D810 files

I have been reading a discussion on a local list I belong to regarding Adobe's inability to process the D810 raw file properly.  He claims that Nikon's Capture NX-D does a much better job.  Has anyone found this to be true.  He claims the images when viewed on LR are much more grainier than when viewed on Capture NX-D.

The D810 algos from Adobe are definitely not optimized. C1 does a really good job.

E.J. Peiker wrote:The D810 algos from Adobe are definitely not optimized.  C1 does a really good job.

Thanks E.J.   Would that apply to D7100 files too?

No and quite frankly it really isn't a major problem for the D810 either. Beware of the Internet Amplification effect

I am just starting to work on my D810 files, so I cannot comment on which software produces the best output at default import settings. Currently I convert the NEFs to DNGs and import in LR 4.

A first thing I noticed with LR is that the default COLOR noise reduction (slider at 25) is often too much, resulting in overall pale colors over the entire image (observed this at iso 1000-2000). Bringing back the slider between 10 and 20 boosts the colors without bringing visible color noise.

The capture sharpening default is way too much too for a sensor with no AA filter. Either turn it off or set it from the default 25/1.0 to 10/0.8 (amount and radius)

I always use Nikon's NX-D for my D810 files for the conversion. I do not spend much time in it, but for me I prefer the output. I then save as a 16-bit Tif for Photoshop.

I am dealing with d810 files for last two months & have tried both NX-D & ACR. Now I am trying the DXO optics pro 10. IMHO ACR 8.7 is still not optimised properly as EJ said. NX-D is doing far better job. It is not the noise only but colour rendering is slightly different. NX-D render colour much to my liking. Considering flat picture control. Now DXO is also doing better than ACR. But none of this two have the versatility of ACR or LR till date considering local adjustment.

I am a bit surprised if Nikon software does a much better job than LR.
One of the first thing I checked when trying the D810 is that LR default RAW import was similar to the in-camera jpeg, as I find very annoying when the pictures on the computer don't look like what I saw on the camera. And from my quick tests LR import seemed quite reliable and faithfull.

But maybe I am wrong. Could somebody post an example showing the advantage of NX over LR, regarding noise and/or colors ?

BTW, when I read "ACR is still not optimised", does it mean that Adobe is supposed to improve its processing of D810 files in the future ?

Vertigo wrote:BTW, when I read "ACR is still not optimised", does it mean that Adobe is supposed to improve its processing of D810 files in the future ?

http://www.dslrbodies.com/accessories/s ... om-56.html

I tend to build my own profiles for the camera. The color output from Lightroom is a whole lot better that way.

Anthony Medici wrote:I tend to build my own profiles for the camera. The color output from Lightroom is a whole lot better that way.

Could anyone describe what is the best procedure to maintain D810 in camera nikon default colour via ACR. DXO seems to have this option in their raw converter. Which I found very much near to NIKON in camera colour rendition. But ACR or LR?

absu wrote:

Anthony Medici wrote:I tend to build my own profiles for the camera. The color output from Lightroom is a whole lot better that way.

Could anyone describe what is the best procedure to maintain D810 in camera nikon default colour via ACR. DXO seems to have this option in their raw converter. Which I found very much near to NIKON in camera colour rendition. But ACR or LR?

I use the Camera Neutral option in ACR mainly because Camera Neutral is designed to most closely simulate the Gretag Macbeth color checker colors which is a consistent starting place.  I have been doing this ever since Eric Chang of Adobe suggested it to me.

absu wrote:

Anthony Medici wrote:I tend to build my own profiles for the camera. The color output from Lightroom is a whole lot better that way.

Could anyone describe what is the best procedure to maintain D810 in camera nikon default colour via ACR. DXO seems to have this option in their raw converter. Which I found very much near to NIKON in camera colour rendition. But ACR or LR?

I'd have to see if the profiles created are closer to Nikon's colors or not as I wasn't trying to get Nikon's colors. I was trying to get the correct colors. Once you start with the correct colors, it is much easier to make slight variations from there.

E.J. Peiker wrote:I use the Camera Neutral option in ACR mainly because Camera Neutral is designed to most closely simulate the Gretag Macbeth color checker colors which is a consistent starting place.  I have been doing this ever since Eric Chang of Adobe suggested it to me.

The key to that statement seems to be "designed to most closely simulate". When I profile, it is supposed to get the actual color and comparing the two with an image of the chart, several of the colors are off with camera neutral as compared to the profiled image and the chart. It is possible that this works better with a Canon file but I do not have a picture of the x-rite chart taken with a canon camera to allow me to compare the results.

I agree with Tony i.e. that a custom color profile is the way to go if you want accurate, pleasing color. A custom profile is very easy to make automatically in ACR/LR using a ColorChecker Passport or Colorchecker Classic. I do a profile for full sun, cloudy and open shade. Them when I import the images into LR I select the appropriate WB profile and then import. Each one of these profiles also has a small bump in vibrance, clarity and a slight bump in saturation along with a check mark for Enable Profile (lens) Correction and Remove Chromatic Aberration that has been saved as a User Preset in the Develop module (this is what I click on to import). As a result I have a very consistent look for all the images I import into LR without having to make any further adjustments so it is very easy to evaluate the images. This doesn't mean that I don't make any further adjustments as I do, but I don't make any adjustments until I have culled the images at least twice if not more before making adjustments to images selected as ones I want to work on.