Google Nik Collection is Now Free

[ritholtz]

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

Thansk

 

[kphoto99]

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]

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.

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]

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.

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.

 

[ashmadux]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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...

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.

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]

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]

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]

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

 

[neuroanatomist]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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

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]

Nice, I'll give it a try!

 

[keithcooper]

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]

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

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

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!