I've been told that NEF is proprietary code and that Adobe NEF's conversion in Lightroom and Camera RAW is reverse engineered since they do not have access to Nikon's NEF code. Therefore NX2 does a better job editing and converting NEF images to TIFF or PSD. Is this true, and if so, does it really do a better job?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

My understanding, and I'm sure I'll be corrected, is that the raw image data in the NEF is basically a TIFF file accessible to anyone. The camera settings are encrypted, though, and Nikon provides a way for the converters like Camera Raw to get the white balance but they don't pull anything else since they aren't using Nikon's SDK.

"Better" is one of those terms that is hard to quantify. Many people think that Nikon's software does a better job of raw conversion for two reasons: no one knows the format better than Nikon and they can use all the camera settings. It's debatable, really. I personally think that NX provides the best raw conversion but it's by a slim to slimmer margin than in the past.

Each generation of Camera Raw makes a more compelling case to drop NX. And if you're even remotely interested in batch processing or speed there's almost no contest.

FWIW, a RAW file is not a tiff with metadata. It is simply a data file with luminance values for each pixel and camera settings like contrast, color space, sharpening, etc.

Once this file is loaded into NX 2, for instance, all these settings are applied to an image constructed by the editor that you then view and edit.

There in lies the problem for other editors. While the bayer filter is known, the actual filter applied to each sensor for each model is subtly different, based on the characteristics of the sensor, (like exactly the precise color frequency that the Red, Green or Blue filter is going to allow through at a given pixel), and only Nikon knows that for sure.

I certainly noticed a big difference on my two camera's images once I switched to NX 2. I had previously used RAWshooter and ACR and tried out DXO Optics Pro.

""

Nikon told me that any 3rd party that uses their SDK can read all the data in a NEF file. Adobe has chosen not to use the SDK, so they can only read the WB setting and none of the other Nikon camera settings. They also cannot properly process ADL images. So if you want to start with an image taht already has applieda ALL of your camera settings and also allows you to change them in post then you must use a post processing toll that uses the SDK, and ADOBE is not one of them. So ADOBE applies their own approximations for settings, but as I just said they are approximations. If you want to invest the time and effort you can eventually get your image to look like what you saw on the LCD, except for any ADL settings you used. I am an advanced user of Photoshop and I choose to use NX2 because it is much easier to get an excellent result without a lot of work.

Bob Baldassano
My Nikonians Gallery

"Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the
camera"

Retirement is a gift of time - Don't waste it!

This comes from Ben Long's book on NX2 (p. 145):

"This process of interpolation is called demosaicing, a cumbersome word derived from the idea of breaking down the chip's mosaic of RGB-filtered pixels into a full-color image. There are many different demosaicing algorithms. Because the camera's ability to accurately demosaic has a tremendous bearing on the overall color quality and accuracy of the camera's images, demosaicing algorithms are closely guarded trade secrets."

And that process can happen in-camera (as with processing a JPEG) or on the computer (which Ben Long argues is better, because there are no time constraints in processing as there in-camera, unless you have a high end camera with a faster processor). But if it's a "closely guarded trade secret", then I presume that's something that Nikon doesn't reveal in the SDK. I.e., all of the data is there in the file, but how to "demosaic" it in the Nikon way, isn't.

Thom Hogan's books go into some more detail. Basically there are several ways to demosaic and each have different tradeoffs. The Bayer pattern itself is well known but I'm sure each place has their clever ways of handling it.

I keep hearing that Adobe can read the WB setting in a NEF file.

Why then, does it not apply it accurately?

If you set a K value in camera (say 5200), Adobe will consistently display it as 5050K. My camera tells me it is 5200K; NX2 tells me it is 5200K; Adobe tells me it is 5050K.

Not a big difference but if it is reading it from the NEF file then why is it displaying it wrongly?

DJ

I've not done any experiments but anecdotally I've not seen that to be the case in my pics.

I see the same difference in the K values between the camera and Adobe Camera RAW. The camera only allows you to set the K value, but ACR has both K values and Tint. I tried every preset in the camera and checked to see what ACR listed for the white balance - none agree. I don't think this is unique to Adobe, not sure if any RAW converters agree on the white balance values.

Adobe developed Camera profiles that are very close to Nikon's conversions with camera settings at nominal. Anyone hear any rumors that they may enhance this on a future release of ACR - maybe CS5?

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I'm sure they'll continue but I don't think we'll see it soon. They wouldn't change the existing ones but would have to create new ones so that people's existing settings won't be changed.

>the idea of breaking down the
>chip's mosaic of RGB-filtered pixels into a full-color image.
>There are many different demosaicing algorithms.

This is key IMHO. A raw file is a pretty crappy looking image. Dark. Pixelated with only three colours (red, green, blue). In need of smoothing and sharpening. Etc. The raw data out of any sensor needs a lot of processing. During this processing, decisions are embedded in the mathematical calculations on what would be thought by a reasonably large audience as a good rendition of the original scene (actually, what would be appealing to the viewer as most images these days are saturated beyond the original scene to give them punch). Note that appropriate white balance in an image is an opinion, not a fact. That's because our brain is constantly recalibrating on what it believes is white in what we are looking at. Knowledge of the sensor, sensor electronics, and in-camera electronics and embedded software can help a lot in this processing. The theoretical advantage to Nikon is they know the sensor well (some they buy from Sony but I'm sure get a lot of inside info), know the in-camera processing of that sensor data to create the raw file, and can then pick up on the processing in Capture NX2 with a competitive advantage.

Cheers,
Peter

I need to ask a question, and not sure where to ask the question . . .

Question: how to organize pictures -- I have ordered Capture NX2. Before I get too tangled up in setting my table here -- how should I start???

I have Picasa (Mac version) on my I-Mac. Do I only use C-NX2 to title pictures, or use Picasa or another? Do titles transfer from one software to another, or only in that software? It is a lot of work to go through and name or label pictures images.

I have registered for the C-NX2 class in Dallas the end of May, so I will be holding images until I get up to speed there. I want to name or label images now -- thus the question -- of this part of the workflow.

I have a 300s, but many pictures from the past years on a PowerShot S45 that I want to work on as well. Now with the 300s shooting in Raw + JEPG fine. Suggestions please.

Thanks, Roger

Roger

This is probably worth a separate thread.

I use Nikon Transfer to download images. When I download the images I create a separate folder with a shortened version of the location or occasion and the date. Multiple downloads on the same date are coded 01, 02, etc so every download has a separate folder. At the same time in Nikon Transfer I rename my images with a similar structure. I also include a 5 digit number for each image that increases with each image transferred and does not repeat. With this approach I can always search by loaction, date or image number. I rate all images and discard the bottom third. Then everything gets backed up onto two storage devices. All this is done before I reformat my CF card.

From a workflow standpoint, after everything is backed up I create a Best of X folder with all the Selects for a shoot or location - approximately the top 2-5% of images from a shoot. These images are the ones that are edited. I delete all images from the original folder on my hard drive retaining just the backup versions on my storage devices (my negatives) and the Best of X version while processing. The Best of folders are backed up periodically - to both drives. Ultimately the best of the best of images that have been edited (about 0.35%) are uploaded to my website and the Best of Folder that has been backed up is deleted on my computer.

Based on the numbering system, I took about 35,000 images in 2009. My one needed enhancement is a better system for keywords and tagging. Jason O'Dell suggested Photo Mechanic since I have a NX2 centric workflow. Lightroom is better, but really requires an Adobe centric workflow.

Eric Bowles
Nikonians Team
My Gallery
Workshops

Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera

Eric, thanks for your quick and great response.

If you don't mind, I would like to ask a few questions as I get going on filing and naming.

I just returned from six days in Arizona at Spring Training games taking about 1,500 pictures.

On NX View, I could just keep each day separate, but I did several things each day: visit the minor league camp with practices and their games, then the major league practice and their games, and some fan shots. It might be better to make new folders for: minor league practice; minor league game; major league practice; major league pre-game (batting practice and field practice); major league game; fan shots. And then move the days into those files (rather than days).

Then with each one, that offers a new question. If I am in the file of Minor League practice, a file could be:

Spring Training 2010 minor league

2010/03/22 minor bp 1 (bp being batting practice)
2010/03/22 minor bp 2
2010/03/24 minor drill 1 (drill being one of the many drills they do)
2010/03/24 minor drill 2

New file: Spring Training 2010 minor games

2010/03/22 minor game 1
2010/03/22 minor game 2
2010/03/24 minor game 1
2010/03/24 minor game 2
2010/03/24 minor game ser pit 1 (example: a series of 1 pitcher throwing with 8 shots)
2010/03/24 minor game ser pit 2 (thus, 8 shots here . . .)

So, above I might have a 1) file, 2) inside that file - dates and specific with number of shots in their series or event.

Then I could flag the best and the best of the best for quick find.

Suggestions please.

As you know, the tough part is -- taking days to name each image -- I want to get it right the first time.

All of this happens prior to any fixing of images.

After the "naming" -- then place them on external hard drives or disc with the names on them -- ????

Thanks, Roger

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Roger

I don't think you want your names to do everything - just be logical and scalable. And don't do anything crazy like having a bunch of files with the same name.

I visited the St. Augustine Alligator Farm last year on two trips totalling 5 days of shooting. I averaged 300 images per session and two sessions per day. I use key words to identify the type of bird (great egret, tricolored heron, snowy egret), and in some cases the type of shot (birds in flight, landing, head shot). My names were specific to the location and date. With any image from the 3000 images I took, I can find the rest of the series, those immediately before an after, or the similar images that were selects.

I think some of the things you are looking for are better handled with key words. Photo Mechanic does a nice job recognizing Nikon ratings and tags, while letting you apply key words to a group of files. My suggestion would be to try Photo Mechanic if you are routinely going to have large numbers of images to handle and keyword. If you don't need keywords, the Nikon products are probably adequate.

You can apply key words when you import using Nikon Transfer, but it really slows down the process because you have to create so many small batches.

Eric Bowles
Nikonians Team
My Gallery
Workshops

Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera