Raw w/D200

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

HIKER4LIFE - 31 Dec 2006 13:41 GMT

Help, again - if you will.

My new D200 is wonderful; however, I've downloaded the programs along with
the camera and now, my Photoshop 7 is struggling - well, in fact, my entire
computer, is struggling to open a Raw image.

I do appreciate the help - it seems there's always somethin'

I would appreciate help with a "fix" in the simplest of terms - if anyone
out there can give me that information.

I've just removed the Picture Project from the computer and it doesn't help.

Thanks again and Happy New Year to ya'all!

Hiker

Reply to this Message

Aad - 31 Dec 2006 13:59 GMT

> Help, again - if you will.
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Hiker

The ARC will only work with CS2.

Reply to this Message

Adrian Boliston - 31 Dec 2006 15:00 GMT

> Help, again - if you will.
>
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Hiker

The d200 raw files are very large in size so if your PC has less than 1GB of
ram it's unlikely you will have any luck opening a raw file regardless of
software. My laptop originally had only 512mb and it was not till I
upgraded the ram to 1gb that I could work with my d80 files, athough the
d70s files would open but very slowly.

You could download the 30 day capture nx trial to convert your files to
tiffs for importing into photoshop if the ACR plugin will not work with your
version of photoshop. This might be cheaper than upgrading to the latest
version of photoshop.

cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk

Reply to this Message

achilleaslazarides@yahoo.co.uk - 31 Dec 2006 16:07 GMT

> The d200 raw files are very large in size so if your PC has less than 1GB of
> ram it's unlikely you will have any luck opening a raw file regardless of
> software. My laptop originally had only 512mb and it was not till I
> upgraded the ram to 1gb that I could work with my d80 files, athough the
> d70s files would open but very slowly.

Well, that is simply not true. I mostly use a computer with 512MB of
ram, and find that it depends on the software more than anything. For
instance, Nikon Capture NX is unworkably slow, to the point of being
unusable (and the quality I get from it doesn't really justify it; I am
very puzzled as to why so many people recommend it, it's ok but that's
all, plus it doesn't let me switch off NR completely). On the other
hand, Capture 1 is spectacularly fast (almost instantaneous previews of
your adjustments, less than a minute to convert but does it in the
background). ACR is fine in terms of speed, Bibble too. In short, I
have no serious problems with 512MB of ram (otherwise, I'd put more :).
Photoshop is perfectly fine, too, I routinely open 2-3 16 bit tiffs
simultaneously (around 60MB each). Or edit 500MB files (with layers)
without much problem.

Were you using Nikon Capture? I can't see why you say 512MB isn't
enough otherwise.

> You could download the 30 day capture nx trial to convert your files to
> tiffs for importing into photoshop if the ACR plugin will not work with your
> version of photoshop. This might be cheaper than upgrading to the latest
> version of photoshop.

Or he could use rawshooter essentials, which is free and fast. Or buy
raw magick lite, which is cheap, has by far the best quality of all the
converters I have used, but is glacially slow (minutes per image in the
high quality mode, and not because of a slow cpu). But excellent
quality, as I said. Or get a trial version of Silkypix. Basically,
anything will be less irritating than Capture NX with 512MB of RAM
(well with any amount of RAM, if you ask me, but you didn't).

> cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk

Reply to this Message

Adrian Boliston - 31 Dec 2006 16:20 GMT

> Well, that is simply not true. I mostly use a computer with 512MB of
> ram, and find that it depends on the software more than anything. For
> instance, Nikon Capture NX is unworkably slow, to the point of being
> unusable (and the quality I get from it doesn't really justify it; I am
> very puzzled as to why so many people recommend it...

I have not actually seen very many people recommend it, as most people seem
to prefer CS2 with the ACR plugin! Capture NX probably has far more
features than I ever use, and I mainly just tweak the white balance and
exposure comp, but it was very affordable after the rebate for Capture V4
users. Capture 4, which I was quite happy with would not open my d80 files
so I had to upgrade.

Cheers adrian www.boliston.co.uk

Reply to this Message

David Kilpatrick - 31 Dec 2006 17:05 GMT

>>Help, again - if you will.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> version of photoshop. This might be cheaper than upgrading to the latest
> version of photoshop.

Or just spend £60 on Elements 5 which has the latest raw converter all
bundled, does the same job except for some fine tuning and resized
output, and will churn through 10 megapixel raw files on any half decent
machine with 512MB RAM

David

Reply to this Message

Fletis Humplebacker - 31 Dec 2006 15:51 GMT

> Help, again - if you will.
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> I would appreciate help with a "fix" in the simplest of terms - if anyone
> out there can give me that information.

You said simplest, not cheapest. The simplest would be to buy
a computer with more horsepower. My iMac was upped to 1 gig
in memory but it just didn't have the processing power and isn't
very upgradable so it was a new computer for me. You might
be able to upgrade what you have to decent performance levels,
you didn't say what you had. Adding a hardrive for Photoshop's
scratch drive will help somewhat, memory of course, maybe video
card. You'd probably be half way to the cost of a new machine
though.

Reply to this Message

Alan Browne - 31 Dec 2006 16:23 GMT

> Help, again - if you will.
>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Thanks again and Happy New Year to ya'all!

Get a dual core Athlon or Pentium and at least 1 GB (preferably 2) of
memory.

Photshop sucks at large memory management (eg: rotate a large image and
only 20% of the CPU is used).

I believe CS2 is better in this respect, but not sure.

Cheers,
Alan

Signature

-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Reply to this Message

Bigguy - 31 Dec 2006 16:33 GMT

PS performance - particularly with large RAW files is mostly down to RAM
size and CPU horsepower...

What spec is your 'puter? Anything 'recent' (2GHz CPU, 512MB RAM) should run
PS O.K. (but maybe not very fast).

After doing the obvious - closing anything running in the background,
clearing system tray of useless apps, defragging etc. it's down to hardware.

PS likes a 'scratch disk' on a separate drive, a minimum 1GB of RAM (2GB is
better with big RAW files) and as fast a CPU as you can find... Video card
is largely irrelevant as long as it drives the monitor at suitable res and
colour depth.

At a deeper level mo/bo performance, RAM speed, hard drive speed and PC OS
setup can make a big difference - a lot of 'budget' PCs are made of the
cheapest, lowest spec components; this is OK for Office and browsing the
net - not so good for PS, 3D and gaming.

Bridge can seriously slow things down too.... So can some AV packages.

I can run PS at a usable speed CS2 on my 'old' office PC (2.8GHz, 1GB, 1
HDD) - it's a lot better on my 'new' PC(3.7GHz, 2GB, 4 x HDDs).

Guy

> Help, again - if you will.
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Hiker

Reply to this Message

HIKER4LIFE - 31 Dec 2006 18:35 GMT

I thank everyone for their input - I can see where I'm going wrong, now.

Hiker

> PS performance - particularly with large RAW files is mostly down to RAM
> size and CPU horsepower...
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>>
>> Hiker

Reply to this Message

Ed Ruf (REPLY to E-MAIL IN SIG!) - 31 Dec 2006 20:49 GMT

>Help, again - if you will.
>
>My new D200 is wonderful; however, I've downloaded the programs along with
>the camera and now, my Photoshop 7 is struggling - well, in fact, my entire
>computer, is struggling to open a Raw image.

As other have mentioned PS7 will not run the version of ACR needed for D200
NEFs.

>I do appreciate the help - it seems there's always somethin'
>
>I would appreciate help with a "fix" in the simplest of terms - if anyone
>out there can give me that information.

One free and easy way to get started is grabbing a copy of RSE:
http://www.pixmantec.com/products/rawshooter_essentials.asp

>I've just removed the Picture Project from the computer and it doesn't help.

Probably what you were seeing in PS7 was the plugin which PP installed when
you installed it. This should have been removed when you uninstalled PP. No
big deal. It only provides the absolutely most minimal of adjustments. If
you are going to play with raw, why bother going only part way.

Signature

Ed Ruf (Usenet2@EdwardGRuf.com)
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html

Reply to this Message