Nikon View NX-i - can't edit metadata

[Phil Robinson]

I have always used Nikon View Nx2 for adding captions and tags to RAW files and never had any problems until recently.

I have updated to View NX-i but find the captions, tags and any other metadata I add simply doesn't appear in any other program.

When I open a file in Photoshop or even right click with windows explorer I get nothing. I have tried over-writing files I captioned with other programs and though the new information appears while in View NX-i, in any other program I can still see the 'overwritten' data.

 

Any idea what's going wrong?

[Phil Robinson]

I have discovered the answer. In this 'updated' verson of View, you cannot edit metadata!

You can change some of it which is then 'stored as a separate file' but can't actually be added to the image file itself or be used for any useful purpose - like captioning a photo for example.

One to be avoided.

[Sultanpepa]

1 hour ago, Phil Robinson said:

I have discovered the answer. In this 'updated' verson of View, you cannot edit metadata!

You can change some of it which is then 'stored as a separate file' but can't actually be added to the image file itself or be used for any useful purpose - like captioning a photo for example.

One to be avoided.

 

I had a photo rejected from live news recently which had stated that content was not suitable. I subsequently notice the image had no metadata. I had just updated to NX-i and thought it was user error. I resubmitted after completing metadata with another program and it was accepted. Thanks for clearing up why this has happened. This seems like a rather silly way for NX-i to operate given that Nikon are messing about with an industry standard. 

[Vincent Lowe]

Read this from Mario Westphal, developer of IMatch.....

 

https://www.photools.com/community/index.php?topic=4438.msg29706#msg29706

 

Especially this bit -

 

If you have used Nikon Capture, they also may contain an embedded XMP record.
If you have used other software on the NEF files, they probably have an external XMP record. This is the standard for RAW files, only Nikon ever was so dumb as to embed XMP in RAW files.

[Phil Robinson]

On 10/24/2018 at 11:46, Sultanpepa said:

 

I had a photo rejected from live news recently which had stated that content was not suitable. I subsequently notice the image had no metadata. I had just updated to NX-i and thought it was user error. I resubmitted after completing metadata with another program and it was accepted. Thanks for clearing up why this has happened. This seems like a rather silly way for NX-i to operate given that Nikon are messing about with an industry standard. 

I've gone back to NX2, which does actually change the data in the image. I'd had a problem with it doing weird things to files with some cameras (forcing RAW files to open at 1680-1090 pixels for some inexplicable reason) but I downloaded the news version and it seems to work OK now.

[Phil Robinson]

On 10/24/2018 at 13:57, Vincent Lowe said:

Read this from Mario Westphal, developer of IMatch.....

 

https://www.photools.com/community/index.php?topic=4438.msg29706#msg29706

 

Especially this bit -

 

If you have used Nikon Capture, they also may contain an embedded XMP record.
If you have used other software on the NEF files, they probably have an external XMP record. This is the standard for RAW files, only Nikon ever was so dumb as to embed XMP in RAW files.

I find embedding metadata in RAW files EXTREMELY useful, not dumb at all. It makes my workflow much easier if I can add captions and tags to RAW files before starting the editing proper. Of course, the developer of a competing program might disagree.

 

 

[Vincent Lowe]

The point is that Mario (IMatch) keeps strictly to the recommendations and specifications of the ITPC, XMP, Metadata working groups, and their recommendation is not to embed metadata in raw files. Only Nikon decided to go their own way with Nikon Capture.  The main reason I started using IMatch many years ago was because of its use of 'categories', which are similar to keywords except they are held in the database only and the raw files aren't touched.  If I click on a category it shows me all the files with that category regardless of where it is stored - hard drive, DVD, cd, external drives even if they are offline.  This avoids the problems, such as Phil has found, when you come to use a different program.

 

Just to add - the categories can easily be converted to embedded keywords if necessary but in the fifteen years or so that I've been using IMatch I've never had the need to embed them in raw files.

[Reimar]

Yes having edits to NEF files stay with the file had some advantages for me too.  Now,  View NX-i and NX-D use sidecar files like everyone else.

 

BTW, the latest View NX-i is essentially unusable for me now.  It is agonizingly slow.  I'm having to use NX-D to rate and sort images.  What is Nikon doing?

[Vincent Lowe]

23 minutes ago, Reimar said:

Yes having edits to NEF files stay with the file had some advantages for me too.  Now,  View NX-i and NX-D use sidecar files like everyone else.

 

 

 

If you use proper image management software you don't see the sidecar files.  If you move, copy, rename, delete a file the sidecar file goes with it.  Again avoiding any possible problems/corruption of the raw file. Any problems with the metadata, just delete the XMP file and start again (never had to do it).  There are good reasons why 'everyone else' uses sidecar files...

[MDM]

31 minutes ago, Reimar said:

Yes having edits to NEF files stay with the file had some advantages for me too.  Now,  View NX-i and NX-D use sidecar files like everyone else.

 

BTW, the latest View NX-i is essentially unusable for me now.  It is agonizingly slow.  I'm having to use NX-D to rate and sort images.  What is Nikon doing?

 

I think Nikon decided some years ago to stick to what it was good at and leave the software business to those who are good at that. There was even a joint statement from Nikon and Adobe about how they were going to be nice to each other and cooperate from now on. I recall trying out NX-D a while back after you mentioned it here and I found that agonisingly slow so I cannot imagine what NX-i must be like. Clearly going down the non-standard route is not great in the long term. 

 

As Vincent Lowe says, raw images are not designed to be edited directly. In fact doing so not only risks corruption but may also negate their use as evidence of ownership. 

[Reimar]

1 hour ago, MDM said:

 

I think Nikon decided some years ago to stick to what it was good at and leave the software business to those who are good at that. There was even a joint statement from Nikon and Adobe about how they were going to be nice to each other and cooperate from now on. I recall trying out NX-D a while back after you mentioned it here and I found that agonisingly slow so I cannot imagine what NX-i must be like. Clearly going down the non-standard route is not great in the long term. 

 

As Vincent Lowe says, raw images are not designed to be edited directly. In fact doing so not only risks corruption but may also negate their use as evidence of ownership. 

 

I get what you mean about editing raw files directly - I don't think any software does that.  The latest Nikon converters create the sidecar files but you don't notice this as one works on images - so it's quite seamless.

Regarding NX-D: I love it.  Not super fast but it doesn't hang up my processing speed and the color and contrast are hard to beat.  Now they re-introduced U-points into the converter!  Like Capture NX, the U-points work on something like the 16 bit TIFF data, not the RAW data.  So double processing a NEF file will give much wider dynamic range, but if the NEF isn't too far out of bounds, the U-points will help things along to the final image tweaked in photoshop.

[Sultanpepa]

4 hours ago, Phil Robinson said:

I've gone back to NX2, which does actually change the data in the image. I'd had a problem with it doing weird things to files with some cameras (forcing RAW files to open at 1680-1090 pixels for some inexplicable reason) but I downloaded the news version and it seems to work OK now.

 

I'm now in a situation where I'm using View NX2, Capture NX2, Capture NX-D, View NX-i, Nikon Transfer, and PS Elements 12 all because I've bought a D850. I'd have been happy to stick with Capture NX2 but it can't handle the D850 NEF files. It means that I'm in learning mode all over again and my hearts not in it if I'm honest. My uploads to Alamy are suffering because of it. I'm going to stick with the D610 for stock at the moment until I can simplify my workflow. Nikon have a lot to answer for.

[MDM]

1 hour ago, Reimar said:

 

I get what you mean about editing raw files directly - I don't think any software does that.  The latest Nikon converters create the sidecar files but you don't notice this as one works on images - so it's quite seamless.

Regarding NX-D: I love it.  Not super fast but it doesn't hang up my processing speed and the color and contrast are hard to beat.  Now they re-introduced U-points into the converter!  Like Capture NX, the U-points work on something like the 16 bit TIFF data, not the RAW data.  So double processing a NEF file will give much wider dynamic range, but if the NEF isn't too far out of bounds, the U-points will help things along to the final image tweaked in photoshop.

 

I was just going on what Vincent Lowe said in relation to embedding metadata in raw files there so no direct knowledge of it. I did download NX-D out our curiosity after a conversation here with you some time back but found it incredibly slow so never took it any further. I was only doing it out of interest anyway to keep up with the times as I am very happy with my Lightroom ± Photoshop workflow and would be very unlikely to change. Nowadays I tend to do as a lot in Lightroom which has advanced massively in recent years and only take images into Photoshop if they need retouching or very detailed local adjustments. This is doubly beneficial as it is fast and I am working on the raws for the most part. I am not clear what you mean about double processing NEFs.

 

23 minutes ago, Sultanpepa said:

 

I'm now in a situation where I'm using View NX2, Capture NX2, Capture NX-D, View NX-i, Nikon Transfer, and PS Elements 12 all because I've bought a D850. I'd have been happy to stick with Capture NX2 but it can't handle the D850 NEF files. It means that I'm in learning mode all over again and my hearts not in it if I'm honest. My uploads to Alamy are suffering because of it. I'm going to stick with the D610 for stock at the moment until I can simplify my workflow. Nikon have a lot to answer for.

 

That sounds horrendously complicated and incredibly time consuming. I don't think Nikon are at fault here as I doubt that they are realistically expecting many D850 users to be using their own raw converters. I think they still supply these as it is expected but here is a lot better and more efficient software available at reasonable prices. Have you considered the Adobe subscription? It would save you a fortune if you value your time and it is not difficult. I've just spent a few hours introducing my wife to Lightroom with her D3400 and she is up and running already. 

[Sultanpepa]

3 minutes ago, MDM said:

That sounds horrendously complicated and incredibly time consuming. I don't think Nikon are at fault here as I doubt that they are realistically expecting many D850 users to be using their own raw converters. I think they still supply these as it is expected but here is a lot better and more efficient software available at reasonable prices. Have you considered the Adobe subscription? It would save you a fortune if you value your time and it is not difficult. I've just spent a few hours introducing my wife to Lightroom with her D3400 and she is up and running already. 

 

As a matter of fact I have considered Lightroom. I'd have prefered to buy it but it's looking increasingly like I'll rent.

[MDM]

Did we have this conversation a little while back? I know most people prefer to buy software but the Lightroom - Photoshop package is excellent value and it is regularly updated. The perpetual version is beginning to look like a distant relation now. Go for it - you will definitely save yourself a lot of stress considering your current workflow and the cost is more or less negligible in comparison to the cost of a D850. The camera is amazing and the images deserve quality treatment.  You should be really enjoying it and not getting stressed out as you clearly are from your earlier post .  I have had mine for nearly a year and I am still excited by it every time I take it for a spin .

. 

 

[Reimar]

3 hours ago, MDM said:

 

. I am not clear what you mean about double processing NEFs.

 

 

You know the kind of scene with bright cloud and dark foreground? (I'm still doing Scotland images, and I got a lot of that).  You want a dark moody sky with bright glowing foreground.  It means you've got to pull a stop or two down from the blown highlights and raise a stop or two on the blocked shadows.  Easy peasy.  Process the RAW file once for the foreground and a second time for the sky.  Combine in photoshop (I use actions to produce a contrast mask).

[MDM]

4 hours ago, Reimar said:

 

You know the kind of scene with bright cloud and dark foreground? (I'm still doing Scotland images, and I got a lot of that).  You want a dark moody sky with bright glowing foreground.  It means you've got to pull a stop or two down from the blown highlights and raise a stop or two on the blocked shadows.  Easy peasy.  Process the RAW file once for the foreground and a second time for the sky.  Combine in photoshop (I use actions to produce a contrast mask).

 

OK you had not mentioned combining them, just tweaking in Photoshop. I think what you are doing is more than a tweak. Have you tried using HDR merge in Photoshop rather than a contrast mask. It is total automatic and gives decent results. 

 

Personally I don't see any need to do separate raw conversions though with files from any D8xx series camera if it is just a few stops (up to 4 or 5 stops even) because the camera  dynamic range is so good. I use grad filters in Lightroom (same in ACR) to work on a single raw file. It works most of the time, maybe with a little tweak in Photoshop if required. An alternative is to go full HDR on the raws in LR/ACR and shoot several exposures (I don't think it works on different interpretations of a single file but I might be wrong) but I find this unnecessary unless the contrast levels are really high and it needs static subjects. 

[Phil Robinson]

17 hours ago, Sultanpepa said:

 

I'm now in a situation where I'm using View NX2, Capture NX2, Capture NX-D, View NX-i, Nikon Transfer, and PS Elements 12 all because I've bought a D850. I'd have been happy to stick with Capture NX2 but it can't handle the D850 NEF files. It means that I'm in learning mode all over again and my hearts not in it if I'm honest. My uploads to Alamy are suffering because of it. I'm going to stick with the D610 for stock at the moment until I can simplify my workflow. Nikon have a lot to answer for.

My problem also started when I got a new camera (D7100 - well, second hand new camera) but I think can now do everything with the latest version of View NX2, Capture NX-D Elements 14 and Nikon Transfer, though I'm not sure if that's essential yet. I had a very bad Wednesday morning but I've recovered now.

[Reimar]

8 hours ago, MDM said:

 

OK you had not mentioned combining them, just tweaking in Photoshop. I think what you are doing is more than a tweak. Have you tried using HDR merge in Photoshop rather than a contrast mask. It is total automatic and gives decent results. 

 

Personally I don't see any need to do separate raw conversions though with files from any D8xx series camera if it is just a few stops (up to 4 or 5 stops even) because the camera  dynamic range is so good. I use grad filters in Lightroom (same in ACR) to work on a single raw file. It works most of the time, maybe with a little tweak in Photoshop if required. An alternative is to go full HDR on the raws in LR/ACR and shoot several exposures (I don't think it works on different interpretations of a single file but I might be wrong) but I find this unnecessary unless the contrast levels are really high and it needs static subjects. 

I have tried the automatic (never a good idea) HDR merge in Photoshop and find the results totally unacceptable.  Neither the foreground nor the sky is what I had set in NX-D, and the edges are truly awful without any way to edit them.  Going full bore HDR is not my style - I hate that look.

I often shoot for the sky and foreground in the field, but often can work with one NEF file.  Taking two shots is sometimes needed as you say, but even if pin registered, any moving leaves or grass against the sky will be a problem.  So single NEF is preferable.  And thank goodness for that DR on the D-850.