|
Sam,
Thanks for the input. I've been using the 'light' version
of Noise Ninja included with the trial version of Bibble Pro. Using the default
settings in BP seemed to produce very soft results. The free version of Neat
Image (with JPG files only) seems to be much less aggressive and produces a
'clean' but sharp image even with out a calibrated profile (auto profile). Both
make an amazing difference cleaning up images capture at ISO 1600. With both
products I really don't know what I'm doing and use the products by the seat of
my pants.
Chris and Eric, the Noiseware package also sounds
intriguing and the online before and after samples also look pretty impressive.
Ahh, so many plugins, so little time.
Thanks all,
Don Bryant
Hi Don,
I have been using Noise Ninja for awhile and have found it to work wonders.
I bought it in desperation when 10 second exposures with the zoneplate showed
golf ball sized noise. Well, those noisy images were impossible to fix, but
Noise Ninja helped a lot. It particularly has been great in smoothing out my
Panasonic (Leica clone) images which are well known for noise.
Not having used Neat Image I cannot compare the 2, but I feel you can't go
wrong with Noise Ninja.
(Besides, Don, wouldn't you rather have something with a cool name?)
Sam Wang
On Jan 17, 2007, at 12:39 AM, Don Bryant wrote:
Does anyone have
any strong opinions about Neat Image and/or Noise Ninja?
I've been testing
different DSLRs, using high ISOs for RAW captures, and to my surprise the
digital noise isn't as bad as I expected, though it's definitely there. So far
I prefer Neat Image to Noise Ninja but I don't have the full blown versions of
either package so a complete evaluation isn't possible. I'd rather not
purchase both to determine which is better. I'm primarily interested in noise
reduction rather than other features such as image
sharpening.
Any shared
experience with either package (or any other) will be
appreciated.
TIA,
Don
Bryant
|