When NIK supports RAW editing, I’ll consider it.
I have no problem with DxO also selling it as a standalone application, but I’d like seamless integration in PLE.
When or if it finally gets fully integrated into PL (with RAW support), I’ll buy it.
The one advantage to separating out the Nik plugins from other ‘Export To’ options is the fact that PL2 only recognises the last 5 apps, so if you use more than 5 you have to hunt for the one that dropped off the list.
1 Like
Nik is integrated within Photoshop, you open your image in PS, launch a Nik plugin, make some changes, return to PS, open another Nik plugin, make more changes, return to PS, make more changes, how does the Nik integration within PL work? It doesn’t because it isn’t really integrated at all.
The HDR Efex ‘integration’ is a huge let down, disappointed! Merge 3 RAW into a HDR and you end up with a stack of unnecessary intermediary TIFs.
Nik functionality hasn’t changed since the Google days, forget DxO’s presets, I can’t see me ever using them. The stability has improved quite a lot and the plugins have never crashed since DxO released them compared to before when they were quite unstable
1 Like
You are not comparing like for like. Photoshop is an image editor, PL2 is a RAW editor.
Compare Lightroom and PL2 to make a fairer comparison. Now try calling a Nik plugin from Lightroom, working in Nik and then going back to Lightroom etc.
That will probably never, ever, happen.
Mark
I was referring to DxO’s Statement that Nik was integrated within PL and how I expect integration should behave.
In LR, you can return to LR once you’ve done your edits in Nik, you can’t do this from PL.
What DxO have developed is ok but it’s not integration, they should describe it differently to reset customers expectations
Maybe I’m misunderstanding you. Are you saying that once you export a tiff to the Nik Collection from PhotoLab you can’t return that edited tiff back to PhotoLab?
Mark
You can but you have to open it as a new image, this isn’t anything new from before, you could always do this
Yes, it works exactly as it always did except that now DXO has given us a dedicated export button instead of having to use the Export to Application feature and drill down to a Nik program’s .exe file.
Mark
1 Like
This button doesn’t make it integrated, same ‘integration’ as you get with PS for example.
A simple of coding which they’ve used to maximise the marketing
1 Like
Obviously. If you are exporting to a different application its not integrated.
Mark
1 Like
Not if you can return to the same picture / document once you’ve made the change
Let’s just hope the DxO learn from this gaff
Let’s just hope hat DxO make meaningful functionality updates to Nik
One can only live in hope!
It seems that there is a lot of misunderstanding about what the Nik plugins actually are. Basically, they are external programs that can only work with raster images, not RAW files. You can even use them as standalone programs as I explained above. They exist in 2 forms : as executables or as DLLs (a 8bf file is a specialized DLL known as a Photoshop plugin). Whatever the format used, they are totally unaware of the RAW format. So, when one is working on a RAW file and wants to use the Nik plugins in order to make some adjustments, the image must first be converted to a raster format (that is, JPEG or TIFF).
Even when using Photoshop, this conversion is implicit : you can not access the Nik plugins while the image is processed in Adobe Camera RAW. You have to wait until it becomes a raster image when ACR (which is itself a PS plugin) opens the image in PS after converting it to an in-memory raster image.
Talking about directly working on RAW files when using the Nik plugins is just nonsense. At this time, DPL and Nik are just unaware of each other (with exception of the cosmetic addition of the Nik software button in DPL - an addition that didn’t required much coding). This will be possible only when the code of the plugins, modified to work on the RAW format, will be a part of the DPL code itself. This would allow to use the Nik plugins without breaking the RAW workflow.
This is what the users who purchased the license for version 1 and now for version 2 were expecting. They are disappointed and I understand this. Maybe this will happen in version 3 (for which we’ll have to pay again) but very frankly, now I doubt.
5 Likes
In my workflow once I export from a raw converter Iike DXO I do not want go back. I consider this a master file which maybe I do some finetuning in a pixel editor. But that is just me
7 Likes
Wow. A lot of petty whining here about excellent improved workflow.
I do disagree with the upgrade timing and pricing for existing users (no way we should be forced to buy an additional license to PhotoLab) or charged a full upgrade price after paying for a very weak v1 (so weak as to be unusable or be even less stable than some of the Google versions they replaced). Fair ball would have been:
- updated version 2 for Nik v1 and PhotoLab license holders: $30
- updated version 2 for Nik v1 license holders without PhotoLab: $50
- version 2 for new users with PhotoLab Essentials: $100/$150
That would have kept everyone happy and offered value at all tiers. The huge group one above are DxO’s most loyal customers and DxO has shown us collectively a great lack of respect. Or DxO are hiding grave financial problems which mean they have to do whatever it takes to put money in the till this month. Who knows?
On the other hand, adding a dedicated one touch export button which brings the Nik finished image back into PhotoLab automatically on save in Nik is a huge step forward for a smoother workflow with Nik. It makes Nik much more usable as part of a PhotoLab centric workflow. Even for those who don’t normally use PhotoLab it makes PhotoLab a great hub for Nik Central, sending an image in and out of the various Nik applications.
PhotoLab is a bit of a heavyweight for this kind of image management but then again the Nik applications are not lightweights themselves. A computer capable of handling the Nik plugins in a spritely way can easily handle the dozen or so images anyone would want to finish in Nik in a session.
If DxO’s goal were to please the people on this forum finding fault with every improvement, alas it’s a Sisyphian task.
Sigi, I’m inclined to feel the same way as you.
What Alec pointed out to me yesterday also made me think about NIK. If I’m willing to adjust my workflow, NIK makes sense. This is Viveza. I can’t deny its brilliance.
This is me, my wife and our chevy.
6 Likes
Bonnie and Clyde without the guns =)
Same here for editing, maybe if PL had “layers” and “Blend mode” I’d reconsider sending the files back.
1 Like
You never know what might be in the trunk.
3 Likes
For anyone coming to this topic with the aim of understanding the relationship between PhotoLab and the Nik Collection tools; please be sure to read Pat’s post above … as partially quoted here;
This is a very clear explanation of how these products do (and don’t) work together.
As Pat finishes up by concluding, (and I agree) it’s not likely that all Nik Collection capabilities will ever be incorporated into PL - nor that PL’s RAW processing logic will be incorporated into the Nik Collection.
John M