kkdji1

Hi. I upgraded from a D7100 to the D500 and for the first time I have committed to shooting in Raw. I am not interested in spending lots of time processing my photos but I do want to have the highest quality of photos to work with hence the switch from jpeg to raw. I have only ever used I-Photo software to process my photos. I am not finding it is able to handle raw files very well. My question is for those who are Nikon shooters, do you prefer the Nikon software or do you use another software? And for myself as a person new to any real PP is the Nikon software easy to learn? Also, I know once I decide on a software to use that I will spend some time on youtube looking for tutorials. I enjoy shooting wildlife with birds being my favorite. Thank you for any advice.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

When I first started shooting raw I tried out a number of software packages, Nikon among them. I settled on Adobe. Back then, the Nikon program was kind of klunky although it had some nice features. The nice features disappeared in an upgrade.

In general, it's my feeling that the software companies should not build cameras and the camera companies should not build software.

I will readily admit that I haven't returned to check out the Nikon software in more than a decade. Things change. But I have something that works for me and I don't want to spend time fixing something that isn't broken.

The advantage of Nikon software is that it reads the proprietary tags in the EXIF data so it can reproduce the settings in the camera exactly. Personally, I don't think that's important because using raw, I can change the settings after the fact, even years after I pushed the button. I don't believe the camera settings are irreplaceable, and I can use generic settings so I don't have to fiddle with settings while shots evaporate in front of me.

redhogbill Loc: antelope, calif

I spend the 9.99 a month for Photoshop/lightroom. {not everyone's cup of tea} i spent a lot of time learning it { finally signed up for www.creativelive.com they have some good classes for beginners and advanced. it helped me immensely..} i shot in Jpg at first, finally went to RAW best thing i ever did.

good luck

redhogbill Loc: antelope, calif

00ps

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

If, as you say, you are not interested in spending lots of time processing my photos, then why bother with RAW images? You are getting everything you need out of JPEGs.

You have several choices moving forward.
Ignore the Nikon software
Get Fastone Image Viewer which has rudimentary editing capabilities
ACDSee Pro has a free version with more than rudimentary editing capabilities.
Spend $10/month and graduate to the Bigs with Adobe.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Your stated goals are in conflict. See rgrenaderphoto's comment.

When you become a RAW photographer, you become the decision maker for these considerations in post processing, where many had been decided by the camera for the JPEG:

1. Sharpening
2. Noise Reduction
3. Color Saturation
4. Exposure adjustments, general
5. Contrast, general
6. Highlights and shadows
7. White Balance
8. Lens corrections
9. Color space
10. Pixel resolution for target image share platforms
11. Disk storage (for the larger files)
12. Image file back-up strategy (for those larger files)

You don't have to understand all these issues, but when you do, you'll be much more successful as a RAW photographer.

If you don't want to do the 12 items above, you should resist the UHH peer pressure about RAW because you won't achieve better images just by setting the camera to RAW. Instead, consider whether a higher quality lens coupled with expert-level shooting technique are better approaches to achieve better JPEG results as compared to more computer time after shooting.

CaptainBobBrown

CHG CANON is exactly right. "not wanting to spend much time" and "wanting to have the highest quality..." are incompatible. First, you would have to spend quite a bit of time climbing the learning curve...but you will become a better photographer doing so because it will open your eyes to seeing things the way your camera does. If you are not satisfied with the jpegs your camera produces now than you must have some idea of what you'd change. I have found the ON1's Photo Raw 2020 does better than Lightroom at making minor adjustments to JPEGs and that might be sufficient but you'll be missing an awful lot of what you can get out of a RAW image. Still, if you don't want to commit the time why "commit to shooting RAW"?

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

While it is certainly possible to spend lots of time in postprocessing, it is not always necessary and I would like to propose another reason to shoot raw.

When I shot film, I just took what the processor gave me and either put it in an album or a shoebox.
When I started to shoot digital, suddenly I was responsible for the photos. I used jpgs for a while but then messed up settings and got some blue photos. They weren't reproduceable and I needed those shots so I spent a lot of time trying to get them to look reasonable. I found that if I had shot raw it would have taken me much less time to correct them. So I started shooting raw+jpg. The jpg was there for immediate use and the raw was my insurance in case I screwed up again.

After a couple years I found that digital shots were much cheaper than buying film and spending money on processing. That meant that I took a lot more shots. Suddenly I had more shots than I could keep track of.

As I was learning postprocessing, I tried Lightroom as one of the programs. I found that I could organize my stuff with keywords and find things that I even forgot I took. So I started using Lightroom. Now, since I'm using Lightroom, it doesn't take me any more time to get an image from a raw file if it's well exposed than it would if I shot jpg. So I started shooting raw only. That way I don't have to choose between the two and it doesn't cost me anything in time.

So now I shoot raw only. Since I shoot raw I have to convert the images to jpg so I can use them. Shooting raw forces me to put my images into Lightroom. Everything goes into Lightroom and gets keywords so I can find things later. Even things I scan go into Lightroom, such as family photos dating back to the 1860s. I can search for things by keyword. I can search for things by date. At my advanced age, my memory is mostly digital now.

kpmac Loc: Ragley, La

Look into On1. Great program and cheaper than Adobe.

Bob Mevis Loc: Plymouth, Indiana

CHG_ CANON is exactly right.

kkdji1

I take lots of bird photos and figured my cropping would be better with Raw photos. I have a Tamron 100-400 lens that I went with because it is a little bit lighter than a longer lens. So far I have liked the photos I have taken with it and cropping has been good with the raw files.

kkdji1

My stated goals are in conflict but I also want to take my photos to the next level and trying to figure out the software that will help me to do that. I guess I mostly was wondering if folks out there use the Nikon software and if that would be a good place to start. I would like to only take the time to learn one software. I have used I-Photo to edit my photos so I have basic understanding of what to do.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Lightroom+PhotoShop is the right way to go. Several other software ideas are equally good ideas.

But, before throwing more money into the question, why not post some JPEGs and asked for review and suggestions? That's free. You can do that in the Photo Gallery or the Post Processing Section or Critique or others. Just be sure to store the file as an attachment so it can be downloaded and viewed in detail. You may get a lot better ideas than people suggesting how they'd spend your money.

a6k Loc: Detroit & Sanibel

Just FYI: the OP said “I-Photo”. Therefore he’s not or wasn’t using Windows.

Last time I checked Faststone is Windows only.

Am I right?

Drbobcameraguy Loc: Eaton Ohio

Pay attention to chg cannon. I have been shooting about the same amount of time as you. I read the Hog and a lot of books most everyday. He is very knowledgeable and helpful. To put it simply he knows his stuff. That being said he also understands what he doesn't know and will point you to someone or somewhere to get the information he doesn't know. Good luck and happy shooting. P. S. I'm using the Nikon software which to me appears similar to lightroom in basic editing. I have very little pp skill but an learning slowly. I have used lightroom tutorials to lead me on Nikon software. Hope this helps.