Capture NX-2 free download in Canada?

[miatab]

I usually get things wrong, but is it possible that Nikon Canada made Capture NX2 a free download, or is it one more error I have made?

[Manfred M]

It lists for $CAD 199.95 on the Nikon Canada website. That's a lot of money for a rather ancient product.

http://en.nikon.ca/nikon-products/im...are/index.page

[Mike Buckley]

That product was discontinued years ago. It may be possible to download it and it may now be for free. If so, after the 60-day trial runs out I don't know if you'll be able to continue using it.

If you want Nikon's raw converter that is supported and has limited post-processing capabilities compared to what Capture NX2 provided, that is available for free at Nikon's website. I think (not sure) the name is Capture NX-D.

[miatab]

Thank you for the replies/update re NX-2. I was going through emails preparatory to dumping them and found an old email I had received from a FujiX user, who said that the product was so good in use with jpegs that he was no longer using RAW, and I somehow got the feeling I'd seen a note from Nikon Canada that the product was now free on their web site. Maybe I confused it with the 60 day try for free deal. Thank you. Yes, I've read the $199 price offer, and now wonder what Nikon will do for those who buy the programme and learn that Nikon Canada has withdrawn it.

[Mike Buckley]

I wonder if the FujiX user who emailed you liked it so much because of its control points. If so, you can use Google/Nik's Collection (it's a suite of software) that also uses control points and is free. Though some parts of the collection work as standalone software, most people feel it works best as a plug-in to other software. It works that way with all of the Adobe Photoshop versions of software, so maybe it would be a good solution for you.

[george013]

I wonder if it's not a kind of swindle still selling a product that's not supported anymore.

George

[Manfred M]

I had received from a FujiX user, who said that the product was so good in use with jpegs that he was no longer using RAW,

That statement in itself would have me wondering about the knowledge of the writer.

The Capture and View series of products that Nikon puts out are primarily raw convertors with some basic editing capabilities along the lines of what Adobe Camera Raw or Phase One Capture One offer, although with a more limited set of options than either of these two products. So while it is possible to do some edits on jpegs, it's not really the primary reason to use this software.

[Saorsa]

That statement in itself would have me wondering about the knowledge of the writer.

The Capture and View series of products that Nikon puts out are primarily raw convertors with some basic editing capabilities along the lines of what Adobe Camera Raw or Phase One Capture One offer, although with a more limited set of options than either of these two products. So while it is possible to do some edits on jpegs, it's not really the primary reason to use this software.

Capture NX and NX2 were full image editors and worked very well for me.

It is not worth downloading because after Nikon funded Nik software in most of the development, they dropped support and Google now provides the entire NIK suite free. If you have been using capture NX then the free NIK suite will work just as you are used to using it. Viveza is nearly all of NX2 but some parts have other names.

You can get the information at https://www.google.com/nikcollection/

[Manfred M]

Capture NX and NX2 were full image editors and worked very well for me.

It is not worth downloading because after Nikon funded Nik software in most of the development, they dropped support and Google now provides the entire NIK suite free. If you have been using capture NX then the free NIK suite will work just as you are used to using it. Viveza is nearly all of NX2 but some parts have other names.

You can get the information at https://www.google.com/nikcollection/

Yes and no - Nikon invested in Nik software and Nix did write the Capture and View NX and NX2 software. At the time Nik did sell a generic (i.e. non-Nikon branded) version of these packages. When Google bought Nik software, the View and Capture packages were not part of the sale. So there is a certain family resemblance with the Nikon and Nik collection due to a common history

[miatab]

I wouldn't know about wondering about his knowledge, Manfred, but I do assume from his words that he no longer sees benefits to using RAW in his work.

[Mike Buckley]

There is a distinct irony for me of the person's choice to stop using raw files because Capture NX-2 works so well with JPEGs. I still use Capture NX-2 for 100% of my images, which are always raw files being captured, and I use additional post-processing software only for about 1% of them. Yet there have been times when I have not been able to load JPEGs into Capture NX-2 whether they were created by me or others. Some of them were created by me using Capture NX-2. The software is renown for its quirks that affect some people and not others and that's just one of many examples I've come across in discussing the product with others over the years.

[george013]

There is a distinct irony for me of the person's choice to stop using raw files because Capture NX-2 works so well with JPEGs. I still use Capture NX-2 for 100% of my images, which are always raw files being captured, and I use additional post-processing software only for about 1% of them. Yet there have been times when I have not been able to load JPEGs into Capture NX-2 whether they were created by me or others. Some of them were created by me using Capture NX-2. The software is renown for its quirks that affect some people and not others and that's just one of many examples I've come across in discussing the product with others over the years.

The advantage of CaptureNx for me is the missing of sidecar files. Everything in 1 file: the RAW, the JPG.
Though one can load a JPG in Capture, many times it didn't succeed. Beside that, loading a JPG always means working with a 8-bit compressed file and some functions are not available. Among WB and "exposure correction".

George

[Manfred M]

I wouldn't know about wondering about his knowledge, Manfred, but I do assume from his words that he no longer sees benefits to using RAW in his work.

I know several commercial photographers who shoot only in jpeg. In their case it, as they are event or wedding photographers this is a measure that saves them time. Nicely said there is nothing wrong with this, so long as it satisfies their clients needs.

This is no different than other photographers I know who exclusively process their image in Lightroom rather than going to a more advanced pixel based editor like Photoshop. Again, if it is good enough for them, who am I to suggest anything different.

I have also heard complaints from a number of FujiFilm camera users that the raw converters from both Adobe and to a lesser extent, Capture One do not do not produce acceptable raw conversions. Note - this was a common complaint by Nikon users prior to the 2012 Adobe raw conversion engine. This too is a valid reason to not shoot raw.

I'm a raw + jpeg shooter and if the images are good enough, I will go straight the the jpegs. If the lighting is right (I can achieve this 100% in studio shots), I have no issues at all going with jpegs. If it is not right, or more likely the in-camera processing engine doesn't create an image that meets my expectations, then I will go to the raw image. I possibly could get the jpeg to work, but if it doesn't then I would have wasted my time and had to go back to the raw.

The whole crux of my previous comment was not so much what this photographer does, but rather understanding the context as why he does so. Without that information, what you have been told is of limited use because his creative choices may not apply to you, your equipment or your shooting style.

[Mike Buckley]

Though one can load a JPG in Capture, many times it didn't succeed.

You're the first person I've come across who also had that problem. That's after having spent years participating daily in a forum dedicated to discussing the software. Definitely quirky software!

[george013]

You're the first person I've come across who also had that problem. That's after having spent years participating daily in a forum dedicated to discussing the software. Definitely quirky software!

I scanned my old negatives. I can't open them in CaptureNx2. Any other program I can.
CaptureNx1 couldn't handle RAW-files that were edited with ViewNx, their own software!!!
There're more strange things on that software, slow window handling by example. But I like it. Good enough for me.

George

[rpcrowe]

I really don't have any problems working exclusively with RAW although, if JPEG does what the photographer wants to do, I see no reason not to shoot in that format or, as Manfred opts to do, shoot in a combination of JPEG +RAW. I stopped shooting the combination when I realized that I was not doing anything with the JPEG images.

I do not use Lightroom, instead; I used Adobe Bridge and open my RAW images in Adobe Camera RAW and then edit them using a combination of Photoshop CC and NIK software. I will also, from time to time, use ON1 10 (have had problems downloading ON1 RAW - need to spend a couple of hours working with that program) for some additionally processing as well as Portrait Pro (also just occasionally).

[miatab]

Wow! This thread has gone a long way past my question re free software, but it has been a most interesting/enlitening series of comments from intelligent photographers, and far more worthwhile reading than the cost of the Nikon software in Canada!

Manfred, you ended your last reply with these words:"The whole crux of my previous comment was not so much what this photographer does, but rather understanding the context as why he does so. Without that information, what you have been told is of limited use because his creative choices may not apply to you, your equipment or your shooting style."

The email/s I referred to came about as a result of my whining about the XE-1 being confusing to me because it was in my eyes so completely menu driven (a major reason for me to buy a Df body to mate with my Nikon lenses from my F2 SB days and film) and wondering what attitude to take towards pre and post processing, which was also confusing to me, as a large part of my 77 year old photographic mind is still locked into film. I've cut and copied some bits of his emails that maybe throw a little light onto your statement i quoted above:

ur welcome interesting stuff. !
As for NX2... yes.... its superb. I have CS4 too but I use Capture NX all the time.
I also bought Nik colour effects. It sits inside capture NX2 and I use that for black and white. I have a little trick for black and white too. I turn the black n white to black n white lol sounds crazy I know but gives very contrasty results which I love. I also set the camera - a third of a stop with B+W. And yes it will work with PC or Mac
It is the only program I know that allows you to treat a JPG as if it was a RAW file. The only thing it will not do is allow you to adjust exposure. You can adjust brightness though and add detail in highlights or shadow. I expose for good highlights and let the shadow take care of itself. There is masses of detail that you can bring out of shadow areas.
I simply can not recomend NX2 highly enough if you are a JPG shooter. It's so good I have stopped thinking about RAW.



You can set DR for 100, 200 or 400. 100 being 0 basically. 200 only works at 400 ISO and beyond and 400 needs 800ISO and beyond. I find 400 makes the images a little too flat. that is why I leave shadow at 0. I then set highlights to -2. SET NR to -2 as well. This gives great images with amazing highlight detail while leaving a shed load of detail in the shadows that can be bought out if needed. Using Capture NX2 you can treat JPGs as if they were raw files. In fact I would say there is as much headroom in the XE1 JPGs as there is in my Nikon RAWs. I also set sharpness to -1. They sharpen better with unsharp mask. Capture NX2 is just superb though. It allows you to alter things like contrast in any area you like. So you can get the best of both worlds, as you can say, leave the sky with all the detail and wack the contrast right up in the foreground etc. Hope that makes it more clear.

Many thanks to all of you for your thoughts on this "old" software. My final thought- it is a supreme irony for me now, after all your comments, that most probably I will not be able to use the software because I'm using a Mac platform running on Sierra!

[Mike Buckley]

It is the only program I know that allows you to treat a JPG as if it was a RAW file. The only thing it will not do is allow you to adjust exposure.

Noting that that comment was made by your fellow photographer rather than you, I'm putting the spotlight on it only to help you out with your future endeavors: Not to be unkind, but that comment displays enough ignorance about the topic that you should probably be very wary of everything that person says in the future that you cannot personally confirm. Capture NX-2 does not treat a JPG like a raw file and Capture NX-2 doesn't treat a JPG any differently than any other program of comparable capabilities, of which there are many, many such programs on the market. That includes all of the capabilities detailed in the email from that person.

By the way, the other thing Capture NX-2 can't do with a JPG is to automatically set the white balance. That's true of all post-processing programs because white balance can only be set automatically when using a raw converter to post-process a raw file.

It's especially interesting that your fellow photographer used Nik Color Efex to make black-and-white images. The Nik collection includes a program which is renowned for being one of the best programs to convert from color to monochrome. They call it Silver Efex. Moreover, Capture NX-2 on its own has a very powerful tool that converts color to monochrome.

Again, this post is meant to give you a bit of pause when seriously considering the information being provided by the person who sent you the email. You mentioned that the email is old, so hopefully its sender has more knowledge of this stuff now than when the email was sent.

[Manfred M]

ur welcome interesting stuff. !
As for NX2... yes.... its superb. I have CS4 too but I use Capture NX all the time.
I also bought Nik colour effects. It sits inside capture NX2 and I use that for black and white. I have a little trick for black and white too. I turn the black n white to black n white lol sounds crazy I know but gives very contrasty results which I love. I also set the camera - a third of a stop with B+W. And yes it will work with PC or Mac
It is the only program I know that allows you to treat a JPG as if it was a RAW file. The only thing it will not do is allow you to adjust exposure. You can adjust brightness though and add detail in highlights or shadow. I expose for good highlights and let the shadow take care of itself. There is masses of detail that you can bring out of shadow areas.
I simply can not recomend NX2 highly enough if you are a JPG shooter. It's so good I have stopped thinking about RAW.



You can set DR for 100, 200 or 400. 100 being 0 basically. 200 only works at 400 ISO and beyond and 400 needs 800ISO and beyond. I find 400 makes the images a little too flat. that is why I leave shadow at 0. I then set highlights to -2. SET NR to -2 as well. This gives great images with amazing highlight detail while leaving a shed load of detail in the shadows that can be bought out if needed. Using Capture NX2 you can treat JPGs as if they were raw files. In fact I would say there is as much headroom in the XE1 JPGs as there is in my Nikon RAWs. I also set sharpness to -1. They sharpen better with unsharp mask. Capture NX2 is just superb though. It allows you to alter things like contrast in any area you like. So you can get the best of both worlds, as you can say, leave the sky with all the detail and wack the contrast right up in the foreground etc. Hope that makes it more clear.

Let me add a few of my own thoughts in addition to what Mike has already written. By the way, while I am a bit younger than you, I spent decades as a film shooter as well as doing my own B&W and colour printing in the "wet" darkroom.

1. First of all your contact has an affinity for ancient software - Both Photoshop CS4 and Capture NX2 came out in 2008. CS4 uses the 2003 raw engine; there was a new engine released in 2010 and the one that is currently in use was released in 2012. There have been 6 new releases of Photoshop after CS4.

I used View NX2 until the 2012 raw converter was released, as the previous versions were not particularly good with Nikon cameras, especially with skin tones. Once Adobe fixed their raw convertor, I stopped using the Nikon software.

2. I also bought the Nik Collection, but you can now get it as a free download from Google. I use it in much of my work. As Mike has mentioned, Silver Efex is the appropriate tool in Nik for B&W conversion.

3. There is no software in the world that treats raw and jpegs identically.

Raw data has to be assembled into an image, using a raw converter; Capture NX2 has that capability BUT only for cameras that were produced before it was replaced by Capture NX-D. During that conversion, things like white balance (colour temperature), colour space and gamma and "baked" into the data. Additionally no processing like sharpening or contrast is added to the raw data. The user must do all these things themselves.

A jpeg is an image file generated by either the camera or by a piece of software. The camera captures raw data and turns that into a jpeg.

Capture NX2 incorporates a fairly basic parametric editor (similar to what Lightroom does), so it can edit both raw and jpeg data.

4. No program can adjust exposure (unless you are shooting a tethered camera and controlling it through a computer via software). Exposure is part and parcel of the data captured by the camera. Brightness can be adjusted in post-processing (PP).

5. Most modern camera capture 14-bit data when you look at raw files. Jpegs are 8-bit data. There is simply significantly more data available in raw than in a jpeg. Yes, you can edit a jpeg file, BUT it has a lot less "headroom" than the raw data and you can easily find yourself with artifact in your working file. If you don't change the exposure or work the colour range too hard you can definitely get acceptable results. There is no question that you can get a lot more data out of a raw file. Your source is absolutely wrong when he says "there is as much headroom in the XE1 JPGs as there is in my Nikon RAWs.". He is absolutely and completely off base here; jpgs get you 256 distinct shades in each of the three colour channels whereas a modern Nikon (or Fujifilm) 14-bit camera has 16,384 distinct colours per channel.

I honestly would have to say your source is not particularly knowledgeable and has fed you some information that is incorrect.

[miatab]

Well, Mike et al, thank you for all your comments and thoughts re the software, and your warnings re the photographer who made the effort to try to convince me to stay with Fuji X and jpegs and purchase the out-dated software. The Fuji is gone, given to my son, and I am back in the Nikon fold but I will always use jpegs, and I'll surely not pay 199 bucks for the software. The photographer, male, female, young or old, may well have gone into orbit, or simply grown older, wiser, moved on. I'll never know.