DxO acquires Nik Collection assets from Google, plans to continue to develop....

[Nowhereman]

Google states on the Nik Collection website, "We have no plans to update the Collection or add new features over time." So, Silver Efex, as part of the Nik Collection, is effectively abandonware. Eventually, Silver Efex will be unusable with new versions of operating systems and of Photoshop and Lightroom. This will be a problem for many of us who feel that Silver Efex produces a look that cannot be copied in PS or LR alone.

I wrote about this when I posted in another thread the picture below, which has a high-contrast look that I like. Indeed, I tried to see how close I could come to reproducing the look in LR alone: the closest I could come was by applying a VSCO Film preset [L - Ilford Delta 3200 -] as a staring point and then increasing Contrast and Clarity and changing the Tone Curve and Color Sliders (for color filter effects) — but the result was still far off from what Silver Efex does. The problem is that the tones remain too uniform and don't have the organic, rougher texture that Silver Efex produces. For example, inter alia, I cannot get the highlights into the wooden bar in the bottom left, or the texture into the highlights in the corner above the subject's head.

To achieve the look of the image below with PS or LR alone would require 20-30 separate masks — in LR using the Radial Filter. This is simply impractical. Impractical in terms of the time you would need, and also impractical because you wouldn't have the image below as a model of what you wanted to visualize.

In my view, other software, such as Tonality/MacPhun, also doesn't come close to what one can do with Silver Efex. My experience is that Silver Efex also produced better results when I used M-Monochrom files; and, ironically, also achieved better results with scanned or digitalized film files: after all, the second part of a "hybrid workflow" is digital.

So, when Silver Efex no longer works, quite a few people will have a problem in producing the type of B&W images that they like.
_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine

 

[Chris101]

.... This will be a problem for many of us who feel that Silver Efex produces a look that cannot be copied in PS or LR alone.
...

That is funny symmetry, because it's similar to something I once said about shooting film: Silver effects produce a look that cannot be copied in Photoshop.

I sympathise about the abandonware though. It happens to most things that are not part of the Adobe subscription empire though. I have dozens of stand-alone and add-on programs that no longer work.

 

[mani]

I wrote this exact thing about the whole Nik Collection when Google released it 'free'. They were extremely smart about it though - the deafening roar of excitement from people thinking they were getting something for nothing, drowned out the few who saw the announcement for what it was: axing all support and development of the applications in the future - and made their objections sound like whiny children disappointed that their once-expensive toys were being handed-out to the plebs.

I personally don't use Silver Efex, but the retouch facility in Viveza builds multilayered and extremely complex masking in a fraction of a second, and allows for extremely subtle and creative work on an image in under a minute that would otherwise take hours of fussy and difficult selecting.

Google and their endless list of abandoned projects...

 

[johannielscom]

Chances are that if you decide not to update the operating system until you buy a new computer, you will buy a new computer nothing sooner or later anyway.

Stop updating now (only install safety updates and patches) and continue to work for a few years. When the operating system becomes truly obsolete, the machine probably is too. But you can still use it for Silver Efex and similar stuff until then, and beyond.

Personally, I don't mind having two machines to create my work with. I have two work spaces in a corner of the living room, one for the current Mac Mini set and one for the scan station with a old Mac G4 and SCSI scanner.

 

[KM-25]

So, when Silver Efex no longer works, quite a few people will have a problem in producing the type of B&W images that they like.

Anyone else see the irony in this when one considers just how easy it is to use the real thing?

 

[Nowhereman]

...Personally, I don't mind having two machines to create my work with. I have two work spaces in a corner of the living room, one for the current Mac Mini set and one for the scan station with a old Mac G4 and SCSI scanner.

Using two computers doesn't work for me: I move each year between North America, Europe and Asia.

 

[Nowhereman]

Anyone else see the irony in this when one considers just how easy it is to use the real thing?

Inevitable statement but, as I said, if you use a hybrid workflow the second part (scanning and printing) is digital and, again, processing with Silver Efex gives better results, depending on the look that you want, of course. Here are two digitalized Tri-X pictures that work much better after having been processed in Silver Efex:


Leica M3 | DR Summicron | Tri-X @ ISO 400 | Stand development in Rodinal


Chiang Mai
_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine

 

[Freakscene]

Anyone else see the irony in this when one considers just how easy it is to use the real thing?

I am the first to say how much I love silver gelatin wet printed. But the time cost is much greater than digital, somewhere between many and most clients don't want to or can't wait, the financial cost of shooting is much higher with film (most people need a computer anyway), and I defy anyone to replicate the OPs shot at EI 3200 with film and have the shot be as grainless or with as much shadow contrast (not detail, contrast, it's different) as the example shot. You also need to scan film or prints to show the photos online, which takes even more time.

But most importantly, SilverEfex should not be, and is not always about making digital images look like film - it is about optimising digital monochrome photos, including scanned film images.

If you want it you're just going to have to maintain an old system once it doesn't work anymore.

Marty

 

[Rob-F]

Leica M10 | Summaron f/5.6 28mm | ISO 3200 | f/5.6 | 1/45 sec

Silver Spring, MD

_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine

This does look remarkably like film! I feel I can see grain, just at the threshold of visibility!

 

[tbhv55]

SilverEfex should not be, and is not always about making digital images look like film - it is about optimising digital monochrome photos, including scanned film images.

+1 to this.

 

[tbhv55]

I personally don't use Silver Efex, but the retouch facility in Viveza builds multilayered and extremely complex masking in a fraction of a second, and allows for extremely subtle and creative work on an image in under a minute that would otherwise take hours of fussy and difficult selecting.

Although I have had the Nik collection for some time, I admit to having ignored Viveza😱. I think I might have opened it perhaps once or twice, and then not bothered with it again... until now, that is. I investigated it more thoroughly after reading your post, and I'm impressed. Pleasingly subtle effects are possible.

Thanks for drawing my attention to it! 🙂

 

[willie_901]

In my experience LR CC is a useful tool to render monochrome images from camera raw files and flat TIFF or DNG files from film scanners (I use VueScan). This was not the case for older versions of LR.

I too agree that SilverEfex Pro 2 is a powerful convenient tool. In my hands camera raw monochrome renderings usually don't see SilverEfex. I would never argue SiverEfex can create monochrome renderings that are impossible or, at best, extremely tedious to produce with LR.

My Photoshop skills are pathetic. This is due laziness. I can not bear to think and work as PS developers to want me think and work. For many decades I used scientific graphics software which often forced me to endure user-hostile interfaces and workflows. So my tolerance for software that make me miserable is unreasonably low.

For me, the NIK Collection is fun to use and produces excellent result. When the NIK Collection no longer works on OS X, I will be forced to either accept the best I can do with LR, explore other rendering options or muster the discipline to become proficient with PS. Despite my lack of direct experience, I suspect a seasoned PS expert could duplicate monochrome renderings that match those from NIK Collection. What I'm certain of is the amount of effort and time required for PS would be significantly greater than using the NIK Collection.

Perhaps years from now the Google will make it possible for a third party to port the NIK Collection to future operating systems. Perhaps they will encourage a third-party to implement a Chrome OS port.

 

[Larry Cloetta]

My question, as posed yesterday before this became a second thread, was why did Google buy this in the first place, since it was obvious from day one that they had no intention of developing it further. I'd be curious to know the actual answer as opposed to the usual conjecture about corporations just being mean.
Being one of those who bought Efex Pro when it was expensive, and have used all the alternatives and found them both less effective, and less versatile, losing it eventually will be annoying. As others have said, it's not really a matter of just shooting film as the alternative, because that's not really the alternative. 95% of what I shoot is film, and it is a rare frame that can't be improved with Efex Pro (provided an above average quality scan is used as well.)

 

[cz23]

Larry, Google supposedly bought Nik to acquire Snapseed for its mobile audience. It was thought to be a response to Facebook's acquisition of Instagram. All part of the plan to give Google greater appeal to mobile shooters.

If this is true, it's easy to understand the low priority given to Silver Efex. Google's typical audience certainly isn't concerned with ultimate BW quality.

It seems to me that we now have three options: 1) Don't implement upgrades that jeopardize Silver Efex, 2) Do more with PS and/or LR, or 3) Find another converter.

If and when the time comes, I'll face the music and go with number 3.

John

My question, as posed yesterday before this became a second thread, was why did Google buy this in the first place, since it was obvious from day one that they had no intention of developing it further. I'd be curious to know the actual answer as opposed to the usual conjecture about corporations just being mean.
Being one of those who bought Efex Pro when it was expensive, and have used all the alternatives and found them both less effective, and less versatile, losing it eventually will be annoying. As others have said, it's not really a matter of just shooting film as the alternative, because that's not really the alternative. 95% of what I shoot is film, and it is a rare frame that can't be improved with Efex Pro (provided an above average quality scan is used as well.)

 

[Tejasican]

My question, as posed yesterday before this became a second thread, was why did Google buy this in the first place, since it was obvious from day one that they had no intention of developing it further. I'd be curious to know the actual answer as opposed to the usual conjecture about corporations just being mean.
Being one of those who bought Efex Pro when it was expensive, and have used all the alternatives and found them both less effective, and less versatile, losing it eventually will be annoying. As others have said, it's not really a matter of just shooting film as the alternative, because that's not really the alternative. 95% of what I shoot is film, and it is a rare frame that can't be improved with Efex Pro (provided an above average quality scan is used as well.)

Google, like Yahoo in particular the past few years, buys products for one aspect or technology either to use in some product or to package for sale, the rest being of no consequence. If there is a user base that is likely to squeal they take steps to minimize it, and if necessary lie and say the program will continue. Then they kill the product off when it is less likely to cause disruption. The company got what it was after, what should it care? It is, in essence, high tech corporate raiding. In the process some really good products and creative ideas fall by the wayside.

 

[johannielscom]

Using two computers doesn't work for me: I move each year between North America, Europe and Asia.

Move to Mac (if you haven't already) and you can boot from an external drive and run your old OS including Silver Efex. Problem solved.

That would require you to pack one extra hard drive in an external casing. I bet you can squeeze that in, or trade it for a single pair of trousers in your luggage 😉

 

[Nowhereman]

johannielscom - Thanks, I am on a Mac and this seems like a good solution. It would work as long as one hasn't upgraded the Mac to future version that could not run the "old" operating system on the hard drive — and that should be still some years in the future.
_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Thanks for the answers, it was the Snapspeed connection I was unaware of. Case solved.
Thanks.
Not sure how accurate my information is, but a few months ago, knowing that The Nik Collection was a dead end, I was encouraged to hear that the people behind Macphun Tonality were from the original Silver Efex development team.
Having since tried Tonality as a possible Efex Pro replacement, I found it somewhat disappointing in comparison, though perhaps there is hope for future development.

 

[View Range]

You can use a virtual machine (such as VMWare Fusion) and don't even have to reboot. I love high structure in Silver Efex. I wish Adobe would produce similar tools with their monthly payments.

 

[Nowhereman]

...But most importantly, SilverEfex should not, and is not always about making digital images look like film - it is about optimising digital monochrome photos, including scanned film images...

This is an excellent statement on the usefulness of Silver Efex and, although someone above has already done so, it's worth highlighting again:

...SilverEfex should not, and is not always about making digital images look like film - it is about optimising digital monochrome photos, including scanned film images...

My own experience is that it took me some time to realize what could be done with Silver Efex: that is to say, for those who haven't yet used it, just trying it out superficially may not be enough to use use it effectively. BTW, one thing I found is that it works best if you first "flatten" the original color file into a low-contrast image before moving it into Silver Efex — particularly if you want create a high-contrast B&W image, such as the one in the OP.

_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine