Google offering Nik Collection photo editing applications for free

I hope that this is the case, but the site where it can be downloaded from says "14 days fee trial" and there is a Purchase button which I did not try yet. Maybe, the site was not updated yet.

Here is the main product page. The "now free" announcement has been added to the top banner, the direct download button is on the upper right-hand side, and there is no mention of a 14-day trial.
https://www.google.com/nikcollection/

I think you're good-to-go with the download. :)

The "now free" banner had been added already on 24th may, so "nothing new" is really the theme here - he might have simply overlooked that in action. ;)

@hectorsm: On the Windows side, Google states that Nik is only compatible with "Windows: Vista, 7, 8". If that's in error, the error is Google's, not mine.

Just because it does not list Windows 10 it does not mean it will not work. You can't assume that. Many people are running the Nik plugins in Windows 10. Most companies don't always go back and revise their published OS requirements every time a new OS gets released. It just the way it is.

I've been using the Nik suite for six months, now. I haven't even tapped into all the tools of all of the suite components. I find myself using the Color Efex editor the most, as I can finish up my LR or PS work with a touch of HDR using the "Detail Extractor" tool. The amount of editing power in just this piece is worth the price I already paid of $150. Now that it's free, I'm letting all my photo friends know... (currently using on Win7 & 8.1, and haven't loaded Win10 anyway - it's a pain!)

My guess, Google hasn't made any significant investment into developing Nik Collection in some time. So they haven't fully tested Nik Collection with newer operating systems, not enough at least to promise compatibility.

I wonder who's corporate strategy changed - Google's or Adobe's?

"what is Google's catch in buying Nik and then giving it away to everyone for free?"

They wanted something that Nik Software had. Patents? Other IP, technology, or code? Employees?

@Bobthearch - Thanks, if they have analytics in the product that seems reasonable enough: The analytics will show them which products to developer further and the employees you mentioned too will produce the needed software. May be Nik will be developed slower and free and a premium alternative based on the analytics will arise(branded Google or Nik)

Yes, could be for mobile imaging...

Good question I better check as my is free edition so will have to find out.

It has filter stack yes, its bit like layer to layer that photoshop called it, onone called it stack (Layer).

I know that oo works with layers, but afaik it does not stack differently exposed images into a single hdr image. also, i'm not sure if it works with hdr images stacked by e.g. photoshop. It produces rather hdr-look rather than processes thrue hdr image. HDRefex can blend images and open hdr format, and then it can be used for tonemaping.

You can stack and merge photos using layers in OnOne, and you can use filters and effects to create images that resemble overdone HDR.
But I don't believe OnOne can produce actual HDR images from multiple differently-exposed photographed. It also lacks two functions that are basic to most HDR softwares: image alignment and anti-ghosting.
If OnOne had an actual HDR application integrated into it's suite, one as nice as NikSoft's HDR plug-in, I would love OnOne even more.

Now Roman, you're the real deal.

We can do any look.

Too much of ps... lr... others... reality of photography evaporated somewhere...

thanks

@makfoto thanks, TIFF as non destructive JPEG is news to me. For some reason I thought it was a completely different format, but this makes sense.
@adsr can you explain the last sentence? How can you edit an image file in standalone version, if it has no file menu? Are you talking about nik or some other program?

TIFF and JPEG have no similarity in their design. Totally different in what they do and how they do it.

Well that's what I thought too, but makfoto sounded rather sure. Also if they are so different, how come a JPEG only program is able to handle it?

Nik can handle Tiff files natively. In fact that's how it works in round trips from Lightroom.

Now that's a positive approach from a company on two fronts!

I guess that they are giving it away now means an end to future development?

Oh really, that's why I have free legal versions of OnOne Perfect Effects and Topaz plugins that they gave away with magazines etc. Yes they are old versions without support, same as Nik. I am sad that Nik is not being actively developed as it's more powerful than anything else I've used.

Sonyshine,
that is very harsh. ignorance is what all of the world have. The ignorance about history, cultures, truth, food , meat or more serious than using little software you are pointing out.

I know under compatibility it says windows 7 & 8, but does anyone know if it works in windows 10?
Thanks

https://support.google.com/nikcollection/answer/6270185?hl=en

It's working on W10 for me.

Thanks!

Macromind - If you have Nik loaded into Photoshop and open an image in PS, the Nik toolbar comes to life. all you need to do is click on one of the programs and your image is automatically opened. Next, you work on the image and click save at the bottom right then it's back into PS. There are hundreds of videos on YouTube, just Google it.

I have tried Gimp and lots of other free or open source software. They don't come anywhere close to the capabilities of DxO Optics Pro or Nik Color Efex Pro.

Granted the abilities run deep; but then the real issue is... What are you missing without Gimp and family?

Gimp can run right along-side whatever you do. If folks were really looking for user ease then they'd start digging into Gimp's time saving plug-in power. It's the kitchen sink; for free.

It can't be fully tested by quick pass. It does everything. However, it is overall easier; but without losing it's great and flexible powers. If you want only sameness then you can keep it. Better simply has to be different, somehow. Altogether this different is better.

Don't be confused about its full manual to full auto ease. Remember: The massive plug-ins (and applets). This is why Gimp is limitless. Not the tiered price, lock-you-in tricks of the rest. Even if you turn a blind eye to that; it's just better. It just works, upgrades better, improves everyday and over time. It's time to stop listening to folks with an axe to grind. Gimp is freedom and I get nothing for saying it. No $ pitch.

Don't let ufraw hold you back. You only need to set its massive adjustments to a default, That's simply downloading and loading up your cam profile, tweaking it to like your good cam JPEG (or any base look, even other camera color palettes) and "Save image defaults: 'Just this once'", to lock it in. Once in a lifetime, people. Then your raw is nearly completely finished upon ufraw load up (set in your file manger as Left-normal-Click; by raw file type). ALL you have to do... is the very reason you are not just pulling the finished JPEG out of the Raw; in the first place. INSTANTLY and in groups. For view/culling the embedded JPEGs; by, "dcraw -e", set in your preferred file manager list for a select-all and Right-Click group/session insta-pulled-JPEGs.

Take that time to set your ufraw preset once and you're done forever. You could selectively go all the way; from raw to finished (auto-wisely) compressed JPEG output (or whatever per your end goals) in NO TIME FLAT. That matters.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion as am I. I'd like to leave it at that. Thanks.

Note: Some cams already work with ufraw as far as a color profile; because they are unique. Like Fuji sensors. So you simply adjust YOUR base look and save it once and for all. Now like others; all you have to do in set the Raw latitude fixes. Expo, WB and Local contrasts.

BTW local contrasts like the shadows, mid-range and highlights go by name like D-Lighting (Nikon), I-Exposure etc... The cool thing is you cam have your own pre-set local contrasts also. Three like in some cameras or as many as you want. It's as simple a s saving and loading them.

Think of the first base curve in ufraw to adjust every Raw form that cam, every-time and saved as default for that cam. It's the Sat curves (2nd curve tab) where you enhance your photos or like groups batches. ufraw has the command line power to apply a total adjustment to many raw files (like group sessions). You can cycle through each photo customizing each and fast or you can save it and apply that look by group with a simple command.

I am not "hating" on GIMP and I do respect your opinion.

Keep in mind that your OP above called out upgrade issues. I comment to suggest Gimp & fam completely decimates all upgrade issues forever. I call that neighborly.

Now it's also an opinion; that happens to be a fact. A fact everyone (who chooses) can benefit from. You get the improvements free too. On going.

Now having a voice against Gimp (as above) is fine. But what is it based on? I also might choose chocolate over vanilla (or both). I do not say to avoid even trying vanilla and just walk away. Your preference (or mine) has nothing to do with what folks should try. If someone did that to me; I'd know they were hiding something. Something good. Taste also change over time and experience. Now you know why I call Adobe products the kindergarten apps. Where's the beef?

I mean really folks! You're going to complain about open-coded (where security lives) free (to you) software; that is actually better? But you don't have time to look? Free help is also all over the net (if one is not technical). Friends will install stuff for you! Adobe Flash is PROVED crap. It's hacked one once again; right now(like yesterday). The latest version (a zero day exploit) actually says (audio); that your data (and your back-up shares too) is encrypted (and does) and with (audio too now) says you must pay exactly $500 (1.2 some odd bit coins) over the dark web and to get the password. That's a known and current fact. Look it up. Now! Is this who you want writing your photo software? The other closed software companies... fine(if you like less for more $). I say try them all; but consider all too!

Subscriptions are more of the same Adobe crap. Just like Flash is the cancer of the Internet and KNOWN to be on the way out. Still web site owners use it for CONTROL. Of you.

My content shows undeniably I use Gimp and family.

No one ever answered; why it is they see something I do not. Why?

Open software is freely there for you; if you are honest(to thy self). No better proof than the pudding.

THAT'S how to discern the truth from the lie.

Now sure; everyone is not paid to comment here. Yet another know fact is there be 'dragons'. Insiders know. Shills are real. Forum Trolls also try to sound like they have a list of facts. They are not congruent. Don't feed the trolls.

Note also it was never specified what effects you could not also get just the same with gimp and associated plugin and apps. All freely accessible and so free to try (for an unbiased while), upgrade, with security and new addtions free too, ongoing.

What else does all that? NOTHING. Absolutely nothing.

Note their are many other open photography programs as there's no restrict on making one. Many are excellent; like DigiKam; if you are looking for EXIF file tagging and face recognition, Lr reminiscent interface, etc.... If you really want a similar UI then Darktable is very powerful; but I don't like the sidecar files and do not think they are necessary. You might. keep in mind; that i say Gimp, its plug-ins, ufraw and friends TO KEEP IT SIMILE AND BEST. There's too many good open programs to review them all. Some suck; as anyone can put together anything; but that issue is worse in the closed software arena. "Freeware" stinks generally (a distraction) and that’s not open software.

I enjoyed reading Shiranai's post.

Thinking free must be worse is childish. This has been promoted largely by so called "free-ware"; that sucked. A tricky game. Free-ware was not GNU licensed open source coded software.

So anyone can program and some suck. So all programs suck? Why? Has there ever been a very expensive program; that was crap?

I didn't say its crap.
I just said it's nothing for >me< because every program I tried (exept the sharpening/denoise which are in fact really good) gave the picture a really overprocessed filter look, especially analog/color/silver efex.
And I'm sure after this software is free, you'll se a lot of these “preset and a few-clicks“ processed photos popping up now.
And as I said, the area feature is really cool but can't make up for this. I just prefer exact selections over round bubbles and real looking pictures over processed looking ones.

Additionally the plugins are very slow. They need roughly 3 times as long as Camera Raw needs to open them (And I'm working on a 3 Ghz Core i7 Quad along with a Geforce 960 and SSD.)

Dear all. I have seen hundreds of people working in pp using any s/w you may imagine to deliver the result they wanted ot they have been asked for. At least one out of 5 could destroy any machine no matter how ..fed this machine was. A significant majority usually produced something that a. they did not have in mind to deliver, b. it was completely out of the result that was asked.
The common cause for producing such a drama, was that they did not have the slightest idea of what light is. They have just, somehow, managed to get to know to press buttons and move sliders with the speed of light, usually assuming that they were in the right way to deliver, Universe know what they had in mind or understood what they were asked to deliver. Generally speaking, to my experience only 1 out of 20 can really deliver. The same or less stands for people who use mainly ps for creative purpose. It's waste of time arguing with those people, you can like them though as whatever...

@jwkphoto: I don't think I make them that way, when I click through the presets lol.

@Aris: I don't really get your relation to my or anyones post including your first paragraph.

Yes I use mainly PS/Lightroom because they are like Multitools. Why would I have to use a knife, when my multitool contains a knife that can cut more exact? Just because the other knife is easier to use for a beginner?

The people who need plugins like NIK are mostly the people who don't have a clue how to get the same look in PS itself.
I for myself think, why do I need a bunch of plugins, that get me the same look I can deliver with LR/PS with much more precision and realness.

I use Adobe' s products from 1990 and Lightroom from September 2006. And yes Adobe was never the fastest kid on town and if I can get the same results, if not better in some instances, in let's say half time, using a plugin or whatever s/w, I will surely use it no matter what.

First I'm not saying these free plug-ins are bad. Upgrades? What they do is cool. It's just better with Gimp + your selected choice from all it's plug-ins + any helper programs that work with it (so well). Plus other programs that do other things. There's simply no lack with open software choices and that do STELLAR upgrades. [Use the stable versions only for production.]

Plus, I'm aware everyone is different and wants something different. That's fine. Also it is indeed taking and editing abilities first. We're taking about software now. If we can COMPLETELY skip editing we should. But editing has its place.

Then as far as better tools for when you need them; then open software has that bar none!

You have to USE this stuff for a while to get it. Then all the window dressing in the world does not even matter. You can add that too; with open software.

If you want LOOKS then Darktable; but UI looks hardly matter.. YOU CAN SET GIMP WITH LOOKS!

Why not try them YOURSELF? At length.

http://photographylife.com/adobes-poor-handling-of-raw-files

This is interesting; because reviewers absolutely must NOT overlook such things in any valuable comparisons. Therefore when this fine review site (very good) shows Raw results it can no longer do it (accurately) with ABOBE products.

Ignoring that would be ignoring Adobe flaws.

LOL. Fight it all you want. BS walks.

Open software is the way out.

Yup, working well on W10 and MAC

Works brilliantly on my old (2008) pc with Core2Duo E8500 cpu and Win10 installed.
Win10 also works like a charm on this old setup :)