I shoot in raw, computer recognizes as an unreadable .nef?!?! HELP!

[D-B-J]

Ok, title says it all. I shot about 20 shots in raw, that i can see FINE on my d200, and when plugged into my computer, it reads them as .NEF files, and refuses to allow any program to open them (photoshop 7.0, or rawshooterplus).

Anyone know whats wrong??

EDIT: And upon opening, it says it is "not a valid win32 file"

I am running windows xp, and its really starting to make me mad that i cannot use the pictures i took...

 

[D-B-J]

nope, thats the problem. they dont show up in "my computer" as raw files like they should, they show up as some stupid unreadable .nef file. They worked fine on my laptop, but since that broke, they refuse to work on my home computer. They used to.. so whats wrong?!?

 

[--ares--]

Download a plugin to get them working with photoshop, you can get this off the adobe website. If you just want to view them I think picasca supports NEF viewing.

 

[D-B-J]

i want to be able to view them/edit them. My whole reason for shooting in raw was so i had a much easier time with editing, and now its not working at all. Every time i open them, they are REALLY small, and once they fit my monitor, the pixels are an inch square.

 

[table1349]

Have you installed the software that came with your camera. Raw files are not a native file they are proprietary to the manufacturer. That is why Adobe for one is always updating their plugins for programs like Photoshop so it can read the newest proprietary raw files.

 

[emh]

The inch square image you are seeing is probably just the embedded jpeg.

Nikon's RAW files have the .NEF extension. Some programs need a patch or plugin to be able to read them. Were you able to use RAW from this camera previously using your existing software? If not, I would suggest the following:

1. As others have said, use the software that came with the camera (NX View?) to check a few of the files and make sure they are fine and there's nothing "broken"

2. Check for a patch or update for your software to work with NEF files and then setup your workflow.

 

[D-B-J]

WOO! thankyou adobe! i downloaded a free trial(prob soon to buy) of lightroom2, and that is GREAT so far for editing my raw shots.

Sorry for the rant earlier guys and gals!

 

[Josh220]

Glad you solved it.


.NEF is a RAW file. That is Nikon's tag for RAW files. Nothing wrong with that.

Lightroom 2 is the most popular RAW processor, but you may want to wait until LR 3 comes out. Should be soon.

 

[KmH]

I think Photoshop 7 is to old to support D200 .NEF files. It looks like you would need to upgrade to at least CS2.

D200 support was first available with Camera RAW 3.3. The current version of Camera RAW is 5.6 and from what I understand 5.7 is in Beta testing.

If you don't have Nikon's View NX you can download it from Nikon's web site.

 

[D-B-J]

well im broke, so ill probably just grab lightroom 2. i wanted to grab cs4, but i dont have the cash.

 

[leftypony]

Does anyone use Aperture? I have a similar problem if I shoot in sRAW ... I have to edit them first in photoshop then convert to jpg if I want to keep them in my Aperture Library.

 

[D-B-J]

i dont use aperture, but i found that lightroom seems to be an outstanding raw editor. Much better than the rawshooterplus i was using. Definately worth the 30 day trial, and probably worth buying (havent used it enough to decide on the latter of the two)/

 

[table1349]

Does anyone use Aperture? I have a similar problem if I shoot in sRAW ... I have to edit them first in photoshop then convert to jpg if I want to keep them in my Aperture Library.

In all the trials I have read Aperture consistently rated third out of the three most popular third party raw file programs. Capture Pro was consistently #1, Lightroom #2 and with Aperture following the bunch. Lightroom seems to be the most popular with buyers as Capture Pro is about 2/3 the cost of Photoshop these days. I use lightroom. I have used Capture Pro and love some of the things it can do, but not the 400+ price tag. :mrgreen:

I have not seen any comparisons yet with the new Aperture 3. I haven't really looked though either.