Nikon delivers brand new Nikon NX-Studio
Just out !
A new native image editing software by Nikon, named NX Studio, has just been released.
I gave it a very quick test drive.
Not bad at all, speed is not blasting, but not worse that C1P in big libraries.
It seems hal-way between the old NX2 and View NX-i (which is removed when installing Studio, by the way).
It is free of charge, and of course, reads and can edit the in-body settings and Picture Controls.
To my opinion: a serious contender for the Nikon Express and the C1P Nikon versions.
-
Prompted by your post, I've just been giving it a try. Fairly horrible, I'd say. It runs appalling badly on my pretty new MacBook Pro: sometimes the screen blacks out when you move a slider, so you can't see the effect it has had until you stop. Sometimes it redraws the image in rectangular blocks, a bit at a time.
The only reasons I can think of so far for wanting to use it would be as a stopgap if Nikon brought out a new camera that wasn't yet supported by C1, or if its being free was an important consideration. I haven't compared it with the Express for Nikon version of C1, so I am not sure whether it has more or fewer features than that. But so far I wouldn't call it a serious contender compared with C1 Pro.
Others may have different views, of course.
Ian
-1 -
HEllo Ian,
Thanks for giving it a go and feeding this discussion.
Strange that you have so many problems.I run on an old Mac Pro (rev 5.1) - 11 years old on Mojave, and it goes "ok".
As said, it is not a monster of speed - although the previews load almost instantly, even in 1000+ pictures folder. Much much faster than the old NX-D.
Did not have black screens.
But yes, the redraw is very slow once you are above 100% of the size. Below, it goes reasonably smoothly.For me, the biggest point is the ability to read the Nikon settings - on some images (mainly portraits), the skin tone difference is huge. Much smoother, more nuances.
1 -
It'd be great if you could keep your off-topic spam to yourself, troll...
-4 -
It'd be great if you could keep your off-topic spam to yourself, troll..
I beg your pardon ????
0 -
Left or right ?
(out-of-cam import, "landscape" applied in both cases).
0 -
Ah the good old Keith, he wont like anythig if you dont praise CO enough and hymn the software
1 -
Well, in the meantime, I must say that NX-Studio, although slightly unstable and clearly not mature, is delivering very fine de-matricing results.
Very useful also to see the "initial" white balance, when you have doubts on C1P.
For me, it will be a keeper. With C1P on the side for finer and layers editing. But when a quick developing is needed, NX-Studio definitely does the job.
1 -
Claude, are you using NX-Studio as part of your workflow with CIP or independently? I'm considering ways that I can integrate it into my current C1P workflow process.
0 -
Hello Doug,
Must say I haven't found streamlined workflow yet, as C1P doesn't understand the changes made in NX Studio. Which is, to my view, a pity, as both programmes could be a great match.
So for me, its is a bit of "either or", and also "both".
If I make a shooting of "familiar" subjects, meaning w/o a need for fine-tuning, I do it with Nikon's in-body Picture Controls activated, and develop the files in NX Studio. (The shooting banks in the camera are great for that ... as long as you don't forget to chose the right one !)
If I expect it to be subject to greater quality requirements, I use C1P (or a workflow based on PureRAW and C1P).
Now that's the theory. It happens often that I re-open a C1P-meant file in NX Studio, simply because I like the possibly more nuanced dematricing of the Nikon software... en end up with two versions !
0 -
Thanks Claude. That's very helpful to know. I appreciate hearing about your experiences. I suspect that my workflow(s) will resemble yours a great deal.
0 -
What makes it difficult is that Studio NX integrates the edits IN the NEF file - meaning you have a versioning integrated in the pict, which is a great plus for portability and sharing.
On the other hand, C1P makes the edits in a preview file, never touching the NEF/RAW. It's definitely faster, possibly safer.
I would welcome a C1P/Nikon version that would be a merge between NX Studio and C1P, with the ability to read Picture Control settings (that's a decent part of what you are paying for when buying a Nikon cam..), AND giving the opportunity to save the edits either in the NEF/RAW file or in the C1P database.
But I think I am dreaming too high ...
0 -
>Claude CAUWE: ...Studio NX integrates the edits IN the NEF
Really?
My copy of NX Studio does not update the NEF. Edits are saved in a proprietary sidecar file imagefile.nef.nksc in a sub directory NKSC_PARAM.
0 -
That is simply a parameter to change in the preferences (a new one, as the function was removed in NX-D)
And then, you will have the possibility to "encapsulate" the versions in the header of the NEF.
0 -
> Claude CAUWE: ...parameter to change in the preferences (a new one, as the function was removed in NX-D)
Aha, thanks. Perhaps Nikon is working its way back towards Capture NX-2 functionality :-)
0 -
Aha, thanks. Perhaps Nikon is working its way back towards Capture NX-2 functionality :-)
That day, I open a bottle champaign for sure !
It was not the easiest software to apprehend (C1 is not either), but what a powerful thing it was (especially for denoising with advanced functions !!)
0 -
Created a few edits embedded in a .NEF.
1) Edits appear to be appended in the NEF
2) Capture One, Affinity Photo, Photo Mechanic and Raw Therapee accept the modified NEF
3) NX-Studio does not appear to update embedded previews like Capture NX-2 did
Hmm.
0 -
Reg (3): Yes, that is exactly what make a streamlines workflow difficult...
0 -
New test.
Opened NEF (with PictureControls applied), and exported
Also exported as TIFF, and opened in C1P (without corrections).
Which one is better ?0 -
The darker one looks more natural to me, maybe I would sharpen the elephant a bit and be happy. Is this the Nikon NX Studio version?
Your frozen river images, I like the left sky and clouds better, but not so much the left ice river. Left was the Nikon app?
On the other hand, whenever I compared two applications I almost always could edit the images to my liking and come to very comparable end results.
With embedded changes in NEF files (by earlier Nikon software) I had bad experiences when trying to open such modified raws with C1 (not possible). Even if that works today, what will be tomorrow... Hence I don't change raw files anymore.
0 -
Before telling which one was C1 or NX, I will say that I an testing a new workflow, apparently satisfying:
- Use PictureControls in the Nikon body
- Make the first edits in Nikon Studio NX
- Export as TIFF-16 bits
- Edit the TIFF with C1P for the last touches.
This way you save the Nikon original colors, and get the best of both worlds.
0 -
hm, I prefer the 2. a little bit better for color. the first looks so c1ish... low sat yellowish greens and reddish yellows...
0 -
Both set to use the Nikon Standard Profile.
Quick adjustments in Studio / C1:
none / Exposure
Active D-Lighting/Shadows
Protect Highlights/Highlights
Saturation+/Saturation-
0 -
0
-
The first of each pair are from the same application, the second of each pair from the other.
0 -
...ok, the first are from C1 I know the banding / transition characterisics too well. ;-)ps.: both are bad IMHO but maybe this is a signature look c1 user like. I have seen this phenomenon in thousands of images sometimes barely visibly.
0 -
Yes, the first converter is C1.
On this particular image I have the same result (very comparable) with Irident N-transformer (when I load the resulting dng into C1).
This is an extreme DR image, and C1 brings back a lot of the highlights, which NX Studio cannot do. I can even bring back more highlights with the HDR highlight slider, but when I try something similar with Studio (exposure compensation, because the highlight protection is already at 100%) then it totally destroys the sky.
Which converter do you think would create a better result?
0 -
haven't use photo ninja for a long time but this could be an image to test it. PN does recover lost detail locally with sometimes amazing results. DXO does not try to recover color information as much as c1 but in exchange you get very smooth and film like highlight roll offs something I really prefer. c1 is very good when there is some information left but when everything is blown out you get this strange banding.
0 -
many c1 user probably think this orange banding is natural when it occurs in outdoor images but the same problem becomes visible with interior shots too, for example around very bright light sources. for some time I thought it was a profile issue but now I´m sure it is a fundamental c1 flaw.
0 -
Hi CSP - I'm not arguing with you or agreeing with you, but I would be interested to know whether you think that the Pro Standard profiles for some cameras make a difference to the "banding" issue?
Ian
-1 -
Ian,
i think the real reason they offer pro std. profiles is to address issues like banding or the horrible handling of high saturated and bright colors especially blue / cyan but from what I have seen they only mask the underlaying problem but don't completely eliminate it. so even with pro std. profiles you will still find some banding and colorshift but much less.
0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
46 comments