Author Topic: NIck PLugins  (Read 1982 times)

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
NIck PLugins
« on: February 12, 2018, 08:37:08 pm »
When round tripping to Nik Plugins the image that comes back looks to be cooked a lot more than it did when being viewed in the plugin. I was using ColorEfex. Is this a known issue?

MikeFromMesa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #1 on: February 13, 2018, 02:21:10 pm »
When round tripping to Nik Plugins the image that comes back looks to be cooked a lot more than it did when being viewed in the plugin. I was using ColorEfex. Is this a known issue?
I have not seen this on my system, but I do have a couple of questions.

1. The Nik plugins that I generally use do not give me the option to Save As, but only to Save. My experience with PL (and OP before) is that the images that are returned from an external edit often do not show the changes if they are just saved back to the original location. PL usually just does not update the thumbnail or main image unless I change folders, and sometimes not even then. Often I have to exit and then restart to see the changes. For that reason I always try to Save As and save the image back as a new image. That way PL (and OP before) do show me the changes.

Do you not have this problem?

2. Have you thought about whether or not you might be changing color spaces in your Nik plugins?

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #2 on: February 13, 2018, 06:35:08 pm »
Thanks Mike.I shall look at this again later. I seem to recall it was just an overcooked version of the filter but that may have been because I reduced the opacity in Nik but that did not make it across to PL. Will post back.

You are correct no Save As.

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #3 on: February 13, 2018, 07:22:35 pm »
Having trouble replicating my own issue now, but can confirm your's Mike re the updating of the returned image. I wonder if the PL browser just builds links to the file and there is not a forced update when it is returned from the Nik plugin. Like you I find going to another folder and then returning gets the image updated.

MikeFromMesa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #4 on: February 13, 2018, 08:59:52 pm »
Having trouble replicating my own issue now, but can confirm your's Mike re the updating of the returned image. I wonder if the PL browser just builds links to the file and there is not a forced update when it is returned from the Nik plugin. Like you I find going to another folder and then returning gets the image updated.
As I mentioned, my solution has been to save the returned image in the same folder, but with a different name. I can do that with editors like Affinity Photo and PhotoLine, and even Dxo's View Point 2, but I do not know how to do it with the Nik plugins since they do not seem to have a Save As.

It seems clear to me that they must not re-read the image after an external editor call. One thing I did a couple of years ago was to write a small app to monitor the folder and rename any update to a new image. That is, when OP saved the tiff (I use a tiff) it would monitor that tiff and then, when the edit date on it changed, it would change the name. That forced OP to display the modified image as a new image and thus to use the correct thumbnail and to display the correct image. However I found using a new name for the return to be a better solution.

This has been an issue with PL (and OP before that) for a very long time. I have submitted bug reports about it but support responded with the advice "Don't do that". Really! They said that any images edited in external editors should not be returned to PL or OP. As I mentioned I return it anyway, but use a different name (or manually rename the file). Interestingly enough the Windows version of PL and OP has a refresh command that presumably forces a re-read of the folder and perhaps that also refreshes the thumbnails. I do not know. But nothing like that exists for the Mac.

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #5 on: February 13, 2018, 11:32:46 pm »
Well if they do not sort that out out my days with DxO will be numbered. It is always the same - I look for alternatives to Adobe but in reality there are none that are as fully featured. Maybe PL best position is as a LR plugin. And maybe I must hope ON1 continues to build on Raw 2018.

MikeFromMesa

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 373
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #6 on: February 13, 2018, 11:56:15 pm »
Well if they do not sort that out out my days with DxO will be numbered. It is always the same - I look for alternatives to Adobe but in reality there are none that are as fully featured. Maybe PL best position is as a LR plugin. And maybe I must hope ON1 continues to build on Raw 2018.
I would not expect Dxo to address this issue since it has been working like this for many years and development shows no indication that they think it is a problem.

You might want to look at CaptureOne as a LightRoom alternative. It does not have this naming problem, it supports "round-tripping" of images and it provides for both "opening" and "editing" of partially processed images, where "opening" means sending the original image and "editing" means creating an intermediate image with the current adjustments. It is very good, if somewhat expensive, software.

I have used ON1 and I, personally, do not think it is nearly as good as LightRoom, PhotoLab or CaptureOne, but that is a very personal decision. Good luck with whatever software you end up using.

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #7 on: February 14, 2018, 12:15:35 am »
Agree re ON1. Capture One would be the way to go  but have you seen the price? Horrendous. We really do need the likes of ON1, Luminar  and Affinity to shake the industry up a bit but the big boys do have a head start. I cannot see me settling with DxO for it is neither one thing or the other - the devs need to make their mind up. It is a superb raw developer but there is no apparent direction and just integrating Nik will give rise to a bigger mess. It needs to either have its own dam or work seamlessly with another - the only one it does work with is LR but LR does all the stuff that DxO does. Weird.

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #8 on: February 14, 2018, 07:21:35 am »
There are two solutions for this:

1) Adobe all in

or

2) Build a toolchain and use the parts of the softwares, they are good in

If DxO is a good raw developer, then use it as such. Skip the DAM/roundtrip part to someone, who can do better. I think, the task here is to find a one time paid or free DAM, that works for you. Only then you get a better and cheaper solution than the Adobe subscription.

It's like making holidays. All inclusive or self organized. :-)
« Last Edit: February 14, 2018, 07:47:58 am by Asser »

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #9 on: February 14, 2018, 09:21:34 am »
I shall sit back and see what happens with the Nik plugins. I am trying hard to find a workflow that is comfortable but I cannot find a dam that works with it well other than LR. It is ok editing in PL but there is no way of seeing that edit in the dam as thumbnails do not update. True I can export to jpeg but I might not want to do that. The fact that DxO build that plugin for LR and only LR perhaps says it all. Photo Supreme gets some good press but still not full integration!

Sigi

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 826
    • Gallery
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #10 on: February 14, 2018, 10:31:37 am »
Hello CollinG,

try Media Pro SE - it used to be called Expression Media. It works very well.

https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/Software/Media-Pro/Highlights.aspx

Sigi

Asser

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #11 on: February 14, 2018, 10:40:25 am »
The market is really limitted, if you want a DAM+RAW+Pixel Editing/PS Plugin support all in one solution. If you want it, you must be wanting to pay for it. But then you often still get a only 70% DAM, or 80% RAW solution. That means that others are still better on different sub topics.

Because I seldom use PS plugins or do any composition work, Affinity Photo is fully sufficient there.

For plain RAW development, DxO is great.

For the DAM part, you must adapt your workflow currently. If you do not want it, you get a problem.

I became fully used to have dedicated JPEGs as RAW previews in DAMs. It seemed like a limitation to not having direct edit previews of raws, but it is not any longer a limitation for me. After RAW development roundtip, I just set the filter in the DAM to display the JPEGs only and it makes no difference, whether there is a "CR2" or a "JPG" text in some thumbnail corner. Here I reduced my requirements for a DAM, without sacraficing anything.

Yesterday I turned all my hierarchical collections into hierarchical keywords. The reason is that hierarchical keywords are stored with the photo and their implementation is not tool specific like in case of hierarchical collections. This way my structuring scheme carries over from tool to tool without doing anything. At the same time I again reduced the requirements for a DAM. I do not need hierarchical collections any longer, I can filter and navigate over the hierarchical keyword tree which is structured by topic and the folder tree which is structured by date.

By reducing the requirements by adapting the workflow, free tools like Bridge or one time paid tools like ACDSee become real candidates for a DAM.

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #12 on: February 14, 2018, 12:17:54 pm »
Nice post Asser (as always) thanks :-).

Yes DxO its a superb raw editor, probably better than LR - it certainly gets there quicker and with its "out of the box" edits. I am playing with Bridge now, it has been a while. It is a decent enough piece of kit and free of course. Not sure what the functional cost of it being free is though - probably camera updates or the like?

You mention the jpeg previews of raw files. Are you saying that for you the lack of a jpeg representation of the edited version of the raw is not an issue? Presumably when you round trip you just convert to jpeg? That makes some sense and I admit having got bogged down in the LR workflow or even the PL view of edited raw. I guess it's the ability to open the raw directly should further editing be required that is so conveniant.

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #13 on: February 14, 2018, 01:06:27 pm »
You have been a great help, Asser. What I will do is convert the raw to jpeg and then have the jpeg and dop viewable in Bridge. The jpeg is a representation of the edited raw and if I want to go back to the raw I just click on the dop. Also helps with stuff like Nik plugins as I can run them from within Bridge :-)
« Last Edit: February 14, 2018, 01:13:04 pm by ColinG »

ColinG

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 145
Re: NIck PLugins
« Reply #14 on: February 14, 2018, 01:39:43 pm »
When round tripping to Nik Plugins the image that comes back looks to be cooked a lot more than it did when being viewed in the plugin. I was using ColorEfex. Is this a known issue?
I have not seen this on my system, but I do have a couple of questions.

1. The Nik plugins that I generally use do not give me the option to Save As, but only to Save. My experience with PL (and OP before) is that the images that are returned from an external edit often do not show the changes if they are just saved back to the original location. PL usually just does not update the thumbnail or main image unless I change folders, and sometimes not even then. Often I have to exit and then restart to see the changes. For that reason I always try to Save As and save the image back as a new image. That way PL (and OP before) do show me the changes.

Do you not have this problem?

2. Have you thought about whether or not you might be changing color spaces in your Nik plugins?

Mike, which plugins are you referring to in Nik? I use ColorEfex and always thought that just had save but it does also have save as as an option.

 

photography