Nikon NX Studio vs Lightroom/Photoshop

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Kjellis

Kjellis

Well-known member
Member's gallery
I‘m using Lightrom/Photoshop and Topaz Sharpen/Denoise for editing my photos. I‘m curious to how nikon NX Studio performs, can it replace Lightroom and Photoshop? And how does work together with Topaz as a workflow? Does enyone have some experience to share in this regard?
 
I shoot Canon so can't evaluate the NX Studio, but find myself in a similar situation where there are features of Canon DPP4 I like, but my point is you don't have to give up Lightroom/Photoshop. I start in Lightroom as an organizer, right click to choose "show file in exlorer," right click again to "open with" DPP4, let dpp4 do the raw conversion making sure I set white balance and other fundamentals, then the menu "transfer to photoshop." I keep photoshop preferences set to open camera raw when it gets a tiff file, so I get most of the lightroom/camera raw tools back again. One can get a similar toolset using the camera raw filter from within Photoshop.. Finally I save back in the same folder that Lightroom used, and once in a while synchronize that folder in Lightroom so it sees the edit.

It's a long round trip, but there are a few tools in dpp4 that Lightroom doesn't have, so I make the effort for keepers.
 
Member's gallery
The manufacturer's raw processor software is always much closer to raw file than a third party like Adobe. Adobe only sample one camera when building their software algorithms. I have always found Nikon software better at reproducing the in-camera profiles than Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom. I like the idea of using NX Studio for raw conversion and Lightroom for cataloguing. NX Studio does not yet handoff to Photoshop if you set it up as an external editor, it is promised in a future update. There is a workaround, have Nikon NXD as an external editor in NX Studio and Photoshop as an external editor in NXD. Adds an extra step but then you can go from NX Studio edits to Photoshop with just an extra click.

I find shadow recovery in NX Studio far better than Adobe's version and plan to switch to using NX Studio for processing for most of my work.
 
Member's gallery
I hosted the Nikonians webinar with Vincent Versace last week. He has used Nikon software for the front end of his workflow since the original Capture software. He believes the colors and rendition of the RAW file is better with Nikon Capture and Nikon Studio NX than any other program. He believes Studio NX is a very good program as long as you understand that this is the 1.0 version, and there are a number of features that are planned that could not be included in the initial release. It's not perfect, but there are reasonable workarounds. He is starting in Studio NX then finishing in Photoshop or other programs.

Lightroom has it's place for higher volume work. The ability to apply settings from one image to another or a group of images provides a very nice workflow. But that's a different type of editing compared to the fine art images and individual image editing Versace is doing with Studio NX.
 
Ad Astra said:
The manufacturer's raw processor software is always much closer to raw file than a third party like Adobe. Adobe only sample one camera when building their software algorithms. I have always found Nikon software better at reproducing the in-camera profiles than Adobe Camera Raw or Lightroom. I like the idea of using NX Studio for raw conversion and Lightroom for cataloguing. NX Studio does not yet handoff to Photoshop if you set it up as an external editor, it is promised in a future update. There is a workaround, have Nikon NXD as an external editor in NX Studio and Photoshop as an external editor in NXD. Adds an extra step but then you can go from NX Studio edits to Photoshop with just an extra click.

I find shadow recovery in NX Studio far better than Adobe's version and plan to switch to using NX Studio for processing for most of my work.
Click to expand...
I suppose another workaround would be to save it from Studio as a tiff back into the same folder with the raw files Lightroom uses, sync that folder in lightroom, then right click in lightroom to edit in Photoshop. Still extra work but makes it doable.
 
Member's gallery
Palouse said:
This is only true of the current packaging. Elements of NX have been available for almost 20 years.
Click to expand...

That's correct. It continues to be the programs where picture controls and camera settings are exactly the same as the camera. It also has control points - a great feature that is probably the best tool available for local adjustments. The gaps are elements that were in earlier programs or could have been released, but would have lengthened the time for development and delayed release.
 
Member's gallery
As I am a confessing Adobe-ophobic I can't tell about LR and PS, but I checked on NX Studio. It has everything that the old sister pair View NX-i and Capture NX-D plus a few functions extra, e.g. simple handling of videos. The main thing is that it's working based on native NEFs and is thus able to interprete ALL the information in thses files correctly, something that NONE of the third party software is able today. NX Studio does not feature selective processing based on masks or anything like that, so this is something to keep in mind and was one of the reasons to move to a third party program - DxO PL4. that said, I still use the Nikon software - now NX Studio - to do checks on my NEFs that are not shown by other software, like some detailed camera settings or the active focus point during capture. Knowing the history of the Nikon software loosing the capability of selective processing when going from Capture NX2 to NX-D, I have put in doubt that a new (free) Nikon software would feature this capability again and that - considering the market situation - they will come back with licensed software package that has to be payed for. NX Studio prooved this to be right.

I am totally happy with the software I am using today and teh improvements coming with the latest updates are promissing, especially because I have seen improvements in the interpretation of native NEF file information already.
 
Member's gallery
Woodpecker said:
As I am a confessing Adobe-ophobic I can't tell about LR and PS, but I checked on NX Studio. It has everything that the old sister pair View NX-i and Capture NX-D plus a few functions extra, e.g. simple handling of videos. The main thing is that it's working based on native NEFs and is thus able to interprete ALL the information in thses files correctly, something that NONE of the third party software is able today. NX Studio does not feature selective processing based on masks or anything like that, so this is something to keep in mind and was one of the reasons to move to a third party program - DxO PL4. that said, I still use the Nikon software - now NX Studio - to do checks on my NEFs that are not shown by other software, like some detailed camera settings or the active focus point during capture. Knowing the history of the Nikon software loosing the capability of selective processing when going from Capture NX2 to NX-D, I have put in doubt that a new (free) Nikon software would feature this capability again and that - considering the market situation - they will come back with licensed software package that has to be payed for. NX Studio prooved this to be right.

I am totally happy with the software I am using today and teh improvements coming with the latest updates are promissing, especially because I have seen improvements in the interpretation of native NEF file information already.
Click to expand...

I don't have any first hand or second hand knowledge, but Nikon has provided a free program for a long time. Nikon had View NX, View NX2, View NXi, Capture NX-D, and Now Studio NX. Capture NX2 required a complete rewrite to work with Windows and 64 bit processing, so Nikon took the cheap approach and licensed SilkyPix for Capture NX-D. But Studio NX contains most of the functions originally in Capture NX2 - and in a format that the software can move forward. Nikon actually has developers working on the software and owns the intellectual property.

It's exceptionally hard for any company to move a product from free to paid. DXO tried that with Color Efex and the Nik suite, but I'm not sure it's successful.
 
Member's gallery
EricBowles said:
I don't have any first hand or second hand knowledge, but Nikon has provided a free program for a long time. Nikon had View NX, View NX2, View NXi, Capture NX-D, and Now Studio NX. Capture NX2 required a complete rewrite to work with Windows and 64 bit processing, so Nikon took the cheap approach and licensed SilkyPix for Capture NX-D. But Studio NX contains most of the functions originally in Capture NX2 - and in a format that the software can move forward. Nikon actually has developers working on the software and owns the intellectual property.

It's exceptionally hard for any company to move a product from free to paid. DXO tried that with Color Efex and the Nik suite, but I'm not sure it's successful.
Click to expand...

Agree, I used purely Nikon software for post processing since moving to shooting RAW years ago and I still like it. The only thing that Studio NX is missing compared to Capture NX2 is the selective processing. To my knowledge the reason for Capture NX2 dying was that the technology around its selective processing capabilities (U-Point technology et al) was not intellectual property of Nikon but licensed to Nikon by Nik Software. When it came to a license contract conflict and they couldn't find a solution, Nik Software sold it to Google and that was the end of Capture NX2. In the meantime DxO has bought this technology, enhanced it and implemented it in DxO PL4. That in combination with the denoising function was the reason for me to move from Nikon to DxO software straight away.
 
Member's gallery
Woodpecker said:
Agree, I used purely Nikon software for post processing since moving to shooting RAW years ago and I still like it. The only thing that Studio NX is missing compared to Capture NX2 is the selective processing. To my knowledge the reason for Capture NX2 dying was that the technology around its selective processing capabilities (U-Point technology et al) was not intellectual property of Nikon but licensed to Nikon by Nik Software. When it came to a license contract conflict and they couldn't find a solution, Nik Software sold it to Google and that was the end of Capture NX2. In the meantime DxO has bought this technology, enhanced it and implemented it in DxO PL4. That in combination with the denoising function was the reason for me to move from Nikon to DxO software straight away.
Click to expand...

Studio NX does have control points for selective edits, but in the 1.0 release it does not have the other local adjustment features. I expect to see a lot more shortly. One of my favorite features was the ability to use Color Efex and other Nik plugins layers applied locally - all in the non-destructive NEF file.

Your guesses are not quite right. Nikon does own the rights to Control Points. They were a partial owner of Nik at the time, and retain that ownership right. Everything in Capture NX2 is owned by Nikon and available for future use. But Nikon did not want to invest in a major rewrite of the Capture NX2 to support future development, did nothing for a few years, and then licensed a version of Silky Pix as Capture NX-D. Meanwhile Nik was sold to Google for the value of Snapbridge. At the time, Google was getting ready for a major push with Google +. Google did nothing with development of Nik Color Efex and after a year under contract, the developers and other staff all went elsewhere (the lead developer is at Adobe). Google kept Snapbridge and sold the Color Efex suite - which had not been updated in 4 years - to Dx0.
 
Member's gallery
EricBowles said:
Studio NX does have control points for selective edits, but in the 1.0 release it does not have the other local adjustment features. I expect to see a lot more shortly. One of my favorite features was the ability to use Color Efex and other Nik plugins layers applied locally - all in the non-destructive NEF file.

Your guesses are not quite right. Nikon does own the rights to Control Points. They were a partial owner of Nik at the time, and retain that ownership right. Everything in Capture NX2 is owned by Nikon and available for future use. But Nikon did not want to invest in a major rewrite of the Capture NX2 to support future development, did nothing for a few years, and then licensed a version of Silky Pix as Capture NX-D. Meanwhile Nik was sold to Google for the value of Snapbridge. At the time, Google was getting ready for a major push with Google +. Google did nothing with development of Nik Color Efex and after a year under contract, the developers and other staff all went elsewhere (the lead developer is at Adobe). Google kept Snapbridge and sold the Color Efex suite - which had not been updated in 4 years - to Dx0.
Click to expand...

Wow, interesting insight, thanks. I think I'll ask my source of information a couple of interesting questions ... :cool:
 
Member's gallery
Must admit, I've been hooked on Capture NX2 since I acquired it with a D300. It stayed with me through the D800. The D500 was slightly more awkward, but raw2nef made it possible. Things have gotten more complicated with my D850 and Z7ii. I use Capture NX-D or Studio NX to open the files (or PL-4 if there is a specific tool I need, e.g. the Deep prime NR) and then export to CNX2. I have tried sticking to Studio NX, but although the control points are an improvement on their NX-D (and PL-4) implementations, CNX2 just seems to nail the areas I want more effectively. And the icing on the cake is the ability to combine the control points with the other masking tools - linear gradient, brush, etc - why have none of the more recent programs picked up on this?
I do love the extra options PL-4 gives on their control points - if the PL-4 developers could match the CNX2 selection performance (and get better at matching Nikon's colours), and add the other CNX2 masking tools (please don't talk to me about 'negative control points'), they would have the best of all worlds...
 
Member's gallery
I’m another “lover” of NX Studio. I Confess I don’t really do much pp and I’ve also got Affinity on both my Mac and my iPad Pro…..but rarely used until recent,y, since I now have the new Monterey OS and NX crashes opening raw files.
 
Member's gallery
Just a FYI: NX Studio has released a bug fix version (1.0.1) this past week. I was not bitten by bugs in the initial release, but I have just updated. I hope it doesn't introduce a bunch of new bugs!
 
Member's gallery
Normaly I shoot only RAW and use LrC for everything else. By accident My camera was set to RAW&Jpeg and after import to LrC I recognized big differences between the RAW and The Jpeg. Mostly the difference in distortion (LrC did lens correction) is strange.
In NX Studio the NEF and Jpeg looks identical.
By the knowing of Nikon engineers about lenses and sensors, and the need to produce very best Jpegs out of camera, the RAW-converter of NX Studio might the best you can get for NEF-Files.
 
Member's gallery
I wish NX Studio had the same capabilities as Lightroom which I am more familiar with. There are some things NX Studio does better with raw files from my Nikon cameras When I need the those advantages (especially noise settings) I will process a file through NX Studio first and then import it to Lightroom to finish up. I roughly process around 1000 pictures a day so I go with what I know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top