ACR 4.6 Nikon D90 vs Nikon  VIEW NX colors/exposure/brightness

Went from a D80 to a D90. Downloaded ACR 4.6 and all of the beta camera profiles for the D90 a month ago or so. When I view my NEF's in Nikon View NX the colors/exposure is fine. When I view them for the D90 in ACR, they are a little washed out. When I converted a couple of NEF's to DNG it appears the results are better,but I don't know if that would hold true for all. I do not want to convert everything to DNG though, plus it does not appear that DNG files can be viewed in View NX.
Haven't put enough hours into researching this yet to figure out if I'm just going to have to convert every NEF file in ACR 4.6 or spring for NX2 and start using that as a supplement-which I really, really do not want to do-but the NEF's look fine there.
I'm holding off buying a new computer until the new PC OS systems come out and at that time assume CS5 will be out by then and will upgrade that also.
Was anyone built a camera preset for the D90 to combat this problem with CS3 ACR 4.6 or encountered the same? Just looking for any input. I've only had the camera a little over a month. (Using XP) Thank you.

> When I view them for the D90 in ACR, they are a little washed out. When I converted a couple of NEF's to DNG it appears the results are better,but I don't know if that would hold true for all.
Both original NEF raws and DNG from those same raws really should appear the same in Camera Raw 4.6. The only potential difference is whether or not you've actually selected one of the other DNG Profiles in a D90 raw and made that the ACR "default". ACR and DNG Converter share the same "defaults". So, what profile is selected in the Calibration panel with a D90 raw? Which one looks better (from the drop down list)? If you like one of the others you can change the ACR default to be that newly selected profile...

Similar Messages

  • Copy does not show File 2 metadata in Nikon View NX

    A picture opened in Photoshop CS4 11.0.1 and saved as a copy jpeg (after color correction) when opened in Nikon View NX 1.5.2 does not show the
    metadata with shutter speed, lens aperture, etc. However, that same picture shows the original info in Photoshop (File info > camera data). I wrote Nikon and they claimed Photoshop and other third part apps "ruin the shooting data." Opinions? Suggestions? Thanks
    Macbook Pro 2.16gHz OSX10.5.6 gRAID 2TB.

    Well the problem is that, in Windows, the menu bar is owned by the application. When you view the PDF in the browser, the browser owns the menu bar and chooses what to show. Hence it shows only the browser items and not the Reader menus. If you view it outside the browser, Reader is running stand-alone and shows it's menu items.
    I think, all you can do is show make sure the button bars you want are exposed by default.

  • Lightroom brighter than nikon view

    Windows Vista, lightroom 2.3, nikon d300 shooting raw images. Monitor calibrated using spyder3
    If I open an image in nikon view and compare it to lightroom, the lightroom version is significantly brighter than the nikon view display even though the histograms look the same. When the full size view initially pops up in lightroom, it looks the same, but when it finishes rendering it, it suddenly jumps brighter. If I export the image from lightroom to a jpg and compare its histogram to the orginal in nikon view, the exported jpg histogram is significantly slid to the right and no longer matches the one lightroom (or nikon view) orginally displayed for the image. Color and tone seem pretty close. My question - is there some setting that lightroom is using that bumps up the brightness or is it just the difference in the programs? I love lightroom, but its display and the proofs it exports just aren't as good as I'm getting from nikon view

    The forums may not yet be up to full speed.
    BTW: It doesn't help when you add off topic material to an existing thread. The best place to raise issues with the new forums is at http://forums.adobe.com/community/general/forum_comments

  • ACR Overexposure with Nikon D3

    Exposure to the right (ETTR) is a standard technique that requires placing of the image highlights just short of clipping in the raw file. Such exposure is often judged by the histogram or blinking highlights in the camera preview of the image, but is best determined by examining the raw file, since the camera preview is derived from a JPEG image to which the camera settings (white balance, tone curve, etc) have been applied. When one brings the raw file into Camera Raw, the white balance setting is applied, but the other camera settings are ignored. If the ACR histogram shows clipping of the highlights and a negative exposure adjustment is needed to recover them, this usually indicates that the image was overexposed. However, with the D3, the default ACR tone curve places the highlights too high and clipping occurs in the rendered file even when the highlights in the raw file are intact.
    I exposed a Stouffer step wedge so that step 1 was just short of clipping with the Nikon D3 using 14 bit NEF and the results are shown in an Imatest plot using the built in DCRaw converter. The results are linear as expected.
    http://bjanes.smugmug.com/photos/271579079_BGUhM-O.png
    Next, I split off the the green1 channel of the raw file with Iris (a freeware astronomical program)and examined the results in ImageJ (a freeware program from the National Institutes of Health). This plot shows that step 1 is just short of clipping:
    http://bjanes.smugmug.com/photos/271460382_RqUdu-O.gif
    and this is further confirmed by the histogram:
    http://bjanes.smugmug.com/photos/271460379_qwjtR-O.gif
    However, when the file is brought into ACR, with the default tone curve, the highlights are clipped as shown:
    http://bjanes.smugmug.com/photos/271460363_jMYHL-O.png
    and -0.6 EV of exposure compensation is required to bring Step 1 in range:
    http://bjanes.smugmug.com/photos/271460357_vDqYZ-O.png
    Nikon Capture NX renders the highlights of this file correctly.:
    http://bjanes.smugmug.com/photos/271569001_ZJwqX-O.png
    The conclusion is that the default ACR tone curve for the D3 is too "hot" and indicates overexposure when none exists.
    Next, here is the camera histogram of the properly exposed image. The histogram shows some clipping which is not really present in the raw file and which is eliminated by exposing 0.3 EV less. The conclusion is that the camera histogram is slightly conservative.
    http://bjanes.smugmug.com/photos/271460374_mRjof-O.png
    http://bjanes.smugmug.com/photos/271460388_WDMpW-O.png
    The blinking highlight display is even more conservative and indicates overexposure by 0.6 EV:
    http://bjanes.smugmug.com/photos/271460368_iFDsP-O.png
    For optimum results with ETTR, it is best to perform your own tests to determine the accuracy of the in camera histogram and blinking highlights so that these aids may be used for optimum exposure. Since the camera tone curve affects the results, it is important to use the same tone curve each time. Furthermore, one should be aware that the ACR default tone curve is too hot and that one does not necessarily have to reduce exposure when a negative exposure compensation is needed to bring the highlights into range. This ACR overexposure has been noted by others, but I do not know if it occurs with all D3s. If so, then the default tone curve should be revised by Adobe.
    http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=147&topic_id=53935&mesg_id =53935&page=2

    Lawrence,
    > How do you open a DNG that would be different than .nef?
    The difference between the native raw and the DNG (in this case created by Adobe's DNG converter) is not in the raw data itself but in the metadata; BaselineExposure is a creature of the converter (and if the converter interprets the raw data this way, then ACR too is doing it this way).
    I mentioned the DNG format, because *in the DNG file* (as metadata) the adjustment can be seen *explicitely*, in contrast to ACR's processing, which is lying about it: the "Exposure" slider is at 0, despite having adjusted the intensity. (Note, that ACR does not show the adjustment with DNG either.)
    > Are you suggesting that converting a suspicious file having highlight clipping might be saved by converting to DNG?
    There is no need to convert the file. The data is not lost - it is the same, as if you process a well-exposed image and adjust "Exposure" by (in this case) 1/2 EV: some pixels may become clipped. You can counter this several ways (beside by resetting the exposure adjustment), for example by Recovery (even though there is nothing to recover here, for nothing was lost in the first place), Contrast, etc.
    The issue is not, that ACR woud lose image data, but
    1. the auto-adjustment is not justified in this case (it is nonsense, that a Nikon D300's exposure should be adjusted to some imaginary "standard", even if that causes loss of part of the image),
    2. it can be destructive if the user is not versed enough,
    3. it is not indicated explicitely.

  • Missing dll's on launch? (Nikon view dll's)

    I downloaded and seemingly-successfully installed PS CS5 on April 30th.  When I launch PS, however, I received an error "Can't find NEFLibrary3.dll".   After clicking "OK", PS completed launching and seemed to be working perfectly fine.  After some investigation, I found that NEFLibrary3.dll is associated with a older Nikon product (circa 2005) called Nikon View.   I located and downloaded Nikon View, installed it, and put NEFLibrary3.dll in windows/system32 ... and then on next launch PS couldn't find Asteroid6.dll -- which was another Nikon View dll.  So I copied all the Nikon View dll's to windows/system32 and now when launching PS finds an error with stdfinder.dll (or something like that), another Nikon View dll that was included in the dll copy-paste action I just described - apparently it's not the right version of the dll.  It's as if the PS CS5 installer someone didn't include these dll's in the installation package.
    I'm not sure how to proceed from here.  PS still works fine, but the error on launch is annoying.  Has anyone else experienced this annoyance or have any idea how to fix it?  Adobe support suggested I download the installation package and try installing it under a different user account, but I can't see how that would make any difference unless they've updated the installer.
    Bill

    It took me a while for your answer to sink in - at first I didn't get the connection between what I was experiencing and your answer.  It appeared to me that Photoshop wasn't finding some dll's that it was looking for and expecting to find.  But after composing  a long response, your "third party plugin" comment sank in and I checked my supplemental plugins directory - and sure enough there was a NikonNEF plugin circa 2004.  I disabled it and problem gone.
    Thanks for the suggestion and the help.

  • When importing raw photos from Nikon D90 aperture seems to automatically adjust exposure darker. why? How can I stop this?

    When importing raw photos from Nikon D90 aperture seems to automatically adjust exposure darker. why? How can I stop this?

    This is typical of the default NEF RAW conversion of Aperture and the best thing you can do is set up a few presets to apply to all of your RAW images to get a tone curve and colors that is pleasing to you as a default. The in camera JPEGs / embedded JPEGs (that you first see during import) are treated to the Nikon "Picture Control" settings that are set on the camera - the RAW's as interpreted by Aperture are not.
    I have written extensively and even have a few downloadable presets on my site - look for NEF...
    http://photo.rwboyer.com/
    RB

  • How differs soft proofing in View - Proof Colors and Save for Web - Preview?

    Hi, I'm currently confused with one inconsistency. My working space is Adobe RGB and I use calibrated monitor. After I finish my work on image I go to View -> Proof Colors -> Internet Standard RGB. Image looks terribly with the overall violet/purple hue. Then I open Save for Web dialogue, I check Convert to RGB and from Preview options I select again Internet Standard RGB. Now the previewed image looks as expected. The same results I get if I manually convert image to sRGB before soft proofing and saving for web. So... what's the difference between preview in Proof Colours and in Save for Web? Thank you for your opinions.

    Hi 21, thank you for your input. All what you say makes perfect sense, it is exactly how it should work and how I expected it works. My problem was, that while testing this theory in practice, I have come to different results. I expected, that if I stick to the theory (meaning keeping in mind all rules you perfectly described) I should get the same result in both soft proof and save for web preview. But... it was not the case. Save for web preview offered expected results while soft proof was completely out of any assumptions and colours were totally over-saturated with violet/purple hue. Also, Edit -> Assign Profile -> sRGB gave another result then Soft Proof -> Custom -> assign sRGB (preserve numbers), but the same as save for web preview.  What troubled me was why this is so.
    Today I've made tests on hardware calibrated monitor and... everything works exactly as you describe and as I expected.
    Then I went back to another monitor which is software calibrated (both monitors are calibrated with X-Rite i1 Display Pro). And again... I received strange results described above. So I did the last thing I thought and disabled colour calibration on that monitor. And suddenly... both soft proof and save for web preview gave the same result.
    Probable conclusion: soft proof and save for web preview (together with Edit -> Assign Profile) are programmed to use different algorithm which is evident on standard gamut monitors with software calibration. Question can be closed.
    Gene and 21, thank you for your effort.

  • When viewing the color blue on my iPad it appears greenhe correct color appears on my computer screen. Can this be resolved?

    When viewing the color blue on my iPad it appears greenhe correct color appears on my computer screen. Can this be resolved?

    Try this:
    Make sure IOS is updated to latest version
    Reboot device by pressing both the home button and sleep/wake (power) buttons at the same time for 10-15 seconds until the apple logo appears on the screen, then let go.
    If that doesn't work then reset the device by going to settings/general/reset/reset all settings
    (no media or data will be deleted from the device, this will only take a minute).
    If that doesn't work then backup and then restore the device as new.
    And if none of that works, take it to an apple store or call apple support

  • ACR/LR3.3 and Nikon D7000 - magenta color mismatch?

    I recently purchased the Nikon D7000. The NEF RAW files are not supported in current versions of LR and CS5.
    Downloaded and installed LR 3.3RC. Also downloaded and installed ACR 6.3R1.
    Both work with the D7000 NEF-files with ONE exception. If I shoot a "Multiple Exposure" (one feature of the D7000)  the resulting image in both LR and ACR displays in strong "pink"/magenta. All other images display correctly.
    If I open the pink images in Nikon Capture NX2 2.2.6 they open correctly.
    If I use the White Balance tool (pipette) in LR, I can bring the image back to "almost normal" but the WB values then are Temp: 2150, Tint: -138. Conclusion: the Multi Exposure Image from the D7000 is completely mismatched by LR/ACR. But they are correctly matched by Capture NX2.
    This obviously needs to be corrected before final release.
    Has anyone else expreienced the same? Is there a workaround?

    Might be better to post this over here:  http://forums.adobe.com/community/cameraraw
    -Noel

  • Adobe Reader 10.1.8 interfers with Nikon View NX2 software

    Recently, when I try to transfer pictures from my camera to my PC using Nikon's View NX2 software I get a message from Adobe stating "There was an error opening this document. Access denied". Why is Adobe interfering with my Nikon software? And how do I stop this interference?
    Kevin Murphy

    First there is no reason to be running anti virus software. Pray tell which one is mucking up your system? Download from here:
    http://get.adobe.com/reader/

  • ACR to support Nikon D750

    I'm still rather new to Photoshop so I did a little research before posting and I apologize if this question has been answered elsewhere. I currently have Elements 11 and just purchased the new Nikon D750. I cannot open my Raw files from my new camera. Luckily I shoot Raw + Jpg so I can still edit the Jpg's but I prefer to work with the Raw files. I realise that there must be an update to ACR to accomidate or I can use my Nikon software as a temporary work around. I have found that Adobe released CR 8.7 for Photoshop CC and 8.7 RC for Lightroom. My question is: Is there and update yet for Elements, can you use the CR 8.7 for Photoshop CC update with Elements or, are we still waiting?

    As Jim has already said you can sue the DNG Converter 8.7 RC to make DNGs from your NEFs and those will open in your older PSE/ACR combo.
    The DNG Converter is available, here:
    http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/cameraraw8-7.html
    Keep in mind that if you touch any of your NEFs with Nikon software that is older than your camera they may be corrupted and won’t work in Adobe software.  The accidental corruption can be corrected with the utility, here:
    http://owl.phy.queensu.ca/~phil/exiftool/fix_corrupted_nef.html

  • Different appearance of Nikon D600 RAW in Aperture 3.4.5 vs Nikon View NX2

    Hi all, here's a question/statement of an issue with Aperture 3.4.5 processing of Nikon D600 RAW images, appears the same with both Raw Camera 4.08 and 4.07 support versions.
    I'm stating that something is incorrect in Aperture's Calibration of Nikon D600 Raw images, it's not a preview or color profile issue. Exporting the original unprocessed Raw image from Aperture and ViewNX2 clearly look different. Pictures to be provided below.
    The issue is present in Saturated, or close to washed out, regions of the original image. The JPEG preview looks the same as the image in Nikon ViewNX2 but as soon as Aperture has generated its own preview the image looks quite different, and, in my humble opinion, outright incorrect. My closest guess is some sort of issue in the curves handling pixel values in the extended range. The pictures below was original taken in 14-bits per component, I shall try out how 12-bits work out.
    At this point I'm not able to figure out any adjustment or fine tuning of the image to make it look like the original as seen in JPEG preview and Nikon ViewNX2.
    The image below is a JPEG exported from Nikon ViewNX2, no adjustments were made. The image looks just like the JPEG preview within the original RAW image. Note the graceful transition from red-ish to yellow and fully saturaded (white) sun.
    Now compare the image above with the one below, which is the same image but first imported to Aperture, then exported as JPEG without any modifications. There is clearly some weird banding occurring and there is no longer a graceful blend into the fully saturated sun.
    I'm not really able to explain this in any other way than really high values, possibly in the extended sRGB range, is not handled correctly, which should be the way Nikon ViewNX2 deals with it. To the best of my knowledge, no automatic adjustments have been made in Aperture.
    Hope someone has a tip to repair this or that there's a fix for it somewhere.
    I can provide original Raw and/or higher resolution versions upon request.
    Thanks / Patric

    Thanks :-)
    I've seen some posts and discussions about Raw Processing and that all software naturally do some things different. Nikon and Canon will have the Ace on their hands as they know what the cameras really do. Although the NEF (Nikon Raw) format is proprietary I expect Apple, and Adobe, do have agreements to give them some SDK or specs so they can read it.
    That said, the artefact shown seems more incorrect than a different flavor. The banding cannot be resolved with any traditional adjustments. So, I'd be happy if anyone could
    a) Provide some tips on how to work with Curves or some other Adjustment to resolve this.
    b) Confirm they also have similar problems and if they managed to resolve it.
    c) Some Apple support tech could pick this up and follow-up internally.
    best regards

  • Nikon in-camera multiple exposure RAW in Photoshop trouble

    I have a Nikon D7000, I use Photoshop CS5. I took multiple exposures in-camera in RAW and they appear fine on the back of my camera, and in the finder window on my Mac, but when uploaded and viewed through Bridge and Photoshop the images are monochromatic RED in color. I have contacted Nikon and they say they can not guarentee compatability with 3rd party software. No amount of editing, that I have found, returns the colors to where they should be (NOT RED). I only found one other discussion board adressing this issue, It was a Nikon, possibly D80(not sure, dont remember) no one left an answer on it and it was from 2011. Please help me figure this out, or update the RAW compatability please!!! thanks

    I tried uploading the orgional RAW of this test shot before I took the real ones, but of course it was too big, so here is the JPG convert. On another shot (under camera calibration settings) I was able to get rid of much of the red, but most of the real color was lost and dark, and playing with saturation and other settings outside of camera calibration didnt do any good. Again the RAW looks fine in the on-camera thubnail preview and in the Mac finder window, but not in the ADOBE programs. THX for any help...

  • Shooting with Nikon D7000 the color is awful. Where do i begin?

    The clips generated from the recently new Nikon D7000 are very hard to correct. I've been using the 3-way color corrector in FCP for years and nothing seems to work on the nikon movie files. The skin tones are flat and almost gray. the over all color is lifeless. And shadow detail is lost even though the image is largely over exposed. Anyone else having this trouble. Of course I am editing these clips alongside clips from the Canon 5D Mark ll.

    I have to be more specific the original Nikon D7000 clips are too yellow and too blue which makes green I can't do anything to make these look good. ahhh!

  • Raw file created by Nikon D7000 with multi-exposure

    After recent updates to ACR6.3 etc.,  I find all my photos taken by D7000 with multi-exposure turn into PINK colored when opened by ACR.  I have no problem in opening other raw files taken by D7000 without multi-exposure nor those taken by D700 (not D7000) with multi-exposure.  I don't know whether it is something wrong with my setting or this is a bug in ACR6.3.  Any one has similar issue?
    Thanks!

    Please see "known issues" section in the release notes:
    http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2010/12/lightroom-3-3-and-camera-raw-6-3-now-avail able.html

Maybe you are looking for