9546 Views Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 8 Next 119 Replies Latest reply: Dec 20, 2007 7:58 AM by Janet Taylor Go to original post
+*No issues at all with RAW images from the D300 in Capture NX under Leopard*+
I'm really struggling to understand what may be wrong with my setup when I see that you are successfully running Capture NX / Leopard. I am a long term Apple / Aperture / Nikon user and I bend over backwards - so does my wallet! - to accommodate them. I have Leopard installed to my 8 Core MacPro from day one - I did archive and install. Generally ok except some favourite applications no longer work. But Aperture is just fine under Leopard so far. Now I have a D3 and despite the clear warnings from Nikon I downloaded Capture NX 1.3. It doesn't work. It is unable to deal with a D3 .NEF. It can however process a .NEF from my existing D200 files. My question is, what is enabling you to see the D300 .NEF files and me not? Can there be differences in the D300 / D3 files or in the NX downloads?
As an experiment I reinstalled Tiger on a separate disk and added Capture NX 1.3 and the D3 files are of course perfectly workable as one would expect. And interestingly the download procedure for Tiger was more detailed than Leopard indicating clearly that NX is not yet ready for Leopard.
I will use the time as a learning curve for my D3 and to play around with NX and JPEGS and see what 2008 brings. But if anybody can shed any light on my situation I would appreciate it.
ps probably not relevant but some applications e.g. iVolum, that now fail to run properly on the 8 Core run like a dream on my MacbookPro under Leopard - how come?
Actually, I posted a message here critical of the company for not providing a timely update which supports Nikon's top of the line cameras. It was far from a flame--much along the lines of what is posted above--but it was deleted and I received a message that it wasn't appropriate or something like that.
I am not sure exactly what the differences are, but for me I was already an NX owner before Leopard, or the D3/300. I upgraded a working licensed copy of NX to 1.3 before my new cameras arrived. To be fair, I have not exhaustively tested NX under Leopard so some items may not work, but I have not had any "show-stoppers".
On another brand new machine here, fresh out of the box, that did not previously have NX on it, I did try installing 1.3 NX with the license that came with the camera, and that did not work properly.
So, clearly there are obviously issues with NX and Leopard, I guess I am lucky on my other box that I think the method of install (upgrade) probably made the difference.
That is the best excuse I have heard for Apple not competing!
Because they are getting it right.
BTW, another commercial RAW converter now supports the new cameras. Bibble.
So now the biggest and smallest companies now support the new D3 and D300. Perhaps the Aperture team never got the memo about the new cameras?
In the hospitality business, must serve about 4000
people a week. I think I converted more PC users to
Apple in the last four years than Apples best sales
person. I would love to understand the process of developing Raw support? Why so Long? I understand
alot of testing under many different conditions must be done. I put Apple at the TOP. Come on guys?
Did the latest Os update include the raw support that everyones been saying needed an OS update? When I looked into the details there was nothing stated but security concerns but I can now see a D300 NEF file that I saved to my desktop. It used to be a default image that was white and black. Now I see an actual preview of the image which may mean that the OS recognizes he file format.... fingers crossed!
I have a wedding in two weeks and two more clients after that and RAw is my friend:)
I still see the dreaded maroon "unsupported image format" when trying to view D3 nefs. I just shot 1,200 jpegs last night and ended up with major white balance problems due to changing gym lights. I should have used RAW.
On a side note, I did have another thread that asked if anyone could give me a good reason why Apple should not provide RAW release dates. I was honestly hoping that a reasonable explanation would help me feel a bit better about waiting. What I got was a notice that they have deleted the thread--nice response Apple.
It won't matter much longer though, I'm starting warm up to Lightroom pretty well.
As Well me with CS3.
Im an apple guy tru and true but I did pickup a new camera that Ive been waiting for for months and I did incorporate it into my workflow and I did have to change my workflow because neither NX or Aperture work for me now. I am a project manager for a major company and I understand that apple isnt standing still on this matter, but good project management means looking at your customer facing product and building a model that can support rapid changes as customers demand them. I am sure apple understands the ever changing face of digital photography and so to not code your support software to be able to handle those changes is unimaginable. Hopefully the new Os is in code lock and they have a deployment date set and are waiting for a maintenance window and regression testing.
I hope youre listening APPLE. I still cant see m RAw images and business is suffering as a result.
I provided a feedback to Aperture team to hurry up also.
Come on everyone... we can complain about it and do nothing or take 60 seconds and fill in this form and let Apple Aperture team know that this is a priority task.
Providing feedback via Aperture Feedback. To do this from Aperture MENU:
APERTURE > PROVIDE APERTURE FEEDBACK
or, just visit:
Apple is really pushing the limits in leaving Nikon D3 and D300 shooters in the dark on RAW support. They responded to the new Canon cameras promptly and it goes without saying as a close partner with Nikon they had access to all they needed in the weeks and months before the new Nikon cameras came out. I've had my D3 now for 20 days and I need Aperture RAW support for this camera. If Adobe could do it there just isn't a reason that Apple couldn't also give us D3/D300 RAW support. My workflow is totally based on bringing my RAW files into Aperture. I don't want to have to wait for MacWord for this to be resolved.
If the Aperture Team is monitoring any of this - PLEASE make providing RAW support for Nikon's D3 and D300 cameras a priority!
I have to admit I have already switched to Lightroom with my D300. I am very disappointed with the level of support from Apple with Aperture. The time an effort I have invested in Aperture to classify and tag my library has been huge - so the move was not considered lightly. All my new projects using the D300 are in Lightroom and I am migrating my library bit by bit over as well.
I guess I am hoping that Apple will get their act together and release a version of Aperture that performs at a reasonable pace on a new Mac. I still am very frustrated with the poor performance, sluggish response time and the time it takes to open and close.
This is a real shame as I thought Aperture had real potential - come on Apple give us a nice Xmas present and announce a new version of Aperture that supports new cameras and sorts out the performance issues.
It's not an issue, exactly, in that it's not like LR renders red as blue, or anything. It's a subtle colour cast that the adobe renderer seems to have with all NEF files. You'd think a color cast would be an easy thing to compensate for, but it doesn't seem to be. Obviously whatever's going on under the hood is more complicated than a simple linear interpretation. I think it's actually a sort of two-way cast. The blacks look sort of magenta, and the reds aren't nearly red enough. For example, I frequently photograph a friend who has red hair. When her skin tones look good in LR, her hair has a brassy, greenish cast. If I adjust the hair to look good, the skin is too reddish. I've tried running the custom camera calibration scripts for LR/ACR, and they help a bit by boosting the reds/magentas, although better with some scenes than others, but Aperture just seems to do a better job of getting it right in the first place, without having to mess about.