# for some reason my windows preview with the nef codec look way better then PS



## matthewo (Dec 16, 2011)

well when i do a preview with windows exploror of my nef raw file it look way better, the colors are vivid, then when i open it in camera raw in photoshop it just doesnt look right.  any reason for this

im shooting in adobe on the camera vs rgb.


----------



## matthewo (Dec 16, 2011)

im looking at more images now cause and its really bad.  they just look terrible.  its like the preview looks pretty good, not need for much editing, then once opened in photoshop or even lightroom the look like crap,  the lights get lighter and the darks get darker. some setting must be wrong in photoshop.  im guessing its the workspace???  but i changed it in cs5.1 camera raw and it doesnt look any different maybe im changing it at the wrong place.  i also cannot find a place to change color space in lightroom


----------



## matthewo (Dec 16, 2011)

pretty Sh*ty huh? this is an unedited photo that is from the camera in raw. the right side(better looking one) is a printscreen of the windows exploror preview of the photo. and the left side is a camera raw import into photoshop, WTF, this is just making my photos look really bad.... someone please help here im doing something wrong i guess.

http://www.orseinv.com/TEMP_PHOTOS/example.jpg

you can really tell by the sky in this example, but this is just a small jpg, when i look at them on the computer in full raw you can really see the differences....
 all this time i thought my lcd screen on the camera just was way different, so i started adjusting the brightness, but it seems as if its a problem with adobes codes or something.


----------



## soxOZ (Dec 16, 2011)

The reason is simple, as by using windows to view your Raw files, it is using the Nikon's Codec's and that allows you to see the photo with the picture settings that you have used in the camera along with any ADL settings.
But ACR & PS does not recognize these Picture Settings or the ADL setting so you will only see the base settings of the raw file which can look very flat.

You can in ACR select a Picture setting under the little camera Icon (standard, neutral, vivid, Portrait etc including the D2X modes) and apply them to the shot. 
But if you have other settings changed in the camera like contrast, hue, brightness etc, you will have to readjust these either in ACR or PS...

You can download free _*Nikon VIEW NX2*_ and do a save of the RAW file to either Tiff or Jpeg and this will embed the Picture settings that you have used from you camera and set it into the tiff/jpg from the Raw file so you can then edit it in ACR/PS...
I use _*Capture NX2*_, but you will have to pay for that, so I suggest using _*VIEW NX2*_ as it's free and you can also perform a few minor adjustments in it. 
Will cost you nothing so give it a try to see if that fixes your problem...


----------



## Rephargotohp (Dec 16, 2011)

It's because Windows uses the embeded JPEG preview instead of the actual RAW Preview that Photoshop generates.

 Even if you shoot RAW, your camera will make a preview for viewing on the back of the camera and in other programs, based upon what your JPEG settings are for your camera.

When you take an image into, Lightroom, Brdige, They will render a new preview based upon the actual RAW whihc has no PP on iot yet and will update that preview should you PP the image. When you open an in image in ACR again you are seeing the RAW file. In other programs that do not render a preview they use the original embedded JPEG preview which has the in camera PP applied, so it looks different


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 16, 2011)

Yep, what others have said.  In the windows preview, you are actually viewing the JPEG that was generated using your camera's picture controls and settings.  Adobe is taking the RAW data and displaying it's interpretation of it.

If you're not at the point where you can edit your RAW files to your liking, consider shooting RAW + JPEG so that you have your cameras interpretation of the scene along with the RAW data.  Also, as said above, ViewNX will take your camera settings and apply them to your RAW data to give you a place to start with, although, personally, I find ViewNX a bit clunky compared to Photoshop.


----------



## matthewo (Dec 16, 2011)

ok so in other words when i shoot in raw none of this really maters anways, i could just set my camera to picture control standard, because if im using lightroom or photoshop its going to all look the same once imported, and im just throughing my self off when i look at the screen of the camera on different settings after i take the picture.


----------



## matthewo (Dec 16, 2011)

i can edit them to my liking i guess, i think the main thing is i just like starting with a better image, knowing that is just an autoprocessed version defferntly helps me.  i always process the image to look better then the windows preview anyways so i guess its not a problem.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 16, 2011)

matthewo said:


> ok so in other words when i shoot in raw none of this really maters anways, i could just set my camera to picture control standard, because if im using lightroom or photoshop its going to all look the same once imported, and im just throughing my self off when i look at the screen of the camera on different settings after i take the picture.


 Pretty much.


matthewo said:


> i can edit them to my liking i guess, i think the main thing is i just like starting with a better image, knowing that is just an autoprocessed version defferntly helps me.  i always process the image to look better then the windows preview anyways so i guess its not a problem.


Sounds like you got it figured out.

FWIW, the only setting besides aperture, shutter speed, and ISO that carry over into Photoshop is white balance.  Adobe throws the rest of it away.


----------



## matthewo (Dec 16, 2011)

Yeah i guess i was thinking changing the stuff on the camera would change the picture, but it only does if it converts it to jpg as raw is pretty much no settings at all applied.

So even changing sharping in the camera doesnt effect raw either?

Even white balance isnt applied to the raw when shooting? Just post processing


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 16, 2011)

matthewo said:


> Yeah i guess i was thinking changing the stuff on the camera would change the picture, but it only does if it converts it to jpg as raw is pretty much no settings at all applied.
> 
> So even changing sharping in the camera doesnt effect raw either?
> 
> Even white balance isnt applied to the raw when shooting? Just post processing



Well, Adobe does bring in the white balance to Adobe Camera RAW.  It is the default 'as shot' selection.  It doesn't effect the data, but the information is there.

And no, sharpening has no effect on the RAW file when processed through Photoshop.

FWIW, your histogram in camera, the blinkies, the preview on the screen, etc are all effected by your in camera settings.  Also, if you are using an automated mode, selecting the active dynamic lighting can influence the exposure the camera chooses.

So, your settings in camera do matter and they can impact the data, but Adobe doesn't care about most of them.


----------



## matthewo (Dec 16, 2011)

well i shoot in full manual mode all the time. i was just kinda making sure that these things we talk about are all basically what the camera does to process the image. so basically with me processing the raw file im doing the same thing just to my liking right. i would rather the camera do as little processing of the image as possible so i can do all the processing. i dont want to be processing on top of what the camera all ready did, that only makes the image quality drop.

i guess the main thing is correct me if im wrong... when you shoot in raw and it saves the "raw" image file.  the camera is just running off of aperture, iso, and shutter speed basically.  maybe active d-lighting.  but all the other settings are just what the camera does to process the image and make a jpg file. right


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 16, 2011)

matthewo said:


> well i shoot in full manual mode all the time. i was just kinda making sure that these things we talk about are all basically what the camera does to process the image. so basically with me processing the raw file im doing the same thing just to my liking right. i would rather the camera do as little processing of the image as possible so i can do all the processing. i dont want to be processing on top of what the camera all ready did, that only makes the image quality drop.
> 
> i guess the main thing is correct me if im wrong... when you shoot in raw and it saves the "raw" image file.  the camera is just running off of aperture, iso, and shutter speed basically.  maybe active d-lighting.  but all the other settings are just what the camera does to process the image and make a jpg file. right


You kind of lost me on the second paragraph.

Regardless, sharpness, active d lighting, contrast, brightness, picture controls, etc are not imported into any Adobe programs.  The only things that are imported are the actual data(which is controlled by aperture, shutter speed, and ISO), and the white balance setting.  Everything else is discarded so that you start from a clean slate.

If you open the image in View NX(a Nikon program), all of your settings are incorporated.


----------



## matthewo (Dec 16, 2011)

i see, well i guess the thing is "sharpness, active d lighting, contrast, brightness, picture controls" are not actually part of the real image.  they are just data thats added to the shot for programs that use the nef codecs.  so really the way adobe opens the file is the true raw file.


----------



## soxOZ (Dec 17, 2011)

matthewo said:


> i see, well i guess the thing is "sharpness, active d lighting, contrast, brightness, picture controls" are not actually part of the real image.  they are just data thats added to the shot for programs that use the nef codecs.  so really the way adobe opens the file is the true raw file.


True to a point, but why don't you just shoot in either *RAW+JPG fine* or just in *JPG fine* for a short time as all those settings you have mentioned (_sharpness, active d lighting, contrast, brightness, picture controls_) will be embedded into the JPG image and Adobe (ACR, PS & LR) will see it as you as seeing it in Windows...


----------



## matthewo (Dec 17, 2011)

still just not happy, i guess im going to have to figure a way to use the nikon software. i only have nx view right now, but the images just look soo much better in nxview. it really makes no sense.

i just need to figure a way to make lightroom or adobe see the same setting that nx view is seeing.  cause some file im unable to make look as good as i they do just opening them in nx view.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 17, 2011)

matthewo said:


> still just not happy, i guess im going to have to figure a way to use the nikon software. i only have nx view right now, but the images just look soo much better in nxview. it really makes no sense.


What doesn't make sense?  A RAW file is an unprocessed file.  That's why it's called RAW.  If you want a processed file, shoot JPEG.  Also, there is always the best of both worlds, which is RAW +JPEG.  Memory is cheap now and the JPEG files aren't that big.  You can use the JPEG file for now, and when you are more experienced in photoshop you can go back and edit the RAW files that you like...


> i just need to figure a way to make lightroom or adobe see the same setting that nx view is seeing.  cause some file im unable to make look as good as i they do just opening them in nx view.


The only way to make adobe see the same settings that NX View is seeing is to shoot JPEG so that the settings are actually applied to the file.  Adobe _does_ however have some presets that may be able to mimick them that you _could_ set as your default.


----------



## matthewo (Dec 18, 2011)

The only thing i could think is active d lighting.  One picture for example i cannot get to look right.  There is a bronze statue that is under exposed in lightroom, but looks good in nxview.  Problem is the sky looks good but if exposed more would wash out.

I guess i will just use nxview for some files.


----------



## matthewo (Dec 18, 2011)

here is something i read from another place, and i think its pretty much my problem exactly

"You're missing my point here.
The point I was trying to make is that when you have ADL turned on, the histograms on the camera look great (and so do the pictures), however, when imported into Lightroom, this camera control is not known to Lightroom so it put's it as Elliot mentions, as the sensor sees it.
If I didn't have ADL turned on, I would of noticed that the histograms were not correct, therefore done something about it. However, the histograms, that took into consideration the ADL effect, made the pictures look great, which they are.......when viewed in NX2.
Oliver, this is what I got confussed with. I incorrectly assumed it would change the raw data, however, it seems that it writes a little extra raw data that Lightroom discards. Only Nikon software can process this data."

what i need to do is basically turn off all the camera settings if shooting in raw, to try and get the best possible raw image. then once i do the post processing i can really make it look how i want. better then processing on top of processing.

also like to add that ADL does affect the raw file not the the way of the actual d lighting but it does it because it will underexpose the image maybe 1/2 stop in the actual raw file, then the active d lighting "data" will then add some lighting to the shadows therefor not overexposing brights like the sky. now i see why when im opening it in LR it becomes a real PITA to get right on multiple images, deffently when i have ADL set to auto on the camera.

i am happy i figured this out. there are a bunch of little things to learn, just takes some time to understand them...

ok i guess the only other question is. is exposure compensation actually burnt into the raw file or just another one of these add ons that is only read by the nikon software? i also understand your saying to shoot in raw and jpg, then i can pick what i like more, but i would rather not have to deal with twice as many files, some days i will end up with 250+ images i wouldnt want 500 to have to delete 90% of them. also in reality i need to be getting the raw file correct. the least amount of processing is always going to result in the cleanest image. i would like to beable to get it as close to perfect on the camera as possible and do minimal tweaking with software later. i would rather start now at getting RAW perfect, then having to deal with raw and jpg. i think the the long run i will be better off. you know its hard to teach an old dog that is set in their ways new tricks(basically switching styles later on once im already set in my ways.)

also in reality, if shot good without ADL on, and i need to tweak the darks a little without over exposing the sky, i can use the highlights/lights/darks/shadows in lightroom to tweak it to do basically what ADL does when needed.

correct me if im wrong, but i think im getting the basics here.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Dec 18, 2011)

Yes, if you want your preview image to aproximate what the RAW file will look like, you will need to turn the contrast down, turn sharpening down, turn off active lighting, and turn off noise reduction.


----------



## Rephargotohp (Dec 18, 2011)

You actually can get all the Nikon style profiles in  Lightroom,
Go to the develop module and then all the way down to Camera Calibration and then the Profile and drop down the list, You will see all of the Nikon profiles for your specific Camera ( they are brand and camera specific, they will recognize the camera  in the file you are working on) You can then choose to use the Nikon profiles and your image will look like the Capture NX look instead of the Adobe standard.

If the camera profiles are not in the drop down, you can download camera profiles fro lightroom from Adobe


----------



## matthewo (Dec 18, 2011)

i see my camera profiles in there, but i have tweaked my profiles in the camera, so i dont think the tweaks i have made to the profiles actually get them all.  for example. i changed standard to a bit more saturation and one up on brightness and maxed out the sharpness.  but i think LR only has the default profiles on the camera.  also does this have any effect on ADL


----------



## matthewo (Dec 18, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Yes, if you want your preview image to aproximate what the RAW file will look like, you will need to turn the contrast down, turn sharpening down, turn off active lighting, and turn off noise reduction.



when you say turn down these things, put them at default?  i think the camera profile standard has defaults or the middle for contrast and brightning, but for sharpening its just 1-9 would the default or middle just be 5?


----------



## matthewo (Dec 18, 2011)

just took a few sample pictures with everything in the camera turned to off. the preview now looks exactly as it is when i import it into photoshop. great. also it seems like the picture look very true to life. im not sure why the camera defaults to having all this stuff on. maybe it just works better for the "auto" shooter who is using the kit lens. but im using a higher end 24-70, and i think with manual controls the cameras settings where just hendering its performance.

then again, i am using a d5100 a somewhat entry level dslr so it probably caters more towards the individual that will be doing limited processing and just wants the photos to "look good"  as shot


----------

