# Google Nik Collection is Now Free



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 24, 2016)

```
From Google:</p>
<p><em>Today we’re making the Nik Collection available to everyone, for free.</em></p>
<p>Photo enthusiasts all over the world use the Nik Collection to get the best out of their images every day. As we continue to focus our long-term investments in building incredible photo editing tools for mobile, including Google Photos and Snapseed, we’ve decided to make the Nik Collection desktop suite available for free, so that now anyone can use it.</p>
<p>The Nik Collection is comprised of seven desktop plug-ins that provide a powerful range of photo editing capabilities — from filter applications that improve color correction, to retouching and creative effects, to image sharpening that brings out all the hidden details, to the ability to make adjustments to the color and tonality of images.</p>
<p>Starting March 24, 2016, the latest Nik Collection will be freely available to download: Analog Efex Pro, Color Efex Pro, Silver Efex Pro, Viveza, HDR Efex Pro, Sharpener Pro and Dfine. If you purchased the Nik Collection in 2016, you will receive a full refund, which we’ll automatically issue back to you in the coming days.</p>
<p>We’re excited to bring the powerful photo editing tools once only used by professionals to even more people now.</p>
<p><strong><a href="https://www.google.com/nikcollection/" target="_blank">Download Google Nik Collection for free</a></strong></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Maui5150 (Mar 24, 2016)

Thankfully I had bought a few years ago, and at an Education Discount... Still slightly perturbed that something I paid for is now free


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 24, 2016)

You're Welcome!
-signed me and all of the others who paid for it 

This is certainly an interesting development and is the exact reverse of Google's normal business model, but it certainly confirms that they bought Nik for their Snapseed mobile app, not the PC/Mac tools.


----------



## Tahoejr (Mar 24, 2016)

Topaz Labs and many other filter companies are scrambling just a bit right now . . .


----------



## jebrady03 (Mar 24, 2016)

Sweet! DL'ing now


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 24, 2016)

[quote author=Google]
The Nik Collection *is comprised of* seven desktop plug-ins...
[/quote]

Picking a nit, but it's rather sad when the communications department of a major corporation – especially one geared around knowledge access – fails to use proper grammar.


----------



## bereninga (Mar 24, 2016)

I've never used them before. Do you have to use the different apps to do different things? It would so much easier to understand if it was all-in-one. I guess I'll just play around w/ it to see the strengths vs weaknesses of each app. Kind of annoying to have to open and close different apps to figure out what it does though.


----------



## Maui5150 (Mar 24, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> [quote author=Google]
> The Nik Collection *is comprised of* seven desktop plug-ins...



Picking a nit, but it's rather sad when the communications department of a major corporation – especially one geared around knowledge access – fails to use proper grammar. 
[/quote]

Nice catch indeed. I is now far more edumacated then I has before. I does frequently missed used that darn fragment


----------



## ooF Fighters (Mar 24, 2016)

Any reason to grab this in addition to my existing LR & PS programs?


----------



## CapturingLight (Mar 24, 2016)

Having not used this software, I would like to know what features people find themselves going to the trouble to leave lightroom for. I have read many people singing the praises of this software over time.

As an aside I tried to search the form for "nik" but a lot of nikon posts come up instead. Not sure how to tell the search to look for complete words only.


----------



## hkenneth (Mar 24, 2016)

How does this compared to VSCO?


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (Mar 24, 2016)

Silver EFEX Pro is worth the price of admission.

There is no HiDPI version of this software for Windows based computers with high resolution screens, these don't look right on my XPS 13 QHD+.


----------



## searsie (Mar 24, 2016)

Wondering about compatibility with Mac El Capitan. Know there were issues.


----------



## sdsr (Mar 24, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> [quote author=Google]
> The Nik Collection *is comprised of* seven desktop plug-ins...



Picking a nit, but it's rather sad when the communications department of a major corporation – especially one geared around knowledge access – fails to use proper grammar. 
[/quote]

The OED disagrees:

"Comprise primarily means ‘consist of’, as in the country comprises twenty states. It can also mean ‘constitute or make up a whole’, as in this single breed comprises 50 per cent of the Swiss cattle population. When this sense is used in the passive (as in the country is comprised of twenty states), it is more or less synonymous with the first sense ( the country comprises twenty states). This usage is part of standard English, but the construction comprise of, as in the property comprises of bedroom, bathroom, and kitchen, is regarded as incorrect."

Note the distinction, and compare with what Google wrote.

This is worth a glance:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/05/why-wikipedias-grammar-vigilante-is-wrong


----------



## avbmenon (Mar 24, 2016)

it was always free for google employees! always loved it. now a large audience can use it for free! i always loved the hdr efex pro


----------



## j-nord (Mar 24, 2016)

Thats cool this software is now free, I kind of figured it would happen eventually. I'm wondering what people use in the nik collection that they cannot do in Lightroom? I bought the nik collection about 2 years ago and put in several hours going through the software but couldn't find much that I couldn't recreate fairly easily in Lightroom. This announcement reminded me that I should give it another try.


----------



## Tiderace (Mar 24, 2016)

Nik was developed by the most creative innovative and expert engineers and professional photographers who knew the science and art of photography. They were incredibly committed 
and industrious and I for one am terribly saddened that this amazing group of people sold their
company to Google and then Google deserted them and this collection. 

Even so, we as 25 years in the business of professional portrait, wedding, and landscape photography
find their collection THE most useful, brilliant and easily used programs to this day. 

Google Please listen get these folks involved again and further this collection. It has huge potential, huge.


----------



## darrellrhodesmiller (Mar 24, 2016)

its still an amazing set of plugins.. Define (noise reduction) is VERY good.. ColorFX is definately still in my workflow too. I just hope this means they havent given up on development and are just giving it away at this point.


----------



## Pebbles (Mar 24, 2016)

This is a sure sign that they are sunsetting it. Will miss Contrast Pro when they finally kill it.


----------



## Orangutan (Mar 24, 2016)

sdsr said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > [quote author=Google]
> ...



The OED disagrees:

"Comprise primarily means ‘consist of’, as in the country comprises twenty states. It can also mean ‘constitute or make up a whole’, as in this single breed comprises 50 per cent of the Swiss cattle population. When this sense is used in the passive (as in the country is comprised of twenty states), it is more or less synonymous with the first sense ( the country comprises twenty states). This usage is part of standard English, but the construction comprise of, as in the property comprises of bedroom, bathroom, and kitchen, is regarded as incorrect."

Note the distinction, and compare with what Google wrote.

This is worth a glance:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/05/why-wikipedias-grammar-vigilante-is-wrong
[/quote]

+1 

I was just about to post when I noticed yours.


----------



## lidocaineus (Mar 24, 2016)

While I'm happy that people can get it for free…

- I'm slightly annoyed that I paid a decent amount for it (before it was even part of google - $200+) and it's now free. However it is what it is and it's a relatively minor complaint.

- We will probably see an even larger influx of people abusing the hell out of Silver Efex Pro. I can spot a SEP abused photo a mile away. In fact if you go to 500px and peruse the street photography highest rated section, it's like 90% people who've run photos through the most contrasty and jacked up detail settings possible. Which is sad because it's SUCH a good plugin and really nothing comes close to it in terms of B&W conversions.

- What I'm most worried about: this is probably the very end of the Nik collection, and that in and of itself is a tragedy. SEP is honestly one of the greatest plugins I've ever used, and is the closest I've seen to matching the control you can get in endless darkroom print iterations.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 24, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> Silver EFEX Pro is worth the price of admission.



I don't like B&W.

I see these list Lightroom compatibility. Do they just round-trip rendered images like TIF's thus requiring derivative files?


----------



## verysimplejason (Mar 24, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> sdsr said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



+1 

I was just about to post when I noticed yours.
[/quote]

+2.


----------



## overniven (Mar 24, 2016)

I like the Nik collection, it's too bad that Google ended up with them. This is just another in a long line of google killing stuff that eventually they decide they don't like to leave users hung out to dry. I never used Picassa, but now I have two relatives trying to get me to help them figure out what to do now.

It is free means that it is expendable.


----------



## RGF (Mar 24, 2016)

Nik collection has great tools. Wonder want that their game plan is. Have any of the programs been updated recently? Is Google about to abandon the suite?


----------



## JonAustin (Mar 24, 2016)

Off-topic rant: Grammar



sdsr said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > [quote author=Google]
> ...



The OED disagrees:

"Comprise primarily means ‘consist of’, as in the country comprises twenty states. It can also mean ‘constitute or make up a whole’, as in this single breed comprises 50 per cent of the Swiss cattle population. When this sense is used in the passive (as in the country is comprised of twenty states), it is more or less synonymous with the first sense ( the country comprises twenty states). This usage is part of standard English, but the construction comprise of, as in the property comprises of bedroom, bathroom, and kitchen, is regarded as incorrect."

Note the distinction, and compare with what Google wrote.

This is worth a glance:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/05/why-wikipedias-grammar-vigilante-is-wrong
[/quote]

I've read the linked article once and *sdsr's* post twice, and I really don't get whatever point he's trying to make. "Comprised of" is simply incorrect grammar; "consists of," "is composed of" or "comprises" should properly be used instead.

The Guardian article basically states that you're a horse's ass for pointing out someone else's incorrect usage of the language, and we uneducated dolts will eventually prevail in changing the language, as we overwhelm correct usage with an onslaught of grammatical errors.

As a counterpoint, I've been watching a lot of BBC television from the 80's and 90's lately, and it's amazing to me how often the dialog gets subjective and objective pronouns wrong. Stuff like "Me and my wife want to ..." and "it's all the same to my friend and I" simply drives me up the wall.

So, in response to the Guardian article, I'll offer:

https://hbr.org/2012/07/i-wont-hire-people-who-use-poo/

</endrant>


----------



## Maiaibing (Mar 24, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> Silver EFEX Pro is worth the price of admission.



Hardly says a lot in this case...


----------



## Maiaibing (Mar 24, 2016)

Wow. Count myself lucky resisting to buy it for so long. Always felt it was too expensive for what you got. 

Amazing freebee for sure. ;D

Downloaded.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 24, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> Silver EFEX Pro is worth the price of admission.
> 
> There is no HiDPI version of this software for Windows based computers with high resolution screens, these don't look right on my XPS 13 QHD+.



Viveza is amazing too.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 24, 2016)

Total disgrace. Giant company moves in and buys up fantastic stuff and then abandons it so their own crappy nonsense can be pushed and sold for money. I fear this is what has yet again happened here.


----------



## keithcooper (Mar 24, 2016)

*the good and maybe not so good*

Superb software - I've written detailed reviews of the parts, and use many of them regularly.

A key part of my print workflow often uses sharpener3
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/sharpening_nik3.html

However...
The software has pretty much stagnated since acquisition. Giving it away doesn't seem to suggest we're seeing anything new on the way (unless it's part of Google's secret plan to take down Adobe ;-) )

What also bothers me somewhat is the feeling that it's kick in the face for lots of smaller photography software developers.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 24, 2016)

"The book is comprised of three chapters," you can rest assured that we're in good company. The phrase "comprised of" goes back 300 years. It turns up in Anthony Trollope, in Christopher Hitchens and Norman Mailer, in the essays of Lionel Trilling and Harold Bloom. Merriam-Webster is OK with it, and so are more than two-thirds of the eminent writers and editors on the American Heritage Dictionary's usage panel, who aren't generally a very a loosey-goosey crowd."



I think neuro is actually Bryan Henderson.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 24, 2016)

sdsr said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > [quote author=Google]
> ...



The OED disagrees:

"Comprise primarily means ‘consist of’, as in the country comprises twenty states. It can also mean ‘constitute or make up a whole’, as in this single breed comprises 50 per cent of the Swiss cattle population. When this sense is used in the passive (as in the country is comprised of twenty states), it is more or less synonymous with the first sense ( the country comprises twenty states). This usage is part of standard English, but the construction comprise of, as in the property comprises of bedroom, bathroom, and kitchen, is regarded as incorrect."

Note the distinction, and compare with what Google wrote.
[/quote]

Sorry, but 'more or less synonymous with' does not mean correct usage. Nor does the fact that it's commonly used incorrectly. By that logic, we will see an entry for 'alot' in the OED soon. 

But hey, maybe common usage is all that's needed. As I stated previously, "Those comix is fo'shizzle stanky," is a sentence using all proper and accepted words. :


----------



## Mr. Shakes (Mar 25, 2016)

Viveza is great for the quick layer work, it saves me a lot of time. I got my $149 worth in the last two years, but I'm worried that this means a great but stagnant product may be headed towards oblivion.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 25, 2016)

They probably get to divert all the engineers to other projects, and they get to stop supporting the product.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 25, 2016)

Photo software dummy here - I downloaded and installed and it didn't show up in my programs. Searched C: and found it and put shortcuts on my Desktop. Each one opens and appears functional but how do I get a photo into any of these applications to play with? Or, where do I look to get a kickstart? Help please.

Jack


----------



## Aglet (Mar 25, 2016)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Viveza is amazing too.



+1
that's the only tool in the group I found really useful.
everything else I need can be done in other ways and I found I can get Topaz to do as well as SEP or the color-contrast plugin.
I knew it was ******* when Google bought it.


----------



## Valvebounce (Mar 25, 2016)

Hi Jack. 
I think the clue here is in the description, they are calling them plugins which I think means that they only work in conjunction with another piece of software, and not as standalone programs, I have no idea which programs they will interact with, or even if my supposition is correct. 
Can anyone clarify this for us please. 

Cheers, Graham. 



Jack Douglas said:


> Photo software dummy here - I downloaded and installed and it didn't show up in my programs. Searched C: and found it and put shortcuts on my Desktop. Each one opens and appears functional but how do I get a photo into any of these applications to play with? Or, where do I look to get a kickstart? Help please.
> 
> Jack


----------



## Zv (Mar 25, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Photo software dummy here - I downloaded and installed and it didn't show up in my programs. Searched C: and found it and put shortcuts on my Desktop. Each one opens and appears functional but how do I get a photo into any of these applications to play with? Or, where do I look to get a kickstart? Help please.
> 
> Jack



Hey Jack, they're plugins for other programs such as Lightroom and Photoshop. They can be accessed by going into your Lightroom library and right clicking on an image > edit in > ... Whatever plugins you have installed show up here. I'm not at my PC so can't remember how to do it on Photoshop but it should be under one of the menus.  Edit - it's under "Filter". 

When you go through Lightroom it will open up the Nik software app, after editing you hit save and it saves a new TIFF file to your library.


----------



## Zv (Mar 25, 2016)

Valvebounce said:


> Hi Jack.
> I think the clue here is in the description, they are calling them plugins which I think means that they only work in conjunction with another piece of software, and not as standalone programs, I have no idea which programs they will interact with, or even if my supposition is correct.
> Can anyone clarify this for us please.
> 
> ...



See my above comment.


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 25, 2016)

Can I use this with either DPP or dxo optics pro 8.

Thansk


----------



## kphoto99 (Mar 25, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Photo software dummy here - I downloaded and installed and it didn't show up in my programs. Searched C: and found it and put shortcuts on my Desktop. Each one opens and appears functional but how do I get a photo into any of these applications to play with? Or, where do I look to get a kickstart? Help please.
> 
> Jack



This software can be used stand alone. Once you open it, select the file open menu and open jpg or tif file and make your changes. Then save it, it will override your original file.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 25, 2016)

kphoto99 said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Photo software dummy here - I downloaded and installed and it didn't show up in my programs. Searched C: and found it and put shortcuts on my Desktop. Each one opens and appears functional but how do I get a photo into any of these applications to play with? Or, where do I look to get a kickstart? Help please.
> ...



Thanks guys for the quick responses. I was just watching one of the NIK videos and it became apparent he was working within Photoshop (I don't yet have PS or LR). I do have Corel Paintshop but haven't taken the time to get to know it and initially don't like it too much.

So, if I can just load a file say after using DPP how do I do this. I didn't see any way in any of these 6 applications. A link to some video or guide would do the trick for those who know but don't wish to type such information up. Thanks.

Jack


----------



## Valvebounce (Mar 25, 2016)

Hi kphoto. 
Thanks for that info, I don't know if this would work, but maybe before hitting save you could rename the original as old or orig then when it saves with the original file name you get to keep them both, either that or just make a copy first. Personally I don't like software that makes destructive changes to things like photo files. 

Cheers, Graham. 



kphoto99 said:


> Jack Douglas said:
> 
> 
> > Photo software dummy here - I downloaded and installed and it didn't show up in my programs. Searched C: and found it and put shortcuts on my Desktop. Each one opens and appears functional but how do I get a photo into any of these applications to play with? Or, where do I look to get a kickstart? Help please.
> ...


----------



## ashmadux (Mar 25, 2016)

Mr. Shakes said:


> Viveza is great for the quick layer work, it saves me a lot of time. I got my $149 worth in the last two years, but I'm worried that this means a great but stagnant product may be headed towards oblivion.



What's Viveza for? Ive had this package for a while, but my main uses was silver efex and now color efx.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 25, 2016)

OK, I see HDR has the file selection menu so now I'll play. So what would be best done in DPP before converting and using NIK - all that's possible?

Jack


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 25, 2016)

1) This is AT LEAST the second time Google has released the whole NIK package for free, the first being shortly after they bought it.

2) I don't believe it has had any major updates in a couple years. It's getting a bit long in the tooth when compared to plug-in suites that have brushes and layers. Still very useful, and for those who don't like to learn new software, keeps on working.

3) If you are angry that an old product is now being released for free, maybe some fresh air and sunshine wouldn't hurt.


----------



## lidocaineus (Mar 25, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> 2) I don't believe it has had any major updates in a couple years. It's getting a bit long in the tooth when compared to plug-in suites that have brushes and layers. Still very useful, and for those who don't like to learn new software, keeps on working.
> 
> 3) If you are angry that an old product is now being released for free, maybe some fresh air and sunshine wouldn't hurt.



You can use any of the plugins as Smart Objects, which is arguably better than layers, as not only do you get layers, but you can reverse everything exactly as you created them. Also the entire workflow is based around color matching (and to a lesser extent spheres of influence) which is an alternate way of doing brush work. Putting brushes in completely defeats the purpose of the plugins, which is to get away from brushes. Or at least that was the original intent during the 1.0 and 2.0 releases. Who knows what it is now that engineers have basically been sucked off the project.

And no one's angry that it's been release for free; there's some very minor natural disappointment that something you paid for is now free, but more importantly it's the MEANING behind being releases for free means – namely that this is mostly like the end of the line for some damn good software that doesn't really have much in terms of equal (specifically Silver Efex Pro).


----------



## Pookie (Mar 25, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> 1) This is AT LEAST the second time Google has released the whole NIK package for free, the first being shortly after they bought it.
> 
> 2) I don't believe it has had any major updates in a couple years. It's getting a bit long in the tooth when compared to plug-in suites that have brushes and layers. Still very useful, and for those who don't like to learn new software, keeps on working.
> 
> 3) If you are angry that an old product is now being released for free, maybe some fresh air and sunshine wouldn't hurt.



It wasn't free to everyone on the first release it was made open in both LR and PS for customers that had already purchased it or some part of it. The key was then abused to no end thereafter.

The NIK suite has brushes and layers in the PS version...



ashmadux said:


> Mr. Shakes said:
> 
> 
> > Viveza is great for the quick layer work, it saves me a lot of time. I got my $149 worth in the last two years, but I'm worried that this means a great but stagnant product may be headed towards oblivion.
> ...



Viveza is like Topaz adjust just much better IMO. 

Having NIK (bought) for as long as I care to remember and still use it often you could see there were no further updates coming.. When Google purchased and then made open for all customers was the writing on the wall... they were dropping further development.

I use often Color Efex, Silver Efex, Viveza and Define... all pretty good but I also use Topaz. If I had to chose one, I'd take NIK any day of the week.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 25, 2016)

Well, all can be used as stand alone by simply dragging the file and dropping it over the _executable_, so that's a pretty simple solution for anyone else that's not into all the sophisticated PS and LR activities. Also, there is no shortage of videos on NIK.

Jack


----------



## Orangutan (Mar 25, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Sorry, but 'more or less synonymous with' does not mean correct usage. Nor does the fact that it's commonly used incorrectly. By that logic, we will see an entry for 'alot' in the OED soon.
> 
> But hey, maybe common usage is all that's needed. As I stated previously, "Those comix is fo'shizzle stanky," is a sentence using all proper and accepted words. :




http://www.oed.com

*c.* _pass._ To be composed _of_, to consist _of_.

1874 _Art of Paper-Making _ii. 10 Thirds, or Mixed, are *comprised of *either or both of the above.
1928 _Daily Tel._ 17 July 10/7 The voluntary boards of management, *comprised..of *very zealous and able laymen.
1964 E. Palmer tr. A. Martinet _Elements Gen. Linguistics_ i. 28 Many of these words are *comprised of *monemes.
1970 _Nature_ 27 June 1206/2 Internally, the chloroplast is *comprised of *a system of flattened membrane sacs.


Sir, remember that being an expert in neuroanatomy does not make you an expert in linguistics, so if you wish to dispute the OED, please cite relevant literature of the appropriate academic subject area. The construction "comprised of" is perfectly cromulent. Please note that one of these examples is from a linguistics textbook, and one is from _Nature_. Presumably, both editorial staffs are capable of distinguishing correct usage from incorrect.


----------



## wsmith96 (Mar 25, 2016)

Free from google usually means lack of development....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 25, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> Sir, remember that being an expert in neuroanatomy does not make you an expert in linguistics, so if you wish to dispute the OED, please cite relevant literature of the appropriate academic subject area. The construction "comprised of" is perfectly cromulent. Please note that one of these examples is from a linguistics textbook, and one is from _Nature_. Presumably, both editorial staffs are capable of distinguishing correct usage from incorrect.



Nevertheless, the Associated Press Stylebook advises against use of that construction, and Mirriam Webster warns of criticism and advises selecting an alternate construct: "_You should be aware, however, that if you use sense 3 you may be subject to criticism for doing so, and you may want to choose a safer synonym such as compose or make up._"

I can claim that, "Use of the 'is comprised of' construct is fo'shizzle stanky," and while the OED would back me up in my choice of words, I'd still sound pretty foolish. Therefore, I will not make the claim in that way, nor will I use the word comprise in any way other than 'the whole comprises the parts', statements such as that above where I am discussing the appropraiteness of said construct notwithstanding.

Good day, Sir.


----------



## Tangent (Mar 25, 2016)

I'm sad to see this for free -- not because I paid for it a year or so ago -- but because it means the final sunset for NIK tools. My favourite set of plug-ins, alas. :'(


----------



## Orangutan (Mar 25, 2016)

neuroanatomist said:


> Orangutan said:
> 
> 
> > Sir, remember that being an expert in neuroanatomy does not make you an expert in linguistics, so if you wish to dispute the OED, please cite relevant literature of the appropriate academic subject area. The construction "comprised of" is perfectly cromulent. Please note that one of these examples is from a linguistics textbook, and one is from _Nature_. Presumably, both editorial staffs are capable of distinguishing correct usage from incorrect.
> ...


You've changed your claim, then? Originally you said it was not "proper." Are you now saying that it is proper, but invites criticism? Or perhaps you wanted to fulfill the prophecy of criticism? Apparently neither the authors/editors of that linguistics textbook nor the editors of _Nature _were put off by the specter (or is it spectre?) of derision?

Languages evolve. Prior to 1939 the word "quark" did not even exist in the English language, and now physicists are using it as if it's real! Such impropriety!


----------



## curby (Mar 25, 2016)

JonAustin said:


> https://hbr.org/2012/07/i-wont-hire-people-who-use-poo/



Man, here you are all up in arms over diction and no one's talking about how people aren't hiring Nikon shooters.

:-X


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 25, 2016)

curby said:


> JonAustin said:
> 
> 
> > https://hbr.org/2012/07/i-wont-hire-people-who-use-poo/
> ...



Good read on grammar. One that amuses me is "their" in place of "they're", pretty common on CR. This CR babble is just good for a laugh, not to be taken seriously! 

Jack


----------



## Schwingi (Mar 25, 2016)

Nice, I'll give it a try!


----------



## keithcooper (Mar 25, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> Can I use this with either DPP or dxo optics pro 8.
> 
> Thansk


No - no DxO or DPP

But...
I've written up details of how I use many of the plugins. There are also reviews of earlier versions - useful fo r a bit more info if you find something particularly useful

For a detailed look at them see:

Silver Efex Pro
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/silver_efex_2.html

Sharpener Pro
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/sharpening_nik3.html

Viveza
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/viveza-2.html

Color Efex filters
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/color-efex-pro4.html

Noise reduction
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/dfine_2.html

HDR image processing
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/hdr-efex-pro2.html

Some other aspects:

Silver Efex halo reduction
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/photo-tips/sfx-halo.html

Using Silver efex to enhance dull colour images
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/tutorial_pages/sfx-colour.html
and
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/stuff2/?p=1493

Hope it's of some help for people just finding them for the first time!


----------



## GuyF (Mar 25, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> curby said:
> 
> 
> > JonAustin said:
> ...



Isn't it hilarious to read submissions from the grammar-police? They clearly forget that we no longer speaketh like wot we did back in Shakespeare's day. Language evolves whether pedants like it or not. The beauty of English is that it can be twisted like a Rubik's cube and yet the writer's intentions are still understood.

Don't get me started on text-speak or that bastard child, "American english". Lol.

Anyway, to get back to the topic in hand, free software - yippeeee!


----------



## d (Mar 25, 2016)

keithcooper said:


> ...
> 
> I've written up details of how I use many of the plugins. There are also reviews of earlier versions - useful fo r a bit more info if you find something particularly useful
> ...



Thanks Keith - I'll check these out!

I've contemplated purchasing Silver Efex on a number of occasions over past years but never went through with it - nice to have it to play with now.

Cheers,
d.


----------



## GuyF (Mar 25, 2016)

d said:


> I've contemplated purchasing Silver Efex on a number of occasions over past years but never went through with it - nice to have it to play with now.
> 
> Cheers,
> d.



Used sensibly, Silver Efex is wonderful. I'm sure you'll like it.


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 25, 2016)

GuyF said:


> d said:
> 
> 
> > I've contemplated purchasing Silver Efex on a number of occasions over past years but never went through with it - nice to have it to play with now.
> ...



+1


----------



## mustafa (Mar 25, 2016)

It was a shame when Google dropped SnapSeed for the desktop, and it didn't get the enhancements that the mobile version got. 

I'm still using the original version, as it's usually all I need for pictures heading for FB.


----------



## nvettese (Mar 25, 2016)

Before HDR eFex 2 came out, I purchased the original from New Egg or some site for like $30. Then a year or so later Google purchased them, and because I had the HDR software, I was afforded the entire at no cost. I could not be happier with my purchase, or this news. I just hope that Google remains committed to this software for the photographers in all of us.


----------



## MickDK (Mar 25, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> curby said:
> 
> 
> > JonAustin said:
> ...



http://www.plainlanguage.gov/examples/humor/marktwain.cfm

For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all.

Generally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeiniing voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x"— bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez —tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivili.

Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.


----------



## JonAustin (Mar 25, 2016)

GuyF said:


> Isn't it hilarious to read submissions from the grammar-police? They clearly forget that we no longer speaketh like wot we did back in Shakespeare's day. Language evolves whether pedants like it or not. The beauty of English is that it can be twisted like a Rubik's cube and yet the writer's intentions are still understood.
> 
> Don't get me started on text-speak or that bastard child, "American english". Lol.



(Sigh.) Well, you can call me "the grammar-police," and point out the obvious evolution of language or make other glaringly self-evident observations, if you like. I don't mind, really. Only trying to help. But if you refuse to recognize the importance of sounding competent in the basics of the language, don't come whining to me if you miss out on that job (or other) opportunity. I just don't understand people who insist on wallowing in ignorance or shun the opportunity to better themselves.


----------



## GuyF (Mar 25, 2016)

JonAustin said:


> ...But if you refuse to recognize the importance of sounding competent in the basics of the language, don't come whining to me if you miss out on that job (or other) opportunity.



Rather than a wholesale refusal to agree the usefulness of correct English, I think there's a big difference between posting a comment on a forum (especially one aimed at photography rather than the minutiae of language) and applying for a job. If you intend working as a journalist, linguist or editor of the OED then verbal skills are high on the agenda. On the other hand, I can't think of any architect, electrical engineer or chemist I've met who knew what it means to conjugate a verb. I imagine you would view them all as dunces. I'll be sure to let them know their careers will now flounder.

Just for completeness and to bring an end to this wordy tomfoolery, can you let me know your definition of the word "arrogance"?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 25, 2016)

JonAustin said:


> GuyF said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't it hilarious to read submissions from the grammar-police? They clearly forget that we no longer speaketh like wot we did back in Shakespeare's day. Language evolves whether pedants like it or not. The beauty of English is that it can be twisted like a Rubik's cube and yet the writer's intentions are still understood.
> ...



+1


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 25, 2016)

This has been good as my first laugh of the morning! I hope Neuro (and others too) never abandons CR.

However, I am now more interested in learning about photography than grammar at my age.

Having said that, there are standards that any young person should aim for or they will pay the price. Also we obviously have to be able to communicate effectively, including CR. I think we do just fine.

NIK is going to be useful to me for sure. 

Jack


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 25, 2016)

Since we're bastartizing the language, how come no one has wondered if 'Nik' is a language-evolved shortening of Nikon, and if so, does the software work well or even at all on Canon images?


----------



## FramerMCB (Mar 25, 2016)

*Re: the good and maybe not so good*



keithcooper said:


> Superb software - I've written detailed reviews of the parts, and use many of them regularly.
> 
> A key part of my print workflow often uses sharpener3
> http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/reviews/plugins/sharpening_nik3.html
> ...



True. Very true. We've seen this happen in other industries too. A small company with a great product gets bought by a larger company. To either kill the technology/idea or to assimilate/incorporate it into their company portfolio or products. I'm afraid that this might hurt other companies ability to sell similar products, as well as Google's own desire to support/further develop a free product. The only way they continue supporting and/or upgrading Nik plug-ins, would be because they are integral parts of some other Google offering that is a paid service or subscription-like service (similar to Adobe's newer business model). And I think there will be a lot of upset Nik customers who purchased it in 2015 who are pissed as hell at Google. For them, this is an unfortunate turn-of-events. For those of us who can now get this suite for free...great! But I wonder of the long-term viability of the Nik suite now. And I have heard very good things about most of these plug-ins. 
A final thought, as someone else has also mentioned, is what kind of negative impact this may have on Topaz products, which are very good products too.


----------



## curby (Mar 25, 2016)

*Re: the good and maybe not so good*



FramerMCB said:


> keithcooper said:
> 
> 
> > The software has pretty much stagnated since acquisition.
> ...



Professionals will pay for high end tools. Abandonware is much less useful to professionals regardless of cost. What happens to Topaz is in their hands, not the hands of peddlers of obsolete tools. (I'm not saying that the Nik tools are currently obsolete, but it's inevitable if the industry moves forward without them.)


----------



## sanfranchristo (Mar 25, 2016)

keithcooper said:


> Hope it's of some help for people just finding them for the first time!



Thanks for all of your articles. I reference them often.


----------



## gmb (Mar 25, 2016)

Have to take back my ass. Google issued me a refund. I am delighted and amazed. Thank you Google.


----------



## Orangutan (Mar 25, 2016)

JonAustin said:


> GuyF said:
> 
> 
> > Isn't it hilarious to read submissions from the grammar-police? They clearly forget that we no longer speaketh like wot we did back in Shakespeare's day. Language evolves whether pedants like it or not. The beauty of English is that it can be twisted like a Rubik's cube and yet the writer's intentions are still understood.
> ...


Skipping the self-righteous condescension. 



> if you refuse to recognize the importance of sounding competent in the basics of the language, don't come whining to me if you miss out on that job (or other) opportunity.


This is a false-dichotomy. Yes, at any point in time there are certain rules of "standard English," in each locale. For example, the expressions "knock up" has very different meanings in the U.S. vs. England, and could be considered standard in one, but not the other. The real issue is about context: employing the rules in the proper circumstances. In informal circumstances (e.g. blog posts) I find I'm not so concerned about spelling and grammar; however I would certainly take them into account in a formal document, such as a letter of application for a job. At the other end, it's equally unacceptable to assert the existence of a formal rule which has only informal acceptance (such as the current example)



> I just don't understand people who insist on wallowing in ignorance or shun the opportunity to better themselves.


And now the heart of the problem: no one is wallowing in ignorance, but you appear to be wallowing in smugness. You see, I used to be a pedant, too: I frequently corrected people on failed diction and grammar. Then I noticed something about myself: any error of my own that came to my attention became forgivable...at least until I'd fully integrated the rule into my regular use. The problem with pedantry is that each pedant places himself (usually him) as the standard by which "well-known" is distinguished from "obscure" formal rules. Maybe you could test yourself, here are a few to play with: do you pronounce "fillet of sole" correctly? Is "fillet" of French or Anglo-Saxon origin? What about "forte," as in a personal strength? Do you use "decimate" correctly? Nauseous? Google for "pedant bait" if you want to find more examples. 

Let's keep formality in the appropriate context.


----------



## JonAustin (Mar 25, 2016)

GuyF said:


> Rather than a wholesale refusal to agree the usefulness of correct English, I think there's a big difference between posting a comment on a forum (especially one aimed at photography rather than the minutiae of language) and applying for a job.



And yet, an effective grasp and correct usage of the language is important to both. Readers who know better will make a judgment about you on the basis of your grammatical errors, even if subconsciously.



GuyF said:


> If you intend working as a journalist, linguist or editor of the OED then verbal skills are high on the agenda. On the other hand, I can't think of any architect, electrical engineer or chemist I've met who knew what it means to conjugate a verb. I imagine you would view them all as dunces. I'll be sure to let them know their careers will now flounder.



I'm sorry to learn that the architects, EEs and chemists in your circles aren't educationally more well-rounded. (BTW, I'm a EE, I've never forgotten the simple task of how to conjugate a verb, and I believe that my command of the language has been a factor in my career success.) My thesis (which apparently slipped past you), applied to your example, is that those professionals in your circle who can't conjugate may lose out to (or may well have lost out to) others in their respective disciplines with a better grasp on the language.



GuyF said:


> Just for completeness and to bring an end to this wordy tomfoolery, can you let me know your definition of the word "arrogance"?



The obvious response would be that I looked up "arrogance" in the dictionary, and found a picture of you, but that's too easy. (I'll let you have the last word, if you so choose, because this frankly isn't a very challenging exchange.)


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Mar 25, 2016)

Worth using it, bin using it for years, paid for mine, how how about a refund?


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Mar 25, 2016)

Maui5150 said:


> Thankfully I had bought a few years ago, and at an Education Discount... Still slightly perturbed that something I paid for is now free



I just ask then for a refund, it never hurt to ask.


----------



## JonAustin (Mar 25, 2016)

Orangutan said:


> Skipping the self-righteous condescension.



No condescension intended, self-righteous or otherwise.



Orangutan said:


> This is a false-dichotomy. Yes, at any point in time there are certain rules of "standard English," in each locale. For example, the expressions "knock up" has very different meanings in the U.S. vs. England, and could be considered standard in one, but not the other. The real issue is about context: employing the rules in the proper circumstances. In informal circumstances (e.g. blog posts) I find I'm not so concerned about spelling and grammar; however I would certainly take them into account in a formal document, such as a letter of application for a job. At the other end, it's equally unacceptable to assert the existence of a formal rule which has only informal acceptance (such as the current example)



OK, so it's not important to you. We get it. The point is, it's important to many people, about some of whose opinions you might care, or who might have influence over aspects of your life or career. But no one said you _have _to care.



Orangutan said:


> And now the heart of the problem: no one is wallowing in ignorance, but you appear to be wallowing in smugness. You see, I used to be a pedant, too: I frequently corrected people on failed diction and grammar. Then I noticed something about myself: any error of my own that came to my attention became forgivable...at least until I'd fully integrated the rule into my regular use. The problem with pedantry is that each pedant places himself (usually him) as the standard by which "well-known" is distinguished from "obscure" formal rules. Maybe you could test yourself, here are a few to play with: do you pronounce "fillet of sole" correctly? Is "fillet" of French or Anglo-Saxon origin? What about "forte," as in a personal strength? Do you use "decimate" correctly? Nauseous? Google for "pedant bait" if you want to find more examples.
> 
> Let's keep formality in the appropriate context.



Oh, but many _are_ wallowing in ignorance, and willfully so. You may call me a smug pendant if you wish, but I recognize that I make mistakes every day. And -- apparently contrary to some -- I'm grateful for correction and instruction, readily admit when I have erred or failed, and try to improve my skill sets on a daily basis. The only alternative would be to continue to make mistakes that I might find embarrassing later. YMMV.

Finally, what's most interesting to me about the entire off-topic series of posts about grammar in this thread, is that *neuroanatomist's* original observation was in response to something written by the fine folks at Google -- not anyone in the CR forum membership -- and which he led off by confessing that he was "picking a nit." And yet, so many came crawling out of the woodwork to take shots at him, and at anyone who agreed with him. Hmmm.


----------



## Pebbles (Mar 25, 2016)

The key point here is that you should probably avoid using Nik in any files that you might need to re-edit later on. From their statement is sounds like Google are not going to update Nik to support new OS versions, so sooner or later any files that use it will have issues. If you are baking it in as a separate layer then I suppose that is safe, but if you are using Smart Objects with Nik as a filter, sooner of later you are probably going to get burned. I would also question why anyone would want to invest time and effort in learning a piece of software that will soon be unusable.


----------



## Maiaibing (Mar 25, 2016)

Did anyone else here take a break to listen to "Word Crimes"? 8)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 25, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> 3) If you are angry that an old product is now being released for free, maybe some fresh air and sunshine wouldn't hurt.



More like people are angry that a great product is being disappeared and won't be updated for hi DPI screens or other new tech and won't be updated if newer OS and whatnot make it fail.

If Google had no use for it, why did they have to buy the company? They have billions, but they just had to raid this tiny little company? Couldn't find anyone else to hire? Couldn't stand to lose 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of budget to competition in a field they don't even do much in?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 25, 2016)

lidocaineus said:


> YuengLinger said:
> 
> 
> > 2) I don't believe it has had any major updates in a couple years. It's getting a bit long in the tooth when compared to plug-in suites that have brushes and layers. Still very useful, and for those who don't like to learn new software, keeps on working.
> ...



exactly and exactly


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 25, 2016)

Maiaibing said:


> Did anyone else here take a break to listen to "Word Crimes"? 8)




Weird Al? Just did - not bad. In Quebec, Canada there really are true word crimes and punishment, but that's written language not verbal and it's not for grammar. ;D

Jack


----------



## curby (Mar 25, 2016)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> If Google had no use for it, why did they have to buy the company? They have billions, but they just had to raid this tiny little company? Couldn't find anyone else to hire? Couldn't stand to lose 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of budget to competition in a field they don't even do much in?



Welcome to capitalism. They saw something they thought would make them more profitable, so they bought it. Why did they buy the whole company rather than the single product they really cared about? Maybe it worked out better legally. Maybe they wanted all the engineers that were working at the company. Maybe they did care more about the full range of Nik products at the time. Regardless, this happens all the time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Apple
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Facebook
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Google
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mergers_and_acquisitions_by_Microsoft

(curious that Amazon's not on there)

Some companies do it more often than others, and companies treat their acquisitions differently, just as they treat their employees and their customers differently. If you care enough about how a company behaves, that's your cue to support them or take your money elsewhere.

EDIT: On the subject of the fates of acquired companies, this can't even be called a failure yet. Compare to:

http://www.theverge.com/2015/7/8/8910999/microsoft-job-cuts-2015-nokia-write-off
http://www.theverge.com/2014/1/29/5358620/lenovo-reportedly-buying-motorola-mobility-from-google


----------



## YuengLinger (Mar 26, 2016)

curby said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > If Google had no use for it, why did they have to buy the company? They have billions, but they just had to raid this tiny little company? Couldn't find anyone else to hire? Couldn't stand to lose 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of budget to competition in a field they don't even do much in?
> ...



"Raid this tiny little company"? I'm pretty sure the previous owners saw it as a great chance to cash in on years of hard work.

Wow...From what Disney movie did you learn about business?


----------



## George D. (Mar 26, 2016)

Before Google I was very curious about Nik software mainly for the various B&W film emulation over DSLR monochrome then I thought the $120 Google offer for the suite is a steal. Paid, then used it maybe once or twice. The idea is nice but if you want to shoot B&W buy film (as long as still around).


----------



## ExodistPhotography (Mar 26, 2016)

George D. said:


> Before Google I was very curious about Nik software mainly for the various B&W film emulation over DSLR monochrome then I thought the $120 Google offer for the suite is a steal. Paid, then used it maybe once or twice. The idea is nice but if you want to shoot B&W buy film (as long as still around).



Sometimes I do miss film. I just feel sometimes like it had a sharper image, but with MP count getting higher that seems less of an issues. But on the topic of BW, I use Lr with wonderful results.

I never tried the Nik software out, many talked about it and I even thought about it. But I need the option of being able to batch process my images from RAW and work my way through them looking and comparing which ones look the best. Lr just makes that easy..


----------



## GuyF (Mar 26, 2016)

JonAustin said:


> The obvious response would be that I looked up "arrogance" in the dictionary, and found a picture of you, but that's too easy. (I'll let you have the last word, if you so choose, because this frankly isn't a very challenging exchange.)



Aren't dictionaries with accompanying pictures more aimed at children? At least we've now found your level. Allow me to help - Arrogance: an attitude of superiority manifested in an overbearing manner.

I suppose we could ask CRguy to request that members declare if their first language is English or not. Those having English as a second language can become forum members automatically whereas native speakers must first submit an essay on the correlation between sensor DR and any equivalent found within language. Bonus marks for use of iambic pentameter.

Now back to the thread in hand; DFine is very good, isn't it?


----------



## expatinasia (Mar 26, 2016)

I would love Google to announce how many people have downloaded it since they said it was free to do so.

I rarely, if ever, use filters but I have downloaded and installed it! I might even try and play around with it to see if I like it.

But I would really love to know how many millions (?) have just downloaded it because, like me, they could!


----------



## GuyF (Mar 26, 2016)

expatinasia said:


> I would love Google to announce how many people have downloaded it since they said it was free to do so.



I wonder if they did research to gauge how many people already had pirated copies.


----------



## PhotoCat (Mar 26, 2016)

Yay! what a great news! Thank you Google! ;D ;D ;D


----------



## lidocaineus (Mar 26, 2016)

George D. said:


> Before Google I was very curious about Nik software mainly for the various B&W film emulation over DSLR monochrome then I thought the $120 Google offer for the suite is a steal. Paid, then used it maybe once or twice. The idea is nice but if you want to shoot B&W buy film (as long as still around).



I agree that if you want to match a certain film stock the first choice is to shoot that stock, but it's sort of ridiculous to assume that any time you want to shoot black and white you want to emulate film. There are a huge number of qualities to love about film, but that doesn't mean digital black and white is useless.

And if you're only using Silver Efex Pro to match film stock, you missed out on 90% of the rest of its abilities.


----------



## Zv (Mar 26, 2016)

I only ever used Silver Efex before so I need to try these other ones out. I really like Silver Efex it's real easy to get a high contrast, punchy and detailed B&W in a few seconds rather than muck around for hours on Photoshop or Lightroom. I don't use the presets now as I have a particular look that I go for and know how those sliders work to help me get it. Really good for those dramatic skies and rocks. 

Here's an example - https://flic.kr/p/AeB8mU


----------



## rpt (Mar 27, 2016)

Has anyone installed this in the last couple of days? 

I tried and only the HDR plugin got installed. I have LR/CC 64 bit on a Windows 10 HP laptop.

Sorry, my bad. So only the HDR appears via the Export option. All of them appear via "Edit In".
:-[


----------



## George D. (Mar 27, 2016)

lidocaineus said:


> George D. said:
> 
> 
> > Before Google I was very curious about Nik software mainly for the various B&W film emulation over DSLR monochrome then I thought the $120 Google offer for the suite is a steal. Paid, then used it maybe once or twice. The idea is nice but if you want to shoot B&W buy film (as long as still around).
> ...



Observe difference: B&W film, DSLR monochrome. Not the same thing. Former has grain, latter pixels. I love monochrome (lately) just as I love B&W.


----------



## zim (Mar 27, 2016)

Is it possible to just install Silver Efex and nothing else?


----------



## George D. (Mar 27, 2016)

It installs/uninstalls the full suite complete as a plug-in on host applications of your choice, however, you can also run each module externally from the installation directory (Windows Program Files/Google/Nik Collection) using respective .exe file. After full installation I suppose you can manually delete the module of your choice from the install dir.


----------



## lidocaineus (Mar 27, 2016)

George D. said:


> lidocaineus said:
> 
> 
> > George D. said:
> ...



I've never heard anyone make the distinction that B&W only belongs to film and monochrome only belongs to digital. Please link to your references regarding this nomenclature.


----------



## keithcooper (Mar 27, 2016)

>>Observe difference: B&W film, DSLR monochrome. Not the same thing. Former has grain, latter pixels. I love monochrome (lately) just as I love B&W.

Nope, I've always found monochrome a fancy term for black and white. I shoot black and white with any camera or process that gets me a B&W print at the end of it. I may not do film any more but it's just as much B&W as my digital prints... 

I choose to call all my monochrome work B&W - the grain/pixel arguments were over many years ago for me...


----------



## zim (Mar 27, 2016)

George D. said:


> It installs/uninstalls the full suite complete as a plug-in on host applications of your choice, however, you can also run each module externally from the installation directory (Windows Program Files/Google/Nik Collection) using respective .exe file. After full installation I suppose you can manually delete the module of your choice from the install dir.



Cheers


----------



## iowapipe (Mar 29, 2016)

searsie said:


> Wondering about compatibility with Mac El Capitan. Know there were issues.



I've been using it in El Capitan with no issues since EC was released (via Photohop CS). I think I've had Nik for about 4 years or so, total. One thing to note: I installed EC fresh and then reinstalled all my software. I did not perform an upgrade. So I think I avoided the 'issue' some found, requiring a reinstall of the collection. Depending on your situation and software of choice, you should double check of course.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 29, 2016)

Please clarify for me, thanks. If I understand from previous comments, If I paste a copy of a photo into Dfine2.exe, since there are no save options, it will automatically overwrite that file when I save?? Should I create the largest possible jpeg with DPP and then downsize or just use the desired downsized jpeg as is? Dumb questions but this is new to me. 

Jack


----------



## cayenne (Mar 29, 2016)

It would be nice if Google open sourced the NIK software...and let the greater internet keep developing and working on them.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 29, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> Please clarify for me, thanks. If I understand from previous comments, If I paste a copy of a photo into Dfine2.exe, since there are no save options, it will automatically overwrite that file when I save?? Should I create the largest possible jpeg with DPP and then downsize or just use the desired downsized jpeg as is? Dumb questions but this is new to me.
> 
> Jack



I use all the Nik apps within Photoshop, so not sure this answers your question. But in Photoshop, Nik merges the visible layers into a single NEW layer, applies the adjustments to that new layer and then places it on top of the other existing layers. You still have all your old layers in place and unaffected, you just have a new Nik layer on top. 

This also allows you to reduce the visibility of the Nik layer, in case the applied effect is too strong or you can add a layer mask to paint out the effect on portions of the image if you choose.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 30, 2016)

zim said:


> Is it possible to just install Silver Efex and nothing else?



You can manually install just the features you need.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 30, 2016)

I downloaded it and played with some of the apps in Lightroom. Define actually produced NR that looked worse to me than just doing it in Lightroom. The Silver Efex program looked useful.

In Lightroom, each time I ran one of the modules, it created another copy of the image. I ended up with at least three copies after running the programs in the recommended order.

I have yet to try in Photoshop, but it likely just created additional layers. I'm configuring my new PC, so It will have to wait a bit. I tend to really load up on software, then the old one will be restored and software reloaded so it bumps a older one yet. I use 4 regularly, so the oldest one will go away, and three will be restored. Its a long process but gets every thing running smoothly again. I'll be installing windows 10 on all of them at the same time.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Mar 30, 2016)

Thanks unfocused,

That's a little outside of my situation but when I do a bit more that is more obvious to the eye it will become apparent. I always shoot RAW so have those files as backup and so having a JPEG altered is no big deal. For now DPP and NIK stand alone will fill the bill.

Jack


----------



## Zv (Mar 30, 2016)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I downloaded it and played with some of the apps in Lightroom. Define actually produced NR that looked worse to me than just doing it in Lightroom. The Silver Efex program looked useful.
> 
> In Lightroom, each time I ran one of the modules, it created another copy of the image. I ended up with at least three copies after running the programs in the recommended order.
> 
> I have yet to try in Photoshop, but it likely just created additional layers. I'm configuring my new PC, so It will have to wait a bit. I tend to really load up on software, then the old one will be restored and software reloaded so it bumps a older one yet. I use 4 regularly, so the oldest one will go away, and three will be restored. Its a long process but gets every thing running smoothly again. I'll be installing windows 10 on all of them at the same time.



Yeah I still don't get what's so wrong with Lightroom's sharpening and NR so much that we need extra plugins to do it for us? Is there something I'm missing? ???

(I was also lead to believe DxO optics pro Prime was the best for NR but I can't really see much difference than when I do it myself in LR.) 

Also, like you said it creates extra files when you use them so not only do you have that extra file but you also need to back it up so actually more like 3 files every time you use it. 

And what is Viveza all about? Can't figure that out. Is it just like masking stuff in Photoshop for those who don't know how to mask stuff? 

Love Silver Efex though, been using that for a while.


----------

