Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="wiz561" data-source="post: 209813" data-attributes="member: 15745">Thanks for the response.&nbsp; I understand about adjusting pictures based upon what you think and you shouldn't have a camera do it.&nbsp; Unfortunately though, I take lots of pictures at times and I'm starting to feel a bit overwhelmed.Ideally, I would like to keep the raw files around for archival purposes, but like the post processing done by the camera and/or viewnx.&nbsp; I usually end up tagging a bunch in viewnx and export them to jpg for printing at costco or elsewhere.&nbsp; I like the settings from viewnx, but don't like the fact that it can destroy the nef, and how it doesn't apply the settings to a sidecar.&nbsp; So that's kind of where I'm at.&nbsp; On the other hand, I like some of the adjustment settings better from LR and how they do non-destructive image editing.&nbsp; If LR could only process the images similar to viewnx, I would be happier.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="wiz561, post: 209813, member: 15745"] Thanks for the response. I understand about adjusting pictures based upon what you think and you shouldn't have a camera do it. Unfortunately though, I take lots of pictures at times and I'm starting to feel a bit overwhelmed. Ideally, I would like to keep the raw files around for archival purposes, but like the post processing done by the camera and/or viewnx. I usually end up tagging a bunch in viewnx and export them to jpg for printing at costco or elsewhere. I like the settings from viewnx, but don't like the fact that it can destroy the nef, and how it doesn't apply the settings to a sidecar. So that's kind of where I'm at. On the other hand, I like some of the adjustment settings better from LR and how they do non-destructive image editing. If LR could only process the images similar to viewnx, I would be happier. [/QUOTE]

Verification