I was just preparing a crop from a tree with fine twigs against the glaring winter sky for this
post when I happened to look a little closer at what Lightroom2 was doing compared to the conversion with CaptureNX2.
As I shot only RAW (=NEF) with my Nikon some software has to convert the RAW-data to somethin that can be viewed, printed, uploaded to the web. This piece of software is called RAW-converter and every image-processing software I know has some RAW-converter built in.
As to you Nikon users it was always claimed that Nikon's own converter (as built into e.g. CaptureNX) is "simply the best". Well I never really looked too hard into this because for all my critical conversions I used CaptureNX.
But if you're a lazy guy like me, you tend to use the LR2 converter every now and then, or if I'm honest 95% of all times
Why? Because I view
all my images in Lightroom and 95% of those are RAW-images
Now have a close look at the following image - click through to the large original (only 300kB):
You see a screenshot comparing side-by-side both converters. Look at the marked areas and tell me: where have all the twigs gone?
Thomas (beware: Nikon-fanboy and moderator!) My Lens Reviews
, My Pictures
, My Photography Blog