Railfan Technology > Photoshop vs, NX

I have been using Photoshop CS5 for years...been as happy as a clam.  Recently, I upgraded from the Nikon D300 to the D7100.  Images processed via Photoshop are lifeless.  Colours are blah compared to images adjusted with Nikon NX.

View the identical image.. one processed with CS and the other with NX.  (On my screen, the Photoshop image looks great... when I post it or send it, the image goes flat.

What am I doing wrong in Photoshop?

The Yeti is waving his arms in frustration..

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/19/15 16:37 by YukonYeti.

---

---

Your thumbnails on the TO page look very different but when I view the full, 900px images, they look similar. The NX image is slightly warmer and a tad brighter.

How are you saving JPEGs from PS? Are you using "Save for Web and Devices"? If so, you might want to read about the color shift issue.

http://viget.com/inspire/the-mysterious-save-for-web-color-shift

Count me in as one of those who see very little difference between the two images except for the powerlines... The top photo shows the powerlines to be smooth while the bottom shows them as jaggedy, probably due to pixel loss. Sorry I'm not of much help, just giving my observations in case they're of any use.

Did you shoot these as Jpegs or RAW?

Bob

The jaggies are an aliasing artifact either in the downsampling or the JPEG compression algorithm of NX.  Not familiar with it, so I can't offer much more, but that's probably why.

Otherwise the two images look almost identical on my monitor.  The thumbnails before I logged in to TO did not - the CS one was darker and flatter.  Makes me think it's something to do with the color space - is your CS workflow in Adobe RGB or sRGB?  The thumbnail looks like AdobeRGB as interpreted by something that only thinks in sRGB (aka everything that's not a professional graphics tool) - generally you get a dull, flat image.  I wonder if the full image has the color profile embedded in it, and it's allowing my browser to figure it out? 

Could be some browsers are infact translating the color space (I know safari does) which would make them appear the same to some folks... I agree they look very similar here using Chrome on Windows, which I think supports color management.

One still looks a tad darker and  better, (When I look at the names or signs I can see number two has less resolution or sharpness??, , the little signs are harder to read, the letters on the train look fuzzier).  At least what I see, tho maybe lighten one up only slightly.

Since one is labeled as PS, I would vote as PS being the better photo.  If you think the PS versions you have are a little lacking, oftern clarity is a good slider to juice them up a little.

As I see it something went wrong with number two in the processing or how it was saved??? 
Besides that, the RAW conversions for each camera are not exactly the same so the PS processing  you do for one camera may not be ideal for another.

Bob Jordan



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 04/20/15 13:27 by robj.

The second one looks best on the thumbnails using Internet Explorer but when looking at the full size, the first one looks better.  Lots of help, ain't I?  

After looking at the big views, I was wondering if there was something in volved in the way you were saving the files and how the file sizes compared,  Saving "for internet" could be a problem causing the jaggies.  The colors in the first are more saturated, brighter.

John

Thanks to everyone for their assistance and comments.  I took the recommendation of using the newest version of Lightroom.that seems to have solved the fatness.  Sample is attached.

---