I've decided to get one of these. But which one?

I like the simplicity of the Photomatix Pro and the fact that it is much less expensive. Is the extra money for the Nik HDR Effects Pro really justified? (It costs almost 75% more).

Secondly, is the U-point technology in the Nik software easy to use? (I remember using it with Nikon NX, which I no longer use for various reasons, but never did get around to using it well enough).
Your views would be appreciated.

Thanks.

Rohinton

Rohinton

I tried Photomatix and did not like it. Immediately, when HDR Efex was made available, I downloaded the trial (which I recommend) and like what it can do. I find that it is very easy to use (I use the LR version) and the upoint technology is excellent and recommend watching the available (free) training videos on Nik Software's site. I have the entire LR collection and use all of Nik's plugins. Vivesa 2 is a must have too.

I did a quick write up on my blog.

http://www.frankkendralla.com/2010/10/nik-software-hdr-efex-first-impression.html

drFrank
www.frankkendralla.com
www.kendrallaphotography.com
www.kendralla.com

+1 for what Frank said!!

-August

De l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace!

HDR Efex Pro has more tools available coupled with far greater fine tuning of the merged image. Photomatix has now fallen to second place. The only trouble with NIK products is they are slow to come to the table with 64 bit updates to the rest of their products.


Best,

Chuck

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Color Effect Pro is now downloadable as 64 bit. D-fine and Sharpen Pro are supposed to be 64 bit by the end of 2010.

Jerry

Probably sooner. Silver Efex is already out, too, as is Viveza 2.

Rick Walker

My photos:
GeoVista Photography

Download from our library of Image Doctor podcasts here

I'm wondering the same thing. I use Capture NX2 for my post processing. Which program will interface better with NX2? Any NX2 users tried both? Any and all feedback is appreciated.

Pat

Pat,
I use NX2 for all my basic image processing also. I am also a huge Nik fan, using Color Efex Pro on all my images. I own all their software. I immediately downloaded the HDR software when it came out.

But for now I'm sticking with Photomatix v. 4.

Here is why. The Nik software is very processor and memory intensive, so it fails to complete the tone mapping most of the time on my Vista machine. It runs out of memory. I have to transfer the .tiff files to my Windows 7 laptop to run conversions there. They still take a lot of time.

Photomatix 4 runs fast and gets the job done. I haven't noticed any substantial diffference,but I am not a geek-type compulsive tester.

I take the tonemapped tif, usually default settings, back into NX2 and finish it there.

Photomatix runs stand alone, and Nik HDR runs in general in another application like LR or Photoshop. Jason Odell's blog shows how to run it standalone.

I have found upon my limited use that using U-points in the HDR conversion process in Nik leads to a different "look" in that part of the image that doesn't blend well into the rest of the image. But maybe I don't know what I am doing.

For now, I will stick with PM 4 and use the Nik HDR when I have problems. I just haven't seen that much difference in the output yet between the two.

My workflow:
1) Take the bracketed shots.
2) Select these images in ViewNX and then "export" them from the file menu as tiffs to the folder I'm using.
3) Open that folder in Photomatix 4, import those images. Run the HDR conversion, tonemap at default value, save the resulting tiff in the same folder.
4) Right click the tiff in ViewNX to open in NX2, finish image there with ColorEfex pro filters.
5) "Open with" to Photoshop from NX2 file menu to convert to black and white with Silver Efex or to sharpen and print.

My 2 cents.

Rick M.

http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/dynoGallDetail.asp?photoID=10960359
http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/dynoGallDetail.asp?photoID=10960127
http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/dynoGallDetail.asp?photoID=10831160
http://www.betterphoto.com/gallery/dynoGallDetail.asp?photoID=10190517

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

If you have SEP for Lightroom you can open the last tiff directly from NX2 using "open with". You might want to save the last color tiff before doing this because I think SEP will overwrite that file. This might save you another step.

I am now using SEP directly from NX2 so I don't have to open Photoshop at all. Saves time and a lot of fooling around.

Mike

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I think if you are a Nik user already it's an easy decision, maybe not so much if you aren't.

I'm a long time Photomatix user and I tried the Nik trial with some HDR's I had found problematic in Photomatix and found that Nik got essentially the same results. I've also switched to using exposure fusion instead of HDR with Photomatix and like the results I'm seeing. I have, but don't often use, NX/2 but I'm not up to speed on U-point, so that may bring something to the table that Photomatix lacks.

I use Photomatix through LR and both it and the Nik HDR work just fine as plugins, so no real difference in that regard.

I'm kind of a software junky having been a developer for many years, so I may get the Nik product eventually, but for now Photomatix' capabilities are all I need.

Charlie...
stalking light

Nikonians Team Member

I have been using Photomatix Pro (recently upgrading to version 4), but thought that I would download the trial version of Nik's HDR Effects to compare. My take? Well, while I like some of the controls of HDR Effects, it has been a hit or miss with it crashing my Photoshop about every 1 in 3 attempts. I am using the 64-bit version with Windoze 7.

I haven't totally given up the trial, but am leaning towards keeping Photomatix, as it has rarely failed me, and ... it is paid for!

Larry

"Every moment in life is unique and will never be repeated. These are the moments that present the greatest opportunity for a photographer..."

>I have been using Photomatix Pro (recently upgrading to
>version 4), but thought that I would download the trial
>version of Nik's HDR Effects to compare. My take? Well, while
>I like some of the controls of HDR Effects, it has been a hit
>or miss with it crashing my Photoshop about every 1 in 3
>attempts. I am using the 64-bit version with Windoze 7.
>
>I haven't totally given up the trial, but am leaning towards
>keeping Photomatix, as it has rarely failed me, and ... it is
>paid for!
>
>Larry
>
>"Every moment in life is unique and will never be
>repeated. These are the moments that present the greatest
>opportunity for a photographer..."

This is a known bug (that NIK is working to fix) for PS and 64bit. I use it in LR with no issues of it crashing. I suggest emailing their tech support and ask for an extension of the trial when the bug is fixed.

drFrank
www.frankkendralla.com
www.kendrallaphotography.com
www.kendralla.com

I've been playing around with Oloneo PhotoEngine and I'm quite impressed, even in beta. I'm probably going to buy this when it goes to full release. I've been comparing it to Photomatix 4.0 and I like the interface, the speed, and the IQ of PhotoEngine.

Ernesto Santos
esartprints.com Ernesto Santos Photography

I tend to agree with drFrank. I like the control HDR Efex Pro offers, but I own the complete collection and use the tools regularly.

I have to say though that PhotoEngine looks interesting.

--SteveL

I downloaded/purchased HDR Efex Pro the day it was released and I'm luvin it!!!
I'm a NAPP member so I got it for $129
I use the whole suite of their products as well and they all work very well together.
I also use Photomatix Pro but this is infinitely easier to use and gives you so much more control, especially w/the other NIK products.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)
Attachment #2, (jpg file)

pix_man, don't know if you want to hear this, but if you own the complete Nik collection, you can get HDR Efex Pro for $99. You have to call them though.

--SteveL

I've tried both. I really liked photomatix and will probably use it once in a while, especially for deriving "surreal" images. But Nik HDR gives me better, more realistic tone-mapped images. I find the adjustments to be finer and more sensible (intuitive).

I've never bought any Nik software before, so I don't have a Nik bias ... although I'm probably about to develop one.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.