I feel the same excitement as you when I first pay with the NeatImage and I
even purchased the Pro Edition. I have it for ten months, it is good but
don't rely too much on it. Together with noise it also cleans up the subtle
details on the image, in many cases it makes the photo look un-real. You
will soon found you prefer to leave some noise on the image rather than to
left it on default cleaning mode. I know there are lots of settings on the
software you can pay with but not all images can benefit from cleaning. A
camera with reasonable noise level is much more important, actually some
slight noise will make the picture look better.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose" <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> I then tried it on the hockey image shot at 1600 iso in the E-1 sample
> images from dpreview. Again, there was no camera profile avialable yet
> for the new verision 4 of NeatImage. The image must not have lent itself
> very well to auto profiling, because the difference between source and
> filtered.images was very small. I'm sure it can be made to work well,
> but this was just a sampling tour and I moved on. Next I tried Noise
> Ninja on the E-1 image. NN has a profile for the E-1. The results were
> very good, not as spectacular as for the A2 because the E-1 at 1600 is a
> lot less noisy than the A2 at 400, but still very impressive. Noise in
> the artifical surfaces of the helmet and in the OOF background was
> greatly reduced. It was also very effective on the player's face, but I
> would reduce the filtering strength there if going for a large print, as
> it removes a bit too much of the fine detail of face, whiskers, etc.
> Again it is clear that, with a little experience with the program, it
> will dramatically reduce digital noise with minimal impact on any other
> image qualities.
The olympus mailinglist olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: mailto:olympus-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe
To contact the list admins: mailto:olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx?subject="Olympus
List Problem"
|