Preview and Finder Can't Read Nikon D600 Camera Raw Files

Question

Level 1

0 points

Preview and Finder Can't Read Nikon D600 Camera Raw Files

Under 10.8.2 with all updates applied, Finder cannot generate a preview for Nikon camera raw (NEF) files generated by my D600, and attepting to open the same file in Preview yields a message "The file “[filename].NEF” could not be opened. Preview currently does not support this raw file format." Lightroom and Photoshop CS6 open the files without issue. Can anyone offer me any advice as to what the problem might be here? Thank you in advance for your input.

Mac Pro, OS X Mountain Lion (10.8.2), Mac Pro 3,1

Posted on Mar 8, 2013 12:01 PM

Reply

Answer 1

Linc Davis

Level 10

209,547 points

Mar 8, 2013 12:36 PM in response to Jon Tu

Have you installed all available software updates?

OS X Mountain Lion: Supported digital camera RAW formats

Reply

Answer 2

Jon Tu Author

Level 1

0 points

Mar 8, 2013 12:39 PM in response to Jon Tu

I hasten to add that I do not have iPhoto or Aperture installed, which prevents me from running Digital Camera RAW Compatibility Update 4.02 or later, which theoretically include D600 support. Is there any way to get MacOS and Preview reading these files without installing one of these applications? Would installing one of these applications andthen running the aforementioned update enable MacOS and Preview to read these files?

Reply

Answer 3

Linc Davis

Level 10

209,547 points

Mar 8, 2013 1:17 PM in response to Jon Tu

Digital Camera RAW Compatibility Update 4.04

Reply

Answer 4

Jon Tu Author

Level 1

0 points

Mar 8, 2013 2:34 PM in response to Linc Davis

Thank you for the reply, Linc. The update you link to can ONLY be installed on systems that also have Aperture version 3.4 or later or iPhoto version 9.4 or later installed. I have neither. Is there a version of this update that exists just for the system handling of raw? Or must I buy and install one of Apple's photo management applications for the OS to support this camera?

Reply

Answer 5

Linc Davis

Level 10

209,547 points

Mar 8, 2013 2:56 PM in response to Jon Tu

I didn't know that, but there is no other version of the update. Maybe a future OS X update will include it. If you can live without QuickLook previews of raw files, you don't need the update. Adobe applications don't depend on the system RAW converter, as you already know.

Reply

Answer 6

Mar 8, 2013 3:09 PM in response to Jon Tu

Every new Mac comes with the (then) current version of iPhoto. Which version do you have? If it can be updated to 9.4, go ahead and do so, even if you are not using it.

Reply

Answer 7

léonie

Level 10

194,785 points

Mar 8, 2013 3:15 PM in response to Linc Davis

All Raw-Support versions later than Digital Camera RAW Compatibility Update 4.01* listed in OS X Mountain Lion: Supported digital camera RAW formats have the footnote

* Aperture version 3.4 or later, or iPhoto version 9.4 or later, is required to install this update.

But iPhoto '11 from the AppStore is not that expensive and might be useful for the OP.

Reply

Answer 8

Jon Tu Author

Level 1

0 points

Mar 8, 2013 3:16 PM in response to Jeffrey Jones2

I was thinking just that, Jeffery. Can you, or anyone else, confirm that this update does add system-level (i.e. Preview.app and Finder preview) D600 raw support to Mac OS 10.8.2? My machine came with a previous version of iPhoto, so I would need to pay $15 to upgrade to a version compatible with this update. That seems like my solution-- assuming I can stomach the indignity of paying Apple $15 for software I don't intend to ever use...

Reply

Answer 9

Mar 8, 2013 3:20 PM in response to Jon Tu

The raw update software is an OS-level thing. So yes, installing it will make it work in preview and Finder once you get it installed.

It strikes me as really odd that you can't install the software without installing iPhoto or Aperture first.

It's possible the next OS X update (10.8.3, by the numbers) will include it. I guess you could wait. Or spend the $15; up to you. I'd send feedback to Apple though, it's an OS level installer and shouldn't need software on top of it to install.

Reply

Answer 10

Jon Tu Author

Level 1

0 points

Mar 8, 2013 3:33 PM in response to William Lloyd

I agree with you completely William, it is other obnoxious or a glaring oversight that Apple would make OS-level camera raw support something that must be paid for. The D600 is certainly a newer piece of hardware, but it is by no means exotic. Time was that a great selling point of Mac OS was the dilligence that Apple put into making it compatilble with as many file formats as poissible on the OS level, especially the proprietary formats commonly used by photographers and graphics professionals.

Anyhow, I thank you all for your help with this issue.

Regards,

Jon

Reply

Answer 11

Mar 8, 2013 4:16 PM in response to Jon Tu

Jon,

I tested this and I can confirm it works. On a 10.8.2 system that didn't have the 4.0.4 update, I deleted Aperture and iPhoto and tried to install. It woudn't install. I then installed iPhoto and the update installed fine.

In general, these RAW updates *are* rolled into OS X releases. So I don't think you'll need to pay to get D600 support, if you want to wait for an OS X update that includes it. Since the D600 was released between the release of 10.8.2 (September 19th!) and now, my guess is that 10.8.3 would include it, but I can't confirm it. But historically all the RAW updates that come from these DCRU updates do eventually show up in OS X updates, so it's likely more a matter of when, than of if.

Also note that for the last couple years or so, all new Macs come with a Mac App Store license for iPhoto. So if you've gotten a Mac since that happened, you should be authorized to install iPhoto anyway. I don't think a Mac Pro 3,1 is new enough to have had this though.

Reply

Answer 12

Jul 6, 2013 5:54 PM in response to Jon Tu

Do you think newer raw files produced by newer cameras such as the Canon 6D will be previewable with quick look in the coming Mac OS X Mavericks upgrade?

Reply