Using Capture NX2, if I open the raw file and save to jpg changing nothing, I will get the same jpg as if it were shot in the camera, except the algorithms are better since it has a real computer and much more time to work and a 12 or 14 bit color gamut before compression.
This is hardly difficult. I can do an entire directory in batch while I am off doing something else.
In a crunch, you can open a jpg as raw in ACR but it is still 8 bit and compressed data is lost, in those cases, best to save as tif,
Regards .... H
D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8. Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.
@haroldp: I am about to load yet another Capture NX2 on my Thunderbolt Apple MacBook Pro and wondered what Nikon Rumors people and you in particular are using for a computer. I ordinarily do not IMPORT using Capture NX2 but am thinking of doing exactly that. Apple and Nikon both did not want to answer my questions about the process as they are to say the least two separate companies. So the process you are using should be the one I use from now on with this new(er) apple. Thanks, DaveyJ
I am currently on a mac mini (4 core i7 2.6ghz) running mountain lion. Photo's are on an external FW800 multi bay enclosure using OSX software based raid 1.
I remove flash cards from the camera and copy their contents into file system directories.
I never import directly into an editor.
I am a software professional and am more comfortable with OSX (actually UNIX) directory structures for organizing data.
Regards .. Harold
D810, D3x, 14-24/2.8, 50/1.4D, 24-70/2.8, 24-120/4 VR, 70-200/2.8 VR1, 80-400 G, 200-400/4 VR1, 400/2.8 ED VR G, 105/2 DC, 17-55/2.8. Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.
.....I shoot RAW but I cannot see any reason why editing would be any faster, if I shot jpegs
...... I am interested to hear from those of you who only shoot jpegs
Thanks for all the replies
I agree, if the client wants unedited jpegs, then there is no reason to shoot RAW
A lot of you agree, if you want the highest quality possible, it is sensible to shoot RAW and correct WB etc. in post
The dislike some of you have of using programs such as Lightroom, seems to stem from the time it takes to install, configure and learn LR , rather than the time it actually takes to do the editing
I have too many clients these days that want their images from the private jets and housing shoots I do that I don't have a lot of time to do editing anymore. This is a common problem I get questions about from my students so in my Photographic Rockstar course we talk about this. It's all about knowing which settings to use in camera during the shoot to reduce the amount of editing you need to do. Also by using the software dedicated to your camera (example I use NIK plugins and Nikon Capture NX2) you can ensure the camera settings convert seamlessly with the computer for the perfect picture and minimal editing.
I created the Top 10 Landscape Photography Tips which covers in camera settings to reduce editing among other tips. Let me know if this helps and what else you want tips on! I'm in the midst of creating a video series to reduce workflow.
Kristian Bogner
Check out my Photography Tips and find me on facebook for monthly giveaways!
I created the Top 10 Landscape Photography Tips which covers in camera settings to reduce editing among other tips. Let me know if this helps and what else you want tips on! I'm in the midst of creating a video series to reduce workflow.
I love "Don’t Pack Up Too Early"
Personally, when shooting landscapes, I would rather do the editing in comfort of my own home, rather than fiddle about with camera settings in the field
As I understand it view NX and capture NX will read the camera settings and apply them when rendering your NEF files. Can you make LR or Aperture do the same thing? Or would you have to make one profile/preset for "vivid" and another for "Neutral" and so on?
You can set LR up to apply the "jpeg" settings that were selected in camera for your raw files.
Sorry, but despite the above claims, there is no way for Lightroom to automatically apply your "JPEG" (camera) settings to your RAW files.
Lightroom processes RAW files using "presets", discarding camera settings. You can create your own "default" preset -- i.e., to manually emulate a set of camera settings, perhaps based on an existing preset -- but that one default preset will then be applied to all the RAW files imported from that camera, regardless of the camera's actual JPEG settings.
You could create several custom presets, for example, one to emulate Nikon's "standard" setting, another one to emulate "vivid", and "monochrome", "portrait", "landscape", etc. They wont be exact and you will need to manually apply them to each of your RAW files. You also wont be able to use things like "quick adjust" or turn on/off functions like D-Lighting because those settings will be ignored by Lightroom.
Personally, I don't think anyone really bothers with all that. If you really want your JPEG settings applied, then your best bet is to use Capture NX, or just shoot JPEG / RAW+JPEG to begin with.
To clarify, Adobe has created profiles that are designed to match the camera settings fairly closely and they do quite well. They are not the "Nikon" settings but are very close. If I shoot a custom WB it does seem to import that which is the main reason I use the Adobe creation. I don't care about the splitting of hairs, but you can set Lightroom to apply the settings. As far as I'm concerned, it works well and gives a good jumping point to start with. If you want the straight raw - you can always turn it off, or "un-apply" it while editing.
Of course JPEG settings are baked into the file so there is no worry about it.
Sorry, but despite the above claims, there is no way for Lightroom to automatically apply your "JPEG" (camera) settings to your RAW files.
Lightroom processes RAW files using "presets", discarding camera settings. You can create your own "default" preset -- i.e., to manually emulate a set of camera settings, perhaps based on an existing preset -- but that one default preset will then be applied to all the RAW files imported from that camera, regardless of the camera's actual JPEG settings.
You could create several custom presets, for example, one to emulate Nikon's "standard" setting, another one to emulate "vivid", and "monochrome", "portrait", "landscape", etc. They wont be exact and you will need to manually apply them to each of your RAW files. You also wont be able to use things like "quick adjust" or turn on/off functions like D-Lighting because those settings will be ignored by Lightroom.
Personally, I don't think anyone really bothers with all that. If you really want your JPEG settings applied, then your best bet is to use Capture NX, or just shoot JPEG / RAW+JPEG to begin with.
Go to the develop module, go to the bottom of the right hand panel and you will see the camera calibration controls. Providing you are displaying a NEF file, you will see under profiles a list of the jpeg settings you can select to display. This can be applied on import as a preset of course to save doing it image by image.
Those calibration controls are simply part of presets, which I've already discussed at length. See 2nd paragraph of my reply, I already talked about existing presets, creating your own presets, and applying presets during import.
I stand by my statement that "there is no way for Lightroom to automatically apply your JPEG (camera) settings to your RAW files"
Simple test. Suppose you're walking around a park:
For a few pictures here and there, you decide to turn on Active D-Lighting. For a few other pictures here and there, you decide to make them black & white using the Monochrome picture control setting. And for some pictures, you decide to make them Vivid.
Now tell me, during import, how to make Lightroom automatically apply Active D-Lighting, Monochrome, and Vivid settings to the relevant pictures?
jpeg Vs raw really depends on the job and the outcome, doesnt it ?
for work recently, i shoot only jpeg, because they need to available instantly, there is no time for editing .... it has its place, and jpegs are great, but ...
if you want to make a very good picture, editing and raw is essential imo. all of my good shots are heavily edited .... forget this "getting it right in camera" nonsense, i never get it right in camera.
for me, going out and taking pictures is simply collecting some raw materials. i will then go home and attempt to create something from the large quantity of rubbish i have collected.
editing is where you add (or at least enhance) a pictures personality, artistic angle, mood, focus .... and so on. editing can make an amazing picture out of a very average starting point. jpegs can be edited, but just not to the same degree as a raw .....
to give an example .... this picture is the last one i edited, it was a few months ago, i have been too busy to get out and shoot much recently, but i am sure you will be able to see the differences, and not only because it has been converted to black and white. this pic was taken the day i got my 10 stop filter, i was out testing it to see if i could smooth out the water in the foreground. it was a 10 seconds exposure, i was on a wobbly bridge, it isnt sharp, i had forgot to cover the viewfinder, it has a large pinkish band of lightleak across the middle of it, out of the camera its junk.
i passed over it for editing at first, just thought it was junk, but i liked the cranes, and after a few hours and maybe 5 attempts and getting a nice picture from it, quite suddenly, out popped this pic, which is now one of my personal favourites. raw allowed me to reduce the effect of the lightleak, enhance the light-to-dark contrast in the sky, boost the clouds, and a ton of other stuff.
imo, taking pics is like mining for ore, and editing is where you find and polish your gems
oh, and lastly, the final image just edits out the foreground water, which is what i was taking a picture of in the first place !
Comments
This is hardly difficult. I can do an entire directory in batch while I am off doing something else.
In a crunch, you can open a jpg as raw in ACR but it is still 8 bit and compressed data is lost, in those cases, best to save as tif,
Regards .... H
Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.
Thanks,
DaveyJ
I remove flash cards from the camera and copy their contents into file system directories.
I never import directly into an editor.
I am a software professional and am more comfortable with OSX (actually UNIX) directory structures for organizing data.
Regards .. Harold
Nikon N90s, F100, F, lots of Leica M digital and film stuff.
.....I shoot RAW but I cannot see any reason why editing would be any faster, if I shot jpegs
......
I am interested to hear from those of you who only shoot jpegs
Thanks for all the replies
I agree, if the client wants unedited jpegs, then there is no reason to shoot RAW
A lot of you agree, if you want the highest quality possible, it is sensible to shoot RAW and correct WB etc. in post
The dislike some of you have of using programs such as Lightroom, seems to stem from the time it takes to install, configure and learn LR , rather than the time it actually takes to do the editing
Denver Shooter
I created the Top 10 Landscape Photography Tips which covers in camera settings to reduce editing among other tips. Let me know if this helps and what else you want tips on! I'm in the midst of creating a video series to reduce workflow.
Kristian Bogner
Personally, when shooting landscapes, I would rather do the editing in comfort of my own home, rather than fiddle about with camera settings in the field
hope this does not break the advertising rules
Option 1
Option 2
Lightroom processes RAW files using "presets", discarding camera settings. You can create your own "default" preset -- i.e., to manually emulate a set of camera settings, perhaps based on an existing preset -- but that one default preset will then be applied to all the RAW files imported from that camera, regardless of the camera's actual JPEG settings.
You could create several custom presets, for example, one to emulate Nikon's "standard" setting, another one to emulate "vivid", and "monochrome", "portrait", "landscape", etc. They wont be exact and you will need to manually apply them to each of your RAW files. You also wont be able to use things like "quick adjust" or turn on/off functions like D-Lighting because those settings will be ignored by Lightroom.
Personally, I don't think anyone really bothers with all that. If you really want your JPEG settings applied, then your best bet is to use Capture NX, or just shoot JPEG / RAW+JPEG to begin with.
Which is why I can not remember how to do it
but think it is possible
Of course JPEG settings are baked into the file so there is no worry about it.
Go to the develop module, go to the bottom of the right hand panel and you will see the camera calibration controls. Providing you are displaying a NEF file, you will see under profiles a list of the jpeg settings you can select to display. This can be applied on import as a preset of course to save doing it image by image.
@Avalanche - hope that helps.
I stand by my statement that "there is no way for Lightroom to automatically apply your JPEG (camera) settings to your RAW files"
Simple test. Suppose you're walking around a park:
For a few pictures here and there, you decide to turn on Active D-Lighting.
For a few other pictures here and there, you decide to make them black & white using the Monochrome picture control setting.
And for some pictures, you decide to make them Vivid.
Now tell me, during import, how to make Lightroom automatically apply Active D-Lighting, Monochrome, and Vivid settings to the relevant pictures?
Short answer: you can't.
for work recently, i shoot only jpeg, because they need to available instantly, there is no time for editing .... it has its place, and jpegs are great, but ...
if you want to make a very good picture, editing and raw is essential imo. all of my good shots are heavily edited .... forget this "getting it right in camera" nonsense, i never get it right in camera.
for me, going out and taking pictures is simply collecting some raw materials. i will then go home and attempt to create something from the large quantity of rubbish i have collected.
editing is where you add (or at least enhance) a pictures personality, artistic angle, mood, focus .... and so on. editing can make an amazing picture out of a very average starting point. jpegs can be edited, but just not to the same degree as a raw .....
to give an example .... this picture is the last one i edited, it was a few months ago, i have been too busy to get out and shoot much recently, but i am sure you will be able to see the differences, and not only because it has been converted to black and white. this pic was taken the day i got my 10 stop filter, i was out testing it to see if i could smooth out the water in the foreground. it was a 10 seconds exposure, i was on a wobbly bridge, it isnt sharp, i had forgot to cover the viewfinder, it has a large pinkish band of lightleak across the middle of it, out of the camera its junk.
i passed over it for editing at first, just thought it was junk, but i liked the cranes, and after a few hours and maybe 5 attempts and getting a nice picture from it, quite suddenly, out popped this pic, which is now one of my personal favourites. raw allowed me to reduce the effect of the lightleak, enhance the light-to-dark contrast in the sky, boost the clouds, and a ton of other stuff.
imo, taking pics is like mining for ore, and editing is where you find and polish your gems
oh, and lastly, the final image just edits out the foreground water, which is what i was taking a picture of in the first place !
edit edit edit (i even edited this post)