RAW file processing in nikon

Qarik

Someone said something to me that didn't sound quite right. They said if you edit your raw files from a nikon camera using the nikon capture tools, you will retain more data and even have greater resolution (number of pixels) then if you import to say PS.

I scratched my head and nodded but kinda doubted him in the back of my mind. I figure RAW files are standard format and that's that. But I don;t use the nikon capture tools.

Is there any truth to this?

jfriend

Same number of pixels with Nikon or any other RAW editor. Sometimes RAW editors treat edge pixels slightly differently so they could vary by a couple pixels, but not meaningfully.

The main settings difference between Nikon and others is that the Nikon RAW editor will read your camera settings from the Nikon RAW file and apply those in-camera settings to your RAW data when you view it in Capture NX. Because those settings are not documented, no other RAW editors read those settings except for white balance (which they all read).

Some people find this an advantage of the Nikon editor, but it doesn't matter to me because I shoot RAW so I don't have to fuss with all these in-camera settings to get what I want. I set them they way I want when I'm doing the RAW processing.

In summary, Nikon gets no more data and no more resolution out of the RAW files. They do get some in-camera settings like curves, contrast, etc... which others don't.

Malindi

jfriend wrote:

Same number of pixels with Nikon or any other RAW editor. Sometimes RAW editors treat edge pixels slightly differently so they could vary by a couple pixels, but not meaningfully.

The main settings difference between Nikon and others is that the Nikon RAW editor will read your camera settings from the Nikon RAW file and apply those in-camera settings to your RAW data when you view it in Capture NX. Because those settings are not documented, no other RAW editors read those settings except for white balance (which they all read).

Some people find this an advantage of the Nikon editor, but it doesn't matter to me because I shoot RAW so I don't have to fuss with all these in-camera settings to get what I want. I set them they way I want when I'm doing the RAW processing.

In summary, Nikon gets no more data and no more resolution out of the RAW files. They do get some in-camera settings like curves, contrast, etc... which others don't.

Many thanks ... This is one of those rare moments where you browse before you ask and actually find an answer. I had the question: Why does Nikon ViewNX show pics the way I wanted them rendered with in-camera settings and Lightroom doesn't? Now I know..

The next quest will be to figure out how to use the Nikon download software to distribute the files into folders by year/date... and that way I can add my copyright into the file without having to import it into LightRoom and essentially have TWO copy of the same RAW NEF image.

jasonstone

Maybe this helps - it's what helped me make the jump to shooting only RAW and using LR2 for all my processing

http://www.onethirdstop.com/

This guy spent ages working on LR2 defaults that replicate, more or less, the Capture NX look.

Obviously this is not a 1:1 reproduction for reasons mentioned by the last poster but I found that in 95% or more of the cases it was better and more accurate than the JPG out of the camera.

YMMV

Good luck

Cheers, Jase

Malindi wrote:

Many thanks ... This is one of those rare moments where you browse before you ask and actually find an answer. I had the question: Why does Nikon ViewNX show pics the way I wanted them rendered with in-camera settings and Lightroom doesn't? Now I know..

The next quest will be to figure out how to use the Nikon download software to distribute the files into folders by year/date... and that way I can add my copyright into the file without having to import it into LightRoom and essentially have TWO copy of the same RAW NEF image.

Malindi

jasonstone wrote:

Maybe this helps - it's what helped me make the jump to shooting only RAW and using LR2 for all my processing

http://www.onethirdstop.com/

This guy spent ages working on LR2 defaults that replicate, more or less, the Capture NX look.

Obviously this is not a 1:1 reproduction for reasons mentioned by the last poster but I found that in 95% or more of the cases it was better and more accurate than the JPG out of the camera.

YMMV

Good luck

Cheers, Jase

His website seems out for the moment.

jasonstone

Malindi wrote:

His website seems out for the moment.

Don't know I just tried it then and it worked...
Maybe try again?

Malindi

jasonstone wrote:

Don't know I just tried it then and it worked...
Maybe try again?

works now, thanks!

Malindi

jfriend wrote:

The main settings difference between Nikon and others is that the Nikon RAW editor will read your camera settings from the Nikon RAW file and apply those in-camera settings to your RAW data when you view it in Capture NX. Because those settings are not documented, no other RAW editors read those settings except for white balance (which they all read).

I just installed Irfanview and the plug-in pack as well .... seems the camera settings come accross just fine ...

The pics look identical between Nikon ViewNX and Irfanview. And it's fast.

jaswebpics

Each program interprets the raw data differently based on someone's decision on the proportion of red to green to blue data to mix in to make 'correct' colour.

This Adobe document is a must read:
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/pdfs/understanding_digitalrawcapture.pdf

Malindi

jaswebpics wrote:

Each program interprets the raw data differently based on someone's decision on the proportion of red to green to blue data to mix in to make 'correct' colour.

This Adobe document is a must read:
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/pdfs/understanding_digitalrawcapture.pdf

Thanks for that. Good read.