NEATIMAGE & HIGH ISO's

I like plastic, I call it glassed over.


"Stacey" wrote in message
...
Annika1980 wrote:



The reason I chose the sky for my test is because that's where the
noise usually shows itself in my pics. On areas with lotsa detail the
noise isn't so problematical. In fact, it sometimes may even look
beneficial as it adds artificial detail and texture to the scene.
Kinda like film.

Exactly, zero noise makes an image look "plastic" to me.

--

Stacey

In article , annika1980
@aol.com says...
Someone on one of the pro photo groups suggested I check out NeatImage after he
found the background in this ISO 1600 pic to be a bit noisy ( I didn't have a
prob with it):
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/35429440

So anyways, I had tried it a few years ago but wasn't too impressed so I
figured I'd give it another day in court. To make a long story short, I now
have the full ver. 4.4 Pro+ edition and it works as advertised.

To test it out, I took some photos of the sky at ISO's ranging from 100 to
3200.
Here is a little test strip I made showing how each shot looks from the 20D and
with the NeatImage processing.

http://members.aol.com/annika1980/neatcomp.jpg

As you can see there is little advantage to using NeatImage at the lower ISO's
since the 20D is so clean. However, the software really kicks in the higher
you go so it's like buying two extra stops on all your shots for $79.

This one gets the ANNI 4-star rating. (It might've garnered a perfect 5-star
rating, but I had to pay for it).

-Annika ---- hates buyin software

How does it do with areas of high detail? Can it separate the wheat
from the chaff?
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird/

"Annika1980" wrote in message
...
Someone on one of the pro photo groups suggested I check out NeatImage
after he
found the background in this ISO 1600 pic to be a bit noisy ( I didn't
have a
prob with it):
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/35429440

Maybe most of us know the God awful digital noise produced by the Sony
sensors in a 100D Nikon at 400 ISO with a 1/30th shutter in low light...
Well to me, getting the noise out of these sort of pictures has always been
a challenge. NI actually does that but an even better set of Photoshop
actions exists that will kill the noise without damaging the sharpenss. They
cost $15 US. Run them first, Interpolate up to 20"x30" and then run NI. The
results are very good indeed. On 20D, 1600 ISO images you only need to run
NI and they look as good as ISO 200 stuff. It is a really good program. The
cost of the Photoshop plugin is only of value when you need to do a lot of
high ISO shooting.

"Stacey" wrote in message
...

Kinda like film.

Exactly, zero noise makes an image look "plastic" to me.


You must look at the world through dirty glasses.

"Brian C. Baird" wrote:

In article , annika1980
@aol.com says...
Someone on one of the pro photo groups suggested I check out NeatImage after he
found the background in this ISO 1600 pic to be a bit noisy ( I didn't have a
prob with it):
http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/35429440

So anyways, I had tried it a few years ago but wasn't too impressed so I
figured I'd give it another day in court. To make a long story short, I now
have the full ver. 4.4 Pro+ edition and it works as advertised.

To test it out, I took some photos of the sky at ISO's ranging from 100 to
3200.
Here is a little test strip I made showing how each shot looks from the 20D and
with the NeatImage processing.

http://members.aol.com/annika1980/neatcomp.jpg

As you can see there is little advantage to using NeatImage at the lower ISO's
since the 20D is so clean. However, the software really kicks in the higher
you go so it's like buying two extra stops on all your shots for $79.

This one gets the ANNI 4-star rating. (It might've garnered a perfect 5-star
rating, but I had to pay for it).

-Annika ---- hates buyin software

How does it do with areas of high detail? Can it separate the wheat
from the chaff?

In my experiernce, fine detail like animal fur can get blurred, but
generally it does reasonably well. I'll have to get me a website to
start posting some examples, I guess.

Colin

Stacey writes:

Annika1980 wrote:

"Stacey" wrote in message
...

Kinda like film.

Exactly, zero noise makes an image look "plastic" to me.


You must look at the world through dirty glasses.

No, it's just a different look. Some people like the smooth zero noise look
even if some details are blured, I don't mind a little noise for crisp
details.

I certainly find that overdoing the neatening (with various tools;
mostly Noise Ninja for me nowadays) can give rather plastic-looking
results. Generally I don't like those, but as you say, what one likes
is pretty much by definition a matter of taste!

It's not that "zero noise" looks plastic, though, I don't think. It's
that zero *variation* looks plastic, and turning up the strength on
the cleanup causes all the little variations to end up treated as
noise, along with the *real* noise.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

"Annika1980" wrote in message
...
SNIP
http://members.aol.com/annika1980/neatcomp.jpg

As you can see there is little advantage to using NeatImage at the
lower ISO's
since the 20D is so clean. However, the software really kicks in
the higher
you go so it's like buying two extra stops on all your shots for
$79.

And it does so with little (or no visible) deterioration of detail.
But don't make the mistake to not recognize the benefit if you have to
significantly sharpen low ISO shots either.

Bart

"Stacey" wrote in message
...
Annika1980 wrote:



The reason I chose the sky for my test is because that's where the
noise usually shows itself in my pics. On areas with lotsa detail
the
noise isn't so problematical. In fact, it sometimes may even look
beneficial as it adds artificial detail and texture to the scene.
Kinda like film.

Exactly, zero noise makes an image look "plastic" to me.

That's why I usually reduce the Luminance noise reduction from its
default 60% down to 45 or 50, depending on the image.

Bart

"Brian C. Baird" wrote in message
.. .
SNIP
How does it do with areas of high detail? Can it separate the
wheat from the chaff?

Yes it does. Added with a little operator skill it does even better,
and the Plug-in version also allows to use it on a layer, so you can
mask in/out whatever you'd want to treat differently.

Bart

How does Noise Ninja compare?

That's another one people talk about.