This content has been marked as final. Show 45 replies
When it's ready. ACR 5.2 was only just released and on average 3 to 4 updates are released a year, so draw your conclusions. If you want quicker support for new cameras, ask Nikon to support dng or to share prerelease cameras and details of their new RAW files with makers of RAW conversion software.
We might all ask but companies do what they consider best for business and I note that Capture one 4 pro supports the D3X, where did they get their data. Adobe should be able to , where there's a will there's a way. Keep up, Adobe
Nikon and Adobe are on separate timetables (different companies, different continents, etc.). As luck would have it, we scheduled the most recent Camera Raw release for the end of November, and Nikon scheduled the release of the D3X at the beginning of December. Sometimes that's just the way things work out, timing-wise.
Don't worry; there will be a CR/LR update before long that processes D3X files.
Nikon NX2 does a good job with D3X files but Capture One 4.6 is even better - much faster and better skin tones - processing to tif files with capture one and then loading into Lightroom is a very good solution, if not the most efficient
raw developer 182 also opens D3x NEF files, much quicker than NX2 and not so buggy on batching. Has very good sharpening options and a logical interface, I find NX2 almost incomprehensible
Camera Raw and Lightroom updates are in the works. Historically, we update these apps about 4 times a year.
This is just amazing!!! The reports on the D3x is that it is the best digital SLR camera to date & Adobe is dragging there feet to get ACRs to open it files!!! Can't they just send out a update for the D3x ?
If Nikon used DNG, the camera would be supported on day one, by more than 200 programs.
Picasa 3 also supports D3x Raw files. As I recall, that version of Picasa was released before the D3x. Either Google was working with Nikon prior to the release or their NEF RAW processor implementation is a bit more flexible than that of Adobe.
Apparently at least one reviewer has a beta copy of ACR that supports the D3x, so I'm hopeful we won't need to wait too long!
I'd be happy to be a beta tester :-) if anyone from Adobe ACR dev/qa is listening...
While I agree it would be nice if Nikon supported DNG (and I have passed this on the Nikon), we really need D3x ACR support soon.
I have just viewed my D3x files with Google Picasa. While it's workable to some point (with a lot of manual tweaking) the defaults are horrible. Seems like Google did a very quick implementation, indeed.
Picasa is not color managed and they do not profile the cameras. It's quite useless as a RAW converter therefore. It's just a generic RAW reading Library they use. I don't think there is anything special about reading the RAW data in the D3x RAW files, but to correctly support them, you need to profile the camera. To do that you need to obviously physically have the camera. That is what it takes for Adobe to support it. If the manufacturer doesn't share a prerelease copy of their cameras, you get this sort of delay between the camera release and when ACR supports it. As Alan said, there is a beta of ACR floating around that has D3X support so the real release cannot be far off.
I did not mean to imply that Picasa was in any way a replacement for Photoshop!
Jao, do you know if the profile for the camera needs to be redone if/when Nikon releases new camera firmware or is it simply a function of the sensor?
>Jao, do you know if the profile for the camera needs to be redone if/when Nikon releases new camera firmware or is it simply a function of the sensor?
Usually it is just a function of the sensor so no update is needed, but sometimes firmware updates can subtly influence the color rendition as the magenta rendering of SRAWs from the 5D mkII after the recent firmware update illustrates.
Very desapointed by Adobe for the non support of D3X, even after a month that the D3X have been release...
Just bought Phase one 4. Will not renew my ligthroom licence... A least this situation let me discover a great software...
Adobe updates ACR in an orderly fashion every three to four months. There is no way your camera could be included in the last release. Hope for the next one.
Don't think that Adobe is going to react to your rant and work any faster. As a matter of fact, the ACR team has indicated here that this type of message delay the support for new cameras.
Crikey. Lots of foot-stamping from D3X owners. An expensive camera I suppose, so owners will be upset that its raw format is not yet supported by Adobe. Still, it's not Adobe's fault.
Maybe they should ask Nikon to support DNG, or provide Adobe with pre-release cameras and NEF details, so they can build support into earlier updates. Mmm, that's not gonna happen.
As users of a quality Adobe product (no I don't work for them, I'm just a fan) maybe they should just wait in anticipation for an update, like the rest of us do.
I am a little surprised though. If I would be in the market for a camera like the D3X (unlikely due to its super premium price) I would make sure that my RAW tool supports the camera because RAW capture is very important to me and software support is essential to the value of a camera, at least to me. It is not that hard to figure out in advance when the next ACR/LR update will come out since they are on a three/four times a year schedule. If that takes too long because Nikon/Canon/whatever release it right on the heels of the last ACR/LR update, then either decide to shoot RAW+jpeg for the time being, and use the generally excellent jpegs from these cameras for the time being, or wait until pulling the trigger on the camera. You can also decide to use another RAW conversion tool, such as the manufacturer's software.
My somewhat inelegant hack for using D3X in lightroom is to use the batch DNG converter in CaptureOne to convert the D3X files to DNGs. I then import these into lightroom. My full workflow is:
1. Use Nikon Transfer to dump the raws across
2. Use CaptureOne batch converter to convert NEFs to DNGs
3. Import DNGs into lightroom and then continue with business as usual.
This is a bit of a pain because you the DNG import isnt profiled or calibrated so there is a bit of extra twiddling in lightroom.
Yes ... I know this involves buying an extra piece of SW but given the price of a D3x it's in the noise.
One interesting comment is that CaptureOne's out of the box developing of skintones seems more accurate than Lightrooms - will be interesting to re-look at this when Lightroom natively supports D3X.
Hope this helps folks who are looking for an interim solution.
Could we not get a temporary alpha/beta release that would allow us to use Lightroom for sorting D3x files, if not all the final tuning / editing?
> Could we not get a temporary alpha/beta release that would allow us to use Lightroom for sorting D3x files, if not all the final tuning / editing?
Are you saying, that LR does not show the previews, not even the thumbnails? (I do not have LR.)
Yes a bit of relaxed waiting should be the way to go.
I heard that even Nikon lets you wait long time for support by their own NX2 software. I ordered a D700 last summer and had to wait a few month for camera control pro 2 to be delivered. In my case this software was vital to use the camera. You figure who has more responsibility for camera support Adobe or the camera manufacturer.
"As a matter of fact, the ACR team has indicated here that this type of message delay the support for new cameras. "
@ Ramon: Hmm interesting that professionals can be directed so easily :-)
So if many post complains the D3x will never be supported? ^^
No, but it will take just a bit longer. The ACR team does spend time reading this forum, time that has to be taken away from development work.
As Thomas indicated in another thread, requests for camera support from users almost never help get an update into the hands of users any earlier. This is simply because we always add support for every raw-capable camera as soon as possible. By the time the requests start coming in, dev support for the camera is sometimes already done, or more often was completed long ago.
A release -- even a dot update release -- entails a lot of overhead because of the significant amount of testing required (all supported platforms, system configs, languages, etc.). Plus there are other things that go into dot updates, such as bug fixes, etc.
For these reasons, among others, we don't release an update every time a camera comes to market.
So I'll summarize by saying this:
1. Again, thanks for your patience.
2. Asking repeatedly for D3X (or any camera) support does not help. Really.
3. In general, if the issue of Camera Raw support for camera X is really important to you, I suggest waiting until a Camera Raw plug-in update is released that actually officially supports camera X, __before__ you buy camera X.
These tiresome gripe threads surface every time a new camera hits the market that isn't immediately supported by ACR. Those of you who have complained in this thread have not said anything new that hasn't been said before. Everyone understands that you spent your $8,000 (or thereabouts) for your new camera. Unfortunately, money doesn't talk here. You are going to have to wait just like everyone else who has been in your situation has had to wait in the past. Surely you can't think that Adobe has singled out your model to not support. The problem will be resolved as quickly as possible. When you put everything in perspective, this brief wait will seem ever so insignificant as soon as the new version of ACR has been released.
At the risk of extending this already too long thread...
In a previous career, I was an engineer and also ran HW&SW engineering at several startups and large companies, so I understand Eric's comments *very* well. However, his point 3 smacks of real arrogance (sorry to be so blunt). Photoshop is great software, the D3x is a great camera. Lots of us have invested $ in both Nikon and Adobe. Frankly as a good customer of both companies I would hope they would 'play nice'. I have also added my voice to those asking Nikon to support DNG.
Jim, I agree that it should not matter how much or how little someone's camera costs. These 'tiresome gripe threads' should be causing the dev team to rethink the methodology of how new cameras get supported to speed up support for new devices. I know that Eric's team does not like the pressure getting out release after release - it is not fun - especially with customers complaining.
However, given the pace of new cameras coming onto the market, these 'gripe threads' will continue until someone changes the model.
I'm very glad that Adobe engineers care enough to participate in this forum and hope that they understand that while we might 'gripe', I for one, love their products.
I don't know if you guys really catch on to what has to happen. Nikon and Adobe don't, as you say, "play nice". Nikon does not provide Adobe with advance copies of their raw files. Adobe must wait for the camera to hit the market and then they have to acquire a raw file from which to build a profile for that specific model. Now if you are the first to purchase that new camera, how can you expect Adobe to immediately support it? This really isn't rocket science. But it does take a little time to ensure that the support will be faithful to the colors as shot by the camera.
Oh well, I suppose complaining can help to make some people feel a little better.
Jim, I really do understand how it works today and why. What I'm suggesting is a new methodology that probably goes beyond the walls of Adobe.
In other industries, there are many examples of companies working together to support new hardware rapidly while protecting the intellectual property rights of all involved...
>In other industries, there are many examples of companies working together to support new hardware rapidly while protecting the intellectual property rights of all involved...
Indeed. However, in this example, there is only one company that does not want nor wish to collaborate - Nikon. If you ask them about it, they will specifically tell you "we do not support third party RAW converters." I think that people are reacting to the fact that this forum is completely the wrong place to be complaining about it. A far more appropriate place would be Nikon fora. Here it will not do anything as the folks that actually need to hear it, never do.
P.S. Canon is no better in this respect. Both Canon and Nikon would actually prefer that you would not be able to use third party tools to develop "their" raw files. Also, sharing prerelease versions of their cameras would be a big no-no for them as they believe it would help their competition (leaks are inevitable even if NDAs are in place?). It's only other market players (i.e. the non-leaders) that play nice with third-party tools. Examples are Sony, who share prerelease versions of their cameras with Adobe and other manufacturers resulting in immediate support upon actual release. Others simply support dng.
Alan, there is no arrogance intended by my third point. It is simply a practical recommendation.
Adobe already has a proposed solution to better interoperability with camera makers. This proposal is called DNG and has been adopted by some camera makers, such as Pentax, Ricoh, Leica, and Casio. The result is that customers of a Pentax K-m, or a Casio EX-FH1, for instance, get automatic support from Camera Raw (and other DNG readers, including ones not written by Adobe) from day 1.
While it would be nice to get similar interoperability between Adobe and Nikon, in the near term we will probably not be able to get to the same level as that described in the preceding paragraph, due to mutual competitive pressures (i.e., Nikon and Adobe both produce commercial raw processing software).
Some makers take deliberate steps (sometimes technical, sometimes legal, sometimes both) to prevent third parties such as Adobe from decoding their raw files. These obstacles are usually overcome in the long run, but for users this leads to a long delay. There is very little that Adobe can do about this. Just ask Sigma DP-1 owners who had to wait nearly a year to get Camera Raw support, due primarily to legal hurdles.
As I said, I have already suggested to Nikon that they support DNG. I have also told them that Capture NX, etc are no substitute for good ACR support - I'm not just picking on you guys but am trying to be constructive!
From personal experience, forming a consortium and/or 3rd party development / testing lab can be done in a way that does not risk IP of any party. However, sometimes the biggest impediments are the egos of certain personality types (not usually developers) that get in the way of doing what's best for customers (or the industry in general).
In any case, I really appreciate you listening and I will (im)patiently await ACR support for the D3x! Meanwhile if you're still looking for beta testers, let me know ;-)
I completely understand that it might not be possible to track every new camera release instantly. (I don't even know whether Nikon's own SDK supports the D3x yet.)
It may well be that Phase One / fastpictureviewer et al have a different relationship with Nikon that allows them to produce earlier releases in some cases.
That said it ought to be possible to produce a version of ACR that does not prevent LR from importing images and accompanying JPEGs from new, incompletely supported, cameras to allow sorting / sifting without necessarily being color correct.
In this case, a beta of ACR does appear to be available to some, having been used in at least one review that I have seen. Sticking it up on Labs would fill the gap pending the arrival of the fully-calibrated version.
John, we've been planning to do exactly that. We've even scheduled a posting date. (Sorry, we're not allowed to say when). The issue is simply that the posting date has not yet arrived. Again, thanks for your patience.
Just to clarify one thing. ACR does not prevent Lightroom from doing anything. Lightroom does not use the ACR plug-in. Lightroom and ACR share a common pipeline, but that is where the similarities end. All the camera raw technology is built into the Lightroom code. There is no need for the ACR plug-in.
In my case, all that I can say is that LR 2.2 does not import my D3x output (complaining about corrupted files). This is not very friendly, and makes LR/ACR perhaps more fragile than strictly necessary.
I'm glad that Adobe are not going to wait 3-4 months for the next ACR version before giving us an interim fix.
I give up! The fact that you don't have support right now doesn't make ACR or Lightroom or any other raw converter more or less fragile. It is the reality of raw photography. You have to wait for the software to catch up. That's the way it works, and you nor nobody else will ever change it.
John, I think your expectations are somewhat unreasonable. When we finalized CR 5.2 and LR 2.2 (i.e., a few weeks ago), we had not yet seen any D3X raw files, via NDA or otherwise. There was no way we could anticipate exactly what D3X raw files would look like internally and add code blindly in the hopes that the resulting product would decode D3X files reasonably well. We process only the raw files that we recognize and give a warning for those we don't recognize.
It is frustrating for an ACR user to have a new camera that is not supported; however, that can be one of the unpleasant realities of life in the real world. The Adobe update policy for updating ACR has been clearly stated and they have pretty much kept their word on the timing of these updates. When buying a new camera, an ACR user should plan ahead and devise temporary workarounds if necessary.
I bought one of the first Nikon D200s and had to wait several weeks for support. An obvious workaround is to set the camera to record both JPEGs and raw. At that time, Nikon offered an infamous NEF plugin for Photoshop that allowed one to import NEFs into PS; however, the plugin set itself as the default NEF plugin and caused many problems for ACR users when ACR support was finally available. Another option is to use Nikon Capture, Bibble, or some other raw converter.
Not only did Nikon not supply Adobe with information about the NEF format for the D200, they encrypted the white balance and this caused further complications.
Rest asssured. The D3x version of ACR is in beta and was used by Michael Reichman in a report at the end of 2008: Luminous-Landscape.
> It is frustrating for an ACR user to have a new camera that is not supported; however, that can be one of the unpleasant realities of life in the real world. The Adobe update policy for updating ACR has been clearly stated and they have pretty much kept their word on the timing of these updates. When buying a new camera, an ACR user should plan ahead and devise temporary workarounds if necessary.
Or don't by the shiny new camera until it is there is support for it in your
toolset. That has worked for me very well in the past.