ACDSee Forums Topic: Nikon D90 RAW conversion

ACDSee Forums Topic: Nikon D90 RAW conversion http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ ACDSee Forums Topic: Nikon D90 RAW conversion en Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:54:03 +0000 cafmike on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-49369 Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:18:17 +0000 cafmike 49369@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I am waiting on the replacement SLR for the Nikon D90 body Does anyone know when this thing is going to be announced? Melanie Wood on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-48735 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 00:27:42 +0000 Melanie Wood 48735@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Hello Walter,  The ACDSee Forums are provided as a meeting place for users like yourself to gather and discuss all things ACDSee. We feel that by providing this area we are showing that we do care about the users and their concerns. While the team does not respond to every post in these forums, the moderator team does alert us and that feedback is taken into account in every stage of development. When you encounter an issue that you want the make certain development teams know about, please continue to submit tickets to CS as this is always the best route to ensure that it is tracked properly.  -Melanie wlwjr66 on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-48722 Tue, 23 Mar 2010 21:30:41 +0000 wlwjr66 48722@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ But it would make sense for ACD to monitor and review posts to improve their product. Obviously they do not care about the customer.  I have yet to receive a reply. I just called their "technical support" number and it is noted they no longer provide phone support and must be done online. Walter Marc Sabatella on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-48658 Fri, 19 Mar 2010 22:30:29 +0000 Marc Sabatella 48658@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Right, these are user forums, not any form of official contact with ACD support. wlwjr66 on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-48623 Thu, 18 Mar 2010 03:14:40 +0000 wlwjr66 48623@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I am definitely not using D-lighting and this is no small correction I have to make on the Exposure slider as I begin my workflow.  The RAW files and the simultaneous properly exposed jpgs are not anywhere close to the same exposure.  The RAW are continuously *much* darker.  I will follow-up with a support ticket to ACD.  It seems like to me they do not read these forums otherwise they would be responding here. Thanks, Walter Marc Sabatella on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-48351 Fri, 05 Mar 2010 16:26:17 +0000 Marc Sabatella 48351@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ In general, ACDSee works fine with NEF files.  If you use D-lighting, it won't render correctly, but that's normal for third party RAW processing programs - if LR has actually implemented their own emulation of this mode, that would be a new/rare thing.  There are a very small number of people seeing problems when *not* using D-lighting; if you are among them, I'd encourage you to submit to support ticket so ACD can be made aware of the issue.  Again, it's absolutely normal for there to be small variations between RAW processing programs - it's only if there are extreme differences that would be a cause for concern. jimdennis1914@gmail.com on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-48344 Fri, 05 Mar 2010 03:17:06 +0000 jimdennis1914@gmail.com 48344@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ There is definitely a problem, a bug, an error in the Raw processing. Nikon D90 I shoot jpeg and Raw at the same time and WAS processing Raw using Adobe lightroom. Lightroom gives almost identical results to the Nikon raw software. Even the free Picasa v3 will give a good rendering of color and exposure of D90 raw files. ACDSEE pro 3 does not. I bought the software hoping to do away with all the other stuff. And it DOES good a good job on jpegs.  But the raw processing must be fixed or I will being to spread the word - STAY AWAY save your money if you use raw Nikon files....   BTW Nikon D90 files ARE a bit different from D70 and earlier. Maybe the pro3 s/w is simply  not up to date?   Jim Dennis USA   wlwjr66 on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-47803 Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:10:16 +0000 wlwjr66 47803@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Has ACDSee corrected the problem with a software update outlined in this thread to correct the darkened D90 RAW images? By the way, I have Windows Vista Thanks, Walter marekbrejl on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-43893 Thu, 15 Oct 2009 14:15:07 +0000 marekbrejl 43893@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Quick update - I have sent request to customer support summarizing the above discussion and providing links to the sample images. After three days, I got a response "thank you for your question, but we do not support Windows 7". Of course, my mistake, I  should have realized people will want to be done with me, not to help. I am following up removing the Windows 7 blocker. Will update you when I find out. Perhaps it would help if you also submited similar requests. Dand on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-43703 Sat, 10 Oct 2009 04:29:04 +0000 Dand 43703@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ No... I don't know. And I think not... But I too would apriciate a way to adjust a preset - preferably a preset set for each different camera model. Eli on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-43691 Fri, 09 Oct 2009 20:17:39 +0000 Eli 43691@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ I have found that one of the reasons NEF RAW files appear darker than they do in Adobe Camera RAW is that Camera RAW had some presets that increase brightness to +50.  If you set ACDSee Process/Tune/Lighting/Brighness to 40 or 50, your images will appear similar to those in Camera RAW. What I don't know is if there is a way to set a preset in ACDSee so that ALL RAW images will have this brightening setting applied without needing to set it manually for each image or using batch processing to set a group of images. Does anyone know if you can set up default presets for all RAW images? Marc Sabatella on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-43667 Fri, 09 Oct 2009 15:12:24 +0000 Marc Sabatella 43667@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Thanks for posting those images - now I can see what people are talking about! That's unlike anything I've seen before - definitely way beyond the normal variation one should expect between RAW processing programs.  Assuming that these were shot with d-lighting or any other camera setting that ACDSee is simply failing to understand, I'd agree something looks wrong, and would definitely recommend contacting Support (link a top left of this page). BTW, I feel compelled to remind people - I don't work for ACD; it's not "my" development team (wish it were - then maybe they'd implement all of *my* suggestions) marekbrejl on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion/page/2#post-43641 Fri, 09 Oct 2009 05:21:31 +0000 marekbrejl 43641@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Following Marc's suggestion - I have uploaded couple of samples, so that we can directly look at what we are talking about: <a href="http://picasaweb.google.com/Brejlovi/ACDSeeRAWConversionSample">http://picasaweb.google.com/Brejlovi/ACDSeeRAWConversionSample</a># The folder contains 3 screen shots - in each the same image in VIEW mode and then in DEVELOP mode. Notice the darkening and the shift in the histogram. While on the brighter image I may like the conversion, on the two darker images I certainly do not and I do not think it is just matter of taste. The histogram clearly shows that the processed image is not leveraging the full luminance range. I also want to repeat that in Lightroom, the processed raw images are very comparable to the images from the VIEW mode in ACDSee. Marc - does this help? Do you think this is something to submit to your development team and that there is a chance they could modify the algorithm? Thanks. Marek myfotoguy on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion#post-43615 Thu, 08 Oct 2009 17:51:16 +0000 myfotoguy 43615@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ <blockquote><cite><a href="#post-43579">k h said:</a></cite> Neither Nikon Capture NX2 nor any other RAW converter has been able to develop JPEGs which closely approximate the ones straight from the camera.  Apparently, not even Nikon's own Capture NX2 software comprehends all of the sooper seekrit algorithms built into Nikon cameras. Surprisingly, I find the RAW conversion done by ACDSee Pro3, with default settings, often looks better than the in-camera JPEG, and furthermore, often looks better than I can get from Capture NX2 with any amount of tweaking.  Not only that, Pro3 is a lot faster and crashes a lot less than NX2.  I hardly use NX2 anymore except when I need to paint a mask to control an adjustment. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or so they say. </blockquote> Your first statement doesn't sound right to me. For camera models with picture controls NX2 initial render matches the JPEG process settings in camera. I am not sure if you have to have downloaded all the extra picture controls or not, but my experience has been that NX2 renders the RAW intially as the Jpeg appears, and in the panel on the right in NX2 I can even see the in camera settings that were used. I here you as far as the "eye of the beholder" but the intial conversion is not anywhere near NX2, not even close in my eyes (For people specifically, for landscape it's not as big of a deal to me personally, but I still see the difference). This is with D-Lighting off and I'm certain of that since I don't use it. I have also heard from other users that they are getting close results in Lightroom, I should download a trial and compare to see just how close it is and compares, just to see for myself.     LV_Bill on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion#post-43604 Thu, 08 Oct 2009 15:13:10 +0000 LV_Bill 43604@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Not sure this will help here. but FYI......  In another thread, I've been questioning why Canon Raw images appear darker and more color saturated in Pro 3.0 vs. Pro 2.5.  The answer turned out to be:  Pro 2.5 showed true raw, without the camera settings.  Pro 3.0 shows raw with the camera settings included in the visible image. Nobody explained to me that I should expect a pronounced rendering difference if I happened to have the settings boosted in my camera.  Now a lot of things make sense.  Maybe Nikon is similarly affected? FWIW, Bill Eli on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion#post-43593 Thu, 08 Oct 2009 12:01:08 +0000 Eli 43593@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ The significant difference (and darker) rendering of Nikon NEF RAW images occurs whether you use Active D-Lighting or not.  Even when it is turned off, the images are significantly darker than the  embedded JPEG image and how the image is rendered by other converters such as Capture NX2, Adobe Camera Raw, etc.  I don't agree with k h that beauty is in the eye of the beholder as far as this issue is concerned; it has to do with rendering the RAW image in an accurate way. k h on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion#post-43579 Thu, 08 Oct 2009 05:52:38 +0000 k h 43579@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Neither Nikon Capture NX2 nor any other RAW converter has been able to develop JPEGs which closely approximate the ones straight from the camera.  Apparently, not even Nikon's own Capture NX2 software comprehends all of the sooper seekrit algorithms built into Nikon cameras. Surprisingly, I find the RAW conversion done by ACDSee Pro3, with default settings, often looks better than the in-camera JPEG, and furthermore, often looks better than I can get from Capture NX2 with any amount of tweaking.  Not only that, Pro3 is a lot faster and crashes a lot less than NX2.  I hardly use NX2 anymore except when I need to paint a mask to control an adjustment. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, or so they say. Marc Sabatella on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion#post-43554 Wed, 07 Oct 2009 19:37:12 +0000 Marc Sabatella 43554@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ It's certianly normal for their to be small variation between how different RAW processing programs convert the same image.  That's the nature of RAW.  Those differences should eb relatively minor and entirely subjective things, where if you didn't know which was which, you'd have a hard time consistently picking one as "better".  If you're seeing something where, even without d-lightin, you are getting consistently/significantly darker results, to the point where anyone could tell without knowing which was which that one was "correct" and the other "incorrect", then that is a problem, sure.  But in general, the differences should be much smaller and much more subjective than that.  if you're seeing otherwise you might want to post examples here, and then consider submitting  support ticket if others agree it really is a problem and not just a small subjective difference. BTW, you can also address differences by developing your own preset that perhaps pushes coor one way or another, applies  custom curves, etc, and then apply that preset to your images before doing anything else. marekbrejl on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion#post-43545 Wed, 07 Oct 2009 19:01:53 +0000 marekbrejl 43545@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Marc - that you for your input, I wish that was the solution. Unfortunatley, what I described happens without the use of D-Lighting. So, the problem is somewhere else. I would really like to figure out whether there is solution. I am very hesitant to purchase ACDSee now. While I love everything else, this seems to put a really big wranch into the workflow of processing Nikon images. Philip Weir on "Nikon D90 RAW conversion" http://community.acdsee.com/forums/topic/nikon-d90-raw-conversion#post-43526 Wed, 07 Oct 2009 17:56:49 +0000 Philip Weir 43526@http://community.acdsee.com/forums/ Marc, In my own case I was seeing the same effect with my D80 which doesn't have ADL.