlessly, as fast as others ( faster than some ) and use less processing power to do the job.

[farmer_rob]

Andrew, point taken but I think you are comparing a resource heavy program with a disgrace to the programming profession. Adobe programs do some wonderful things, but there are aspects to the way they interact and and work with the operating systems that make me hang my head in disgust.

[mongo]

Mngo uses it for viewing NEF and other files, great for RAW conversions, uses it for just some steps of a total editing chain.

However, just noticed a problem yesterday - it will edit and save changes to NEF and TIF files but when you edit a Jpeg with it, it says it saves the changes and probably does BUT Mongo cannot then open that Jpeg file in any other program (particularly CS3) !! So, to Mongo , it has even more limitations now but still usable for other things as mentioned.


Forget everything Mongo said above - He does NOT use "Capture NX2" - he was talking about "View NX2"

BTW - new version of Capture NX2 has just been released

[arthurking83]

Thanks Mongo.

Have just downloaded it, and normally I used to just download it without thinking nor looking at the updates to it.

In general, CNX updates are 60 or so Mb in size, whereas this update(full version but still an update) is over 100Mb in size!!

If you look at the list of updates for it, it specifically states that :

"This software now operates as a native 64-bit application under the 64-bit versions of Windows 7 and Windows Vista."

Whoot! .. took their damned sweet time about it, but whoot nonetheless!

There seems to be a new Astro NR option in there too according to some of the other feature updates, but most of the updates seem to be for the J1/V1 series cameras and a few (re)updates for the P7100.

[I @ M]

Whoot! .. took their damned sweet time about it, but whoot nonetheless!

Exactly my thoughts when I saw the updater flash me the message at 4.00 am Wednesday.
I downloaded and installed it an had a play and was quite impressed with the way it ran. A lot faster rendering images and instantaneous saves on edits!!!
Unfortunately, it was uninstalled and 2.2.8 was reinstalled in place of it.
Nikon and Nik software are seemingly not talking to each other at the moment as the Nik software filters, either version 3 or 4 are not compatible with CNX in 64 bit mode.

I will wait patiently for a compatibility upgrade but I aint holding my breath.

[arthurking83]

Ah! I didn't even know there was a version 4 to Nik's filters

But they don't work, so I'll be in the same pickle, up the creek as you .. so you'll have some company!

[gerry]

CEP 3.003 works fine with the 32bit CNX 2.3

I would not waste my time going back to 2.2.8, even the 32 bit version (2.3.0) is a substantial improvement.

there is some anecdotal stuff out there which refers to Nik waiting on Nikon before releasing the updated CEP for capture, this kinda makes sense since Nikon have invested in Nik software, however the capturenx plugin has certainly taken a back seat in recent years.

[arthurking83]

I did some testing myself too.

V2.3 is indeed faster, but more so in x64 mode than x86 mode.

In the end, if you have to run in x86 mode because you're running the CEP filter set, then the advantage is not as good.

For some reason, CNX2 runs and has always run very fast and smoothly on my PC.

I did the speed tests I found on the flckr website and can tell you that v228 on my PC did the test in 1m:05s, where v230 x86 mode did it in 58.6s.
By comparison, v230 in x64 mode ran the test in 47.4s, so I think until they upodate the CEP plugins to x64bit, the reality is that there is no point in stuffing about for minimal gains.

I read comments of sluggish and slow to render a large edited NEF file, but for me(and I remember for Andrew(I@M) CNX2 opened an NEF file of any type/edit, in a matter of a few seconds. Most of mine are opened rendered and ready to edit between 1-5sec. I can't see the fuss.
But for me(again in my testing) having a fast image storage drive is the key. If the stored images are on a slow drive then yes .. they take 20-30sec to open in some cases.

If CNX2 is running slow and sluggish, then maybe there is a reason to update to v2.3, and especially in x64 bit mode(if you're not using the Nik filters).

Amazes me that CNX2 was suddenly updated and released and finally to x64bit mode .... after all this time, and yet there wasn't a coordinated update to the Nik filter set as well!

Boggles the mind at how some companies simply don't cooperate together when they have a vested interest in each other's products.

Nik produced the Software that we know as Capture NX, so it's not as tho they didn't know what was going on! (unless Nikon used another software engineering company to re write v2.3

I'd say that Nik are probably going to release the CEP v4 update soon enough with x64 mode compatibility.

I've lost track of what I installed over the past few hours, but I think I'm now back to 2.2.8. I'll now wait for the x64 version of the filter set.

[davidd]

I just installed the 32 bit version as I use CEP v3. I have found even the 32bit version to be considerably faster then 2.28, so I would recommend the upgrade.

I have seen some benchmark tests by Jason O'Dell, and he says the speed loss in using 32 bit instead of 64 bit is only about 10%.

[arthurking83]

....
I have seen some benchmark tests by Jason O'Dell, and he says the speed loss in using 32 bit instead of 64 bit is only about 10%.

Jason doesn't specifically state this, but I'm sure he ran his tests in the Mac environment, and it seems that Mac users seem to be having more of the speed issues that CNX is(was) famous for.
The difference in speed between the two different version of 2.3 is more like 15-20%, and I'm only really seeing 10% difference between x86 2.3 and 2.2.8.

And remember this is for batch editing, I can't measure the differences in times between clicking to open an NEF and a finalised rendering of that NEF.

(I think) I still have a copy of CNX2 on my very old, now disused AMD XP3200 machine which is single core, non optimised and slow as hell(as far as modern PC specs go).
Can't remember if I wiped the original drive, or simply installed Ubuntu on another drive for the kids to play with.
I'll go check in a day or two .... or later tonight.

They must have re written some parts of ViewNX too tho, as they had to update it to work with the Picture Control utility.
Another issue for me on this current PC. ViewNX is lightning fast on here so I couldn't measure any speed differences other than for a large batch edit job lot.
But on my feeble tablet, VNX is rather slower .. due to the very low power system specs.

[I @ M]

Frustration has set in!

Alcohol may be the only answer.

I cannot get the CEP filters, either 3.003 or the earlier version, to work with CNX 2 / 2.3.0 32 bit.

If I install the program it simply doesn't show the filters.

If I attempt to install the filters I get a message immediately after the set up program un packs itself saying "Installation cancelled because Capture NX2 is not installed, please install Capture NX2 and try again".

Oh well, 2.2.8 was never that bad anyway.

[arthurking83]

The trick is that you need to have 3.003 installed with v 2.2.8 before you attempt the update to v2.3.

That is, apparently you can't install CNX 2.3 and then the CEP filters.

Installation sequence should be

1. install CNX 2.2.8
2. install CEP 3.003
3. uninstall CNX2.2.8 -> install CNX2.3(obviously in the optional 32bit mode.

I was also reading that you can still install CNX2.3 in 64bit mode and still run the program in 32bit mode in Windows too.
There's a how too for Mac, but there's very little info on doing it for Win.

If I head one day to capture some night time astro shots, I may update back to 2.3 one day, but at the moment I don't feel any need to rush into v2.3 due to the incompetence of the filter issue.

Seriously! .. how hard would have been for Nikon to say .. "Hey Nik bludgers!! We're making a 64bit version of your software, you wanna get cracking on the update for your filter sets at the same time!"


It really is a case of dumb and dumber with these two!!

[I @ M]

Installation sequence should be

1. install CNX 2.2.8
2. install CEP 3.003
3. uninstall CNX2.2.8 -> install CNX2.3(obviously in the optional 32bit mode.

Did that, repeatedly, no joy.

Seriously! .. how hard would have been for Nikon to say .. "Hey Nik bludgers!! We're making a 64bit version of your software, you wanna get cracking on the update for your filter sets at the same time!"


It really is a case of dumb and dumber with these two!!

The response from the tech in charge at C.R.Kennedy ( Nik software Aus. Distributor ) is that Nikon are the ones that stopped talking to Nik at the time of CEP 4 development.

[gerry]

Try uninstalling all of your nikon products including the .NET then doing a fresh install of 2.3.0 followed by CEP 3.003. Whilst it should not be necessary on Win7, i would also reboot between the uninstall and install.

I assure you that you can install CEP 3.003 after installing CNX 2.3.0.

"Hey Nik bludgers!! We're making a 64bit version of your software, you wanna get cracking on the update for your filter sets at the same time!"

as I@M mentioned, its the other way round, nik is apparently waiting on nikon.