Nikon Capture vs. Photoshop CS

I'd like to know folks experience w/ Capture vs. the raw converter in Photoshop
CS. What does Capture do that PS doesn't, have you found it worth the $100?

Thanks in advance

From: (Wehs)

I'd like to know folks experience w/ Capture vs. the raw converter in
Photoshop CS.

I'm no Nikon shooter (obviously) but experts like Jack Davis say that Nikon
Capture outperforms Adobe Camera RAW.

Also, make sure you install the NEF plugin for CS which comes on the Nikon View
CD.

In article ,
(Wehs) wrote:

I'd like to know folks experience w/ Capture vs. the raw converter in
Photoshop
CS. What does Capture do that PS doesn't, have you found it worth the $100?

Thanks in advance



The Nikon software is MUCH better. I lik ethe look of the images better
and I like the tools of the Nikon capture better than the very sparse
bare bones RAW converter for Photoshop.

JR

(Wehs) wrote let it be known in
:

I'd like to know folks experience w/ Capture vs. the raw
converter in Photoshop CS. What does Capture do that PS
doesn't, have you found it worth the $100?

Thanks in advance

I can't put it into words, but I really like the quality of the
image that is processed with Nikon Capture much better than that
of CS's RAW converter.

If I had to try to describe the difference, I would say that the
tones are smoother? The gradations are better? Like I said, I
don't have the words to express it but somehow the images just
look BETTER. All I know is that whenever I make the effort to
use Capture to process the RAW file, I am always much more
satisfied with the resulting image. After the thousands I've
spent on bodies, lenses and other accessories, I think that the
extra hundred bucks for Capture so I can get the best image
possible is well worth the expense.

I was hoping that the CS converter would make my life simpler
and streamline my workflow, but lately I only use it when I am
taking a quick look at an image, or working on somehting that is
just going to be a 'snapshot' that was shot in RAW by mistake.

Now if Nikon could just work on the interface...

(Wehs) wrote let it be known in
:

I'd like to know folks experience w/ Capture vs. the raw
converter in Photoshop CS. What does Capture do that PS
doesn't, have you found it worth the $100?

Thanks in advance

I can't put it into words, but I really like the quality of the
image that is processed with Nikon Capture much better than that
of CS's RAW converter.

If I had to try to describe the difference, I would say that the
tones are smoother? The gradations are better? Like I said, I
don't have the words to express it but somehow the images just
look BETTER. All I know is that whenever I make the effort to
use Capture to process the RAW file, I am always much more
satisfied with the resulting image. After the thousands I've
spent on bodies, lenses and other accessories, I think that the
extra hundred bucks for Capture so I can get the best image
possible is well worth the expense.

I was hoping that the CS converter would make my life simpler
and streamline my workflow, but lately I only use it when I am
taking a quick look at an image, or working on somehting that is
just going to be a 'snapshot' that was shot in RAW by mistake.

Now if Nikon could just work on the interface...

"Curt Bousquet" wrote in message
...
I can't put it into words, but I really like the quality of the
image that is processed with Nikon Capture much better than that
of CS's RAW converter.

snip

I was hoping that the CS converter would make my life simpler
and streamline my workflow, but lately I only use it when I am
taking a quick look at an image, or working on somehting that is
just going to be a 'snapshot' that was shot in RAW by mistake.

Now if Nikon could just work on the interface...

I agree wholeheartedly with Curt the quality of the output - Capture
beats Photoshop here (colors are more saturated, transitions are cleaner and
sharper, etc.). My beef is that we could have the best of both worlds if
Nikon would just get on the stick a bit: make available in the Photoshop
plug-in version the extra controls (i.e., all of Advanced Raw, Noise
Reduction, Vignetting, etc.) to which we have access via the Capture
interface, rather than the dumbed-down version we currently have (which lets
you adjust WB and EC, that's it!). Adobe has shown it can be presented
rather cleanly with its ACR tabbed-interface, large preview window, etc. -
can't Nikon just emulate that design and make its controls available?

- John

"Curt Bousquet" wrote in message
...
I can't put it into words, but I really like the quality of the
image that is processed with Nikon Capture much better than that
of CS's RAW converter.

snip

I was hoping that the CS converter would make my life simpler
and streamline my workflow, but lately I only use it when I am
taking a quick look at an image, or working on somehting that is
just going to be a 'snapshot' that was shot in RAW by mistake.

Now if Nikon could just work on the interface...

I agree wholeheartedly with Curt the quality of the output - Capture
beats Photoshop here (colors are more saturated, transitions are cleaner and
sharper, etc.). My beef is that we could have the best of both worlds if
Nikon would just get on the stick a bit: make available in the Photoshop
plug-in version the extra controls (i.e., all of Advanced Raw, Noise
Reduction, Vignetting, etc.) to which we have access via the Capture
interface, rather than the dumbed-down version we currently have (which lets
you adjust WB and EC, that's it!). Adobe has shown it can be presented
rather cleanly with its ACR tabbed-interface, large preview window, etc. -
can't Nikon just emulate that design and make its controls available?

- John

In article ,
says...

From: (Wehs)

I'd like to know folks experience w/ Capture vs. the raw converter in
Photoshop CS.

I'm no Nikon shooter (obviously) but experts like Jack Davis say that Nikon
Capture outperforms Adobe Camera RAW.

Also, make sure you install the NEF plugin for CS which comes on the Nikon
View
CD.

There is also a new one on the AdobePS site. I have not done a side-by-side
of the old v new, but would assume that Adobe has done their usual good job
with the upgrade. If one has CS (don't know about upgrading the plug-in in PS
7), and they shoot RAW, the newest release might include more cameras/mfgrs,
and more control. For my NEF files, it looked pretty much the same.

Hunt

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloa...jsp?ftpID=2609

Ver 2.3 (26th Sept 04)

Support for the following cameras as well as support for DNG
http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/main.html has been added. Please visit
the Camera Raw page
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html for a complete list
of supported cameras.
Canon PowerShot S60 Epson R-D1 Fujifilm FinePix S20 Pro Nikon
Coolpix 5400



Cheers, Jason (remove ... to reply)
Video & Gaming: http://gadgetaus.com

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloa...jsp?ftpID=2609

Ver 2.3 (26th Sept 04)

Support for the following cameras as well as support for DNG
http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/main.html has been added. Please visit
the Camera Raw page
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/cameraraw.html for a complete list
of supported cameras.
Canon PowerShot S60 Epson R-D1 Fujifilm FinePix S20 Pro Nikon
Coolpix 5400



Cheers, Jason (remove ... to reply)
Video & Gaming: http://gadgetaus.com