Agree 100%
I first used the control points in CNX2, so simple to use and not scary or space consumers like PS layers and the difficult to master selection techniques ....
I've had nothing but trouble trying to find a half decent raw converter/editor to replace(and wean myself off) CNX2.
I'm currently trialling PhotoLab, and am having a better time of it than I've had with C1 and LR(4 and 5).
I think I'm close to actually deciding to pay for it,, even tho I still have about 20 days left on the trial.
C1 was OK .. nice and fast operating IQ was nice .. just needed more work than CNX2 for me.
LR is a pile of bovine waste IMO. I don't want/need DAM, and it'd DAM isn't worth a damn anyhow. Was slower than all other software that I've had by a mile(even CNX-D!)made worse by forcing the catalog feature on you.
And I hated the inability to simply navigate to a directory and locate an image randomly and play. Everything had to be 'imported' which is a massive waste of resources and time.
Worst $100 I've ever wasted.. would have been better off directed at a random homeless person or something.
So I've tried this new PhotoLab .. and I reckon it may suit your preferences Armando.
We both seem to have a preference for the simple/quick/easy style of 'point and edit'.
There a few major differences between the Nikon way CCPs work and the way they're done in PhotoLab .. and I think it'll just be a matter of getting used to the differences.
I personally can't see the need for DXO to have a blur slider in the U-point tool, but it's there is required.
The other major difference(I can't find a way to resolve) is the strength level of the tool. In the CNX2 implementation the effect is more gradual(in a radial sense), but in the DXO version, the is a lot of added strength to the centre portion of the selection.
ie. if you want to darken a section of a particular colour in a wide ranging area, in the Nikon CCP the effect of darkening that colour is more gradual over the radius of the selection. In the DXO method there is an additional strength to the middle of the selection relative to the rest of the radial area. So it can produce 'dark spots' of sorts. They need care when making adjustments.
The last major difference between the CNX2 and DXO versions is the way you need to access them when creating and editing the control points. CNX2 is better in that you had a list of any points created(on the RHS), and even tho you created a copy of one control point you could still be allowed to edit that copy in a different manner to tweak a specific area to different taste.
With DXO tho, if you make copies of one control point those copies are tied to the original .. so to tweak a control point in DXO requires new control points, which is a clunkier method of creating them in the first place(compared to CNX2).
My feelings would be that you would probably be a convertee to this new software, but that it'll take some time to get used to it.
Note that if you do trial it(I recommend you try it too) when you use the Local Adjustments tool(click on it), rightclick the image area to invoke the options for all of those tools.
PS: now if someone would pick CNXD and make it a decent application ....
Best thing Nikon could do with CNX-D is to break all ties they have with Ichikawa soft(the makers of SilkyPix) and collaborate with DXO to give us back our CNX2 update path!
