Digital BW, The Print

Seth,

I've done quite a few tests this week comparing ACR and NC on my D100 NEF
files, and I found that the best combination is to process the raw files in
NC and to upsample in PS. ACR might give better upsampling, but we can't
separate that from the rest of the ACR process. My impression was that the
files I processed in ACR were more 'ragged' than when processed in NC. At
fiirst I thought that ACR gave better definition, but then I realised that
came with more noise, aliasing, and moire, and using ACR's smoothing was a
no-no.

Having decided that NC produced the cleaner, nicer, images, I tried
upsampling in NC (which theoretically ought to be better), but found
upsampling in PS afterwards was better.

I'd be delighted to hear of other's comparisons. With other cameras the
results may be different.

Bob Frost.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Seth Rossman" <seth@...>

> Hi, John-
>
> The plug-in issue is not whether it is better than native PS; it's whether
> it is better than Nikon Capture (NC).
>
> It boils down to where the 100 bucks is better spent.