From the top of the bridge

[Artshot]

These photos are quite accurate as to color and light, but I think it's time to give RAW a try.
Will Nikon software do the basics, or is there better free software thats easier to use?

What else can I do to improve these shots?

[Shadowman]

Nice set.

[billtils]

Art

If we follow the dictum of "Crawl, Walk, Run" you could do worse than start with the free Nikon S/W. It will do an acceptable job for you in regard to editing. It doesn't have its own library function but can communicate with others. Once you are comfortable in the raw arena, you can check out the various other editing/raw engine/library software - there's a lot of it around now and most is available on 30 day free trial. When you get to that point, select the one that suits your style best in regard to workflow and image editing.


PS: I like these images!

[ccphoto]

While initially I found the proprietary Nikon software to be reasonably accurate, it wasn't until I got into ACR (Adobe Camera RAW) that I was able to work with some adjustment brushes, control to a large degree my highlights and shadows. I think you'll find the learning curve is quite easy and very intuitive.

[billtils]

While initially I found the proprietary Nikon software to be reasonably accurate...

Chris

Yes indeed, it works and for sure, once Art becomes more proficient and used to the whole raw to finished image business the more he will realise that perhaps there is more to explore .

However, I'd still caution against jumping in cold to the next level and picking something just because it is popular or the "latest and greatest". ACR is just one of many options, each with its adherents and sceptics. Went the Nikon to something else path over many years and at the end of the day don't think there is much (if any) objective evidence to say where I ended up is better or worse than any other. What I can say without reservation is that because of the experience with the free Nikon software I was able to make a final choice that suited my workflow.

[Manfred M]

Art - I started up much like you, shooting JPEG and was pushed into shooting raw by some of the "experts" around who claim one cannot edit a JPEG. My first reaction to my images from my raw data was "these are terrible, much worse than what I get from my straight-out-of-camera (SOOC) JPEG images".

What the "experts" didn't tell me is that I had to learn a whole new skill set when shooting raw, as my camera was taking care of all kinds of little details like white balance, colour space selection, sharpening, bit-depth and contrast. I had to do to this myself to get my images from raw captures to get them even close to the quality I was getting with my SOOC JPEG images. It took a lot of work to learn these skills. The Nikon raw converters are quite good. The main complaint about them is they have relatively limited functionality when compared to some of the commercial products on the market. Up until Adobe released Photoshop CS5, it was my preferred raw converter for portraiture as the colours were more natural, but the user interface and corresponding workflow were not to my liking.

There are a lot of good tools out there and while I have my own personal opinions on them, I'm not going to suggest that my choices are the best for everyone. There are some other free tools out there and they have their followings. There is a wide range of commercial tools out there too with a wide-ranging set of features. It really depends on what you are looking for in terms of where you want to go in developing your picture making skills. I personally prefer the combination of a raw converter to manipulate the raw data and then a pixel based editor that supports layers and a non-destructive workflow.

I think trying some of the free stuff is a good place to start and to move on, if you find that these tools limit what you want to do, then move on to something else. The important part is to start somewhere and move your image making to the next level.

[tbob]

I strongly encourage you to try RAW I am not familiar with all the programs available, I only use two and have for years. However processing adds to the art and enjoyment of photography because it adds a huge level of control over the image. You can then portray the image as you saw it in your mind rather than being constrained by the cameras internal software interpretation. I would highly recommend that if you get a processing program you go a bit crazy with the adjustment controls; one at a time, to get a feel for what each control does. I spent about two weeks doing this and it was a great help.

With this image you could change the colour balance to a bit warmer and reduce the highlight/shadow contrast if you had a RAW file to work with.

[Wavelength]

I like both these images very much

[Dave Humphries]

I think I'm right in saying ...

The advantage of the Nikon software (with a Nikon camera!) is that "in camera" picture styles (you are/were using for jpg) can be applied to get the RAW images close to the same quality as a starting place.

[Artshot]

Thanks for all the replies. I'll start with what I have and take one step at a time.