NeatImage vs. Noise Ninja 2...

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Volker Hetzer, Jan 13, 2005.

  1. Hi!
    My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    entirely? (I'm not really into another camera because for me
    the Coolpix 5000 is a great compromise between size and "screws"
    that allow me fine control over the picture I take.)

    Lots of Greetings!
    Volker
     
    Volker Hetzer, Jan 13, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Volker Hetzer commented courteously ...

    > My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially
    > high up in the mountains where the sky is a nice
    > dark blue. Can anybody recommend one tool over the
    > other, or something else entirely?


    Hi, Volker.

    I don't use any special noise reduction utilities, but
    after years of fighting scanner noise, then digital camera
    noise on occasion, I was delighted at how effective
    Corel's (formerly Jasc) Paint Shop Pro 9 Digital Camera
    Noise Reduction (DCNR) filter is.

    I'm not suggesting you buy PSP 9 just for DCNR but if you
    own a previous version of PSP and/or are in the market for
    a very competant graphics editor at a moderate price (US
    $130), do consider PSP9.

    Good luck!

    --
    ATM, aka Jerry
     
    All Things Mopar, Jan 13, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Volker Hetzer

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:24:07 +0100, in rec.photo.digital Volker Hetzer
    <> wrote:
    >My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    >mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    >Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    >entirely? (I'm not really into another camera because for me
    >the Coolpix 5000 is a great compromise between size and "screws"
    >that allow me fine control over the picture I take.)


    No experience with Noise Ninja, but have been using Neat Image for years.
    Give the free demos a try for yourself.
    ----------
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf, Jan 13, 2005
    #3
  4. Volker Hetzer

    Dutch Flyer Guest

    "Volker Hetzer" <> wrote in message
    news:cs6oth$gce$-online.net...
    > Hi!
    > My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    > mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    > Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    > entirely? (I'm not really into another camera because for me
    > the Coolpix 5000 is a great compromise between size and "screws"
    > that allow me fine control over the picture I take.)
    >
    > Lots of Greetings!
    > Volker


    I dont know about Noise Ninja, but NeatImage is very good at removing excess
    noise. If your pictures are overly noisy, however, trying to remove all or
    most of the
    noise will remove some detail and make your image look "plastic". With
    NeatImage,
    you shouldn't set the slider to more then 60% removal.
     
    Dutch Flyer, Jan 14, 2005
    #4
  5. Volker Hetzer

    C J Campbell Guest

    "Volker Hetzer" <> wrote in message
    news:cs6oth$gce$-online.net...
    > Hi!
    > My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    > mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    > Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    > entirely?


    NeatImage is nice, but I think NoiseFixer is a lot easier to use, plus it is
    cheaper. I have been able to get rid of noise in pictures that NeatImage
    would not even touch. NeatImage has problems with black dogs, for example.
     
    C J Campbell, Jan 14, 2005
    #5
  6. C J Campbell wrote:
    > "Volker Hetzer" <> wrote in message
    > news:cs6oth$gce$-online.net...
    >
    >>Hi!
    >>My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    >>mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    >>Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    >>entirely?

    >
    >
    > NeatImage is nice, but I think NoiseFixer is a lot easier to use, plus it is
    > cheaper. I have been able to get rid of noise in pictures that NeatImage
    > would not even touch. NeatImage has problems with black dogs, for example.
    >
    >

    Hi!
    I'll have a look at that one too.

    Thanks a lot!
    Volker
     
    Volker Hetzer, Jan 14, 2005
    #6
  7. Volker Hetzer

    Stacey Guest

    Volker Hetzer wrote:

    > Hi!
    > My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    > mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    > Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    > entirely? (I'm not really into another camera because for me
    > the Coolpix 5000 is a great compromise between size and "screws"
    > that allow me fine control over the picture I take.)
    >



    I'm going to try the retail "neatimage +" that comes with a photoshop plugin
    that can work in a layer. Seems you can then selectively apply it (like to
    the sky or shadows only) so it doesn't affect fine details or adjust the
    layer to control the amount and easily see it. Then you can be more
    agressive with the settings or use different setting for different parts of
    a scene. From their site:

    ========
    Photoshop plug-in version of Neat Image enables applying noise reduction and
    sharpening exactly where is required: in a Photoshop layer, channel, or
    selection

    Neat Image plug-in can run in Photoshop actions and apply required analysis
    and filtration completely automatically
    ========
    --

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, Jan 14, 2005
    #7
  8. Volker Hetzer

    Ed Ruf Guest

    On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 02:36:51 -0500, in rec.photo.digital Stacey
    <> wrote:


    >I'm going to try the retail "neatimage +" that comes with a photoshop plugin
    >that can work in a layer. Seems you can then selectively apply it (like to
    >the sky or shadows only) so it doesn't affect fine details or adjust the
    >layer to control the amount and easily see it. Then you can be more
    >agressive with the settings or use different setting for different parts of
    >a scene.


    Yes, that is the case.
    ----------
    Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 ()
    See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
    http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index.html
     
    Ed Ruf, Jan 14, 2005
    #8
  9. "Stacey" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    SNIP
    > I'm going to try the retail "neatimage +" that comes with a
    > photoshop plugin that can work in a layer. Seems you can
    > then selectively apply it (like to the sky or shadows only) so
    > it doesn't affect fine details or adjust the layer to control the
    > amount and easily see it.


    Yes, this is the best way to use it, especially on problematic images.
    With a layer mask you can paint-in (or out) whatever you want treated,
    and you can reverse any changes by changing the mask. This gives
    total control, in addition to the tuning that is possible within
    NeatImage (and it is highly tunable).

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Jan 14, 2005
    #9
  10. Volker Hetzer

    Guest

    Archived from Stacey <> on Fri, 14 Jan 2005 02:36:51
    -0500:

    >Volker Hetzer wrote:
    >
    >> Hi!
    >> My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    >> mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    >> Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    >> entirely? (I'm not really into another camera because for me
    >> the Coolpix 5000 is a great compromise between size and "screws"
    >> that allow me fine control over the picture I take.)
    >>

    >
    >
    >I'm going to try the retail "neatimage +" that comes with a photoshop plugin


    [snip]

    FWIW. I've used Neat Image for a long time, but no more. Recently I've found
    the Helicon Noise Filter and like it very much. I use the latest Pro Version
    2.02. It does an excellent job especially on high noise images and is very
    easy to use. It has a Photoshop plugin and handles NEF and CRW raw images.
    There is a free version available that lacks the full functionality of the
    Pro Version. http://heliconfilter.com/pages/

    Vic
     
    , Jan 14, 2005
    #10
  11. Volker Hetzer

    D Cheung Guest

    I use NoiseWare Pro


    On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 22:24:07 +0100, Volker Hetzer
    <> wrote:

    >Hi!
    >My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    >mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    >Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    >entirely? (I'm not really into another camera because for me
    >the Coolpix 5000 is a great compromise between size and "screws"
    >that allow me fine control over the picture I take.)
    >
    >Lots of Greetings!
    >Volker


    D Cheung
    http://www.opaltonsolutions.com
     
    D Cheung, Jan 14, 2005
    #11
  12. Stacey wrote:
    > Volker Hetzer wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Hi!
    >>My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    >>mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    >>Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    >>entirely? (I'm not really into another camera because for me
    >>the Coolpix 5000 is a great compromise between size and "screws"
    >>that allow me fine control over the picture I take.)
    >>

    >
    >
    >
    > I'm going to try the retail "neatimage +" that comes with a photoshop plugin
    > that can work in a layer. Seems you can then selectively apply it (like to
    > the sky or shadows only) so it doesn't affect fine details or adjust the
    > layer to control the amount and easily see it. Then you can be more
    > agressive with the settings or use different setting for different parts of
    > a scene. From their site:


    I tried it standalone and it did leave the rest of the picture alone all
    on its own. I got the picture developed at 7.9x11.8in (20x30cm) and was
    pretty impressed. Absolutely no difference in the non-sky part but a
    much cleaner sky. (The non-sky part was mostly grass so any loss of
    detail would have been obvious.)

    Ditto for noise ninja although the sky wasn't as good.
    I think I'm going for the full version of neatimage too, but more for
    the ability to write non-jpg files.
    But I still have to look at NoiseWare Pro.

    Lots of Greetings!
    Volker
     
    Volker Hetzer, Jan 16, 2005
    #12
  13. D Cheung wrote:
    > I use NoiseWare Pro

    O man, how many noise remover are there? :)

    Lots of Greetings and thanks!
    Volker
     
    Volker Hetzer, Jan 16, 2005
    #13
  14. Volker Hetzer wrote:
    > C J Campbell wrote:
    >
    >> "Volker Hetzer" <> wrote in message
    >> news:cs6oth$gce$-online.net...
    >>
    >>> Hi!
    >>> My Coolpix 5000 makes a very noisy sky, especially high up in the
    >>> mountains where the sky is a nice dark blue.
    >>> Can anybody recommend one tool over the other, or something else
    >>> entirely?

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> NeatImage is nice, but I think NoiseFixer is a lot easier to use, plus
    >> it is
    >> cheaper. I have been able to get rid of noise in pictures that NeatImage
    >> would not even touch. NeatImage has problems with black dogs, for
    >> example.
    >>
    >>

    > Hi!
    > I'll have a look at that one too.

    The helicon program? Had a look. Haven't seen the printouts yet but was
    pretty unimpressed by the way noisefixer smoothed the whole image.
    NeatImage and NoiseNinja cleaned up the sky only and left the rest
    alone.
    So, I *need* to use photoshop (elements is what I got) for cutting out
    the non sky before. Then I cut out a few clouds too because I liked them
    the way they were but the result was white rings around the clouds.
    I'll try a run with the default settings and the whole sky and see how
    it turns out. So far my favourite is neatimage.

    Lots of Greetings and thanks!
    Volker
     
    Volker Hetzer, Jan 16, 2005
    #14
  15. Volker Hetzer

    Stacey Guest

    Volker Hetzer wrote:

    > Stacey wrote:
    >> Then you can be
    >> more agressive with the settings or use different setting for different
    >> parts of a scene. From their site:

    >
    > I tried it standalone and it did leave the rest of the picture alone all
    > on its own. I got the picture developed at 7.9x11.8in (20x30cm) and was
    > pretty impressed. Absolutely no difference in the non-sky part but a
    > much cleaner sky.


    You didn't look as closely as I did. It does change subtlely things like
    tree bark and grass detail etc if you look closely unless you crank back
    the NR. For most people this wouldn't be an issue as it does take more than
    a click of the mouse to go there...

    --

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, Jan 16, 2005
    #15
  16. Stacey wrote:
    > Volker Hetzer wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Stacey wrote:
    >>
    >>>Then you can be
    >>>more agressive with the settings or use different setting for different
    >>>parts of a scene. From their site:

    >>
    >>I tried it standalone and it did leave the rest of the picture alone all
    >>on its own. I got the picture developed at 7.9x11.8in (20x30cm) and was
    >>pretty impressed. Absolutely no difference in the non-sky part but a
    >>much cleaner sky.

    >
    >
    > You didn't look as closely as I did. It does change subtlely things like
    > tree bark and grass detail etc if you look closely unless you crank back
    > the NR. For most people this wouldn't be an issue as it does take more than
    > a click of the mouse to go there...

    Hm. Looked again, to no avail. Here's the link to three pictures,
    the original, one with the default (no very low frequency noise) and one
    with the extra low noise. Maybe you can point me to the right spots?
    http://service.gmx.net/mc/4X0eXwlTRGKg5vcmusczL9DG8yF2yQ
    Just click on "GMX MediaCenter starten", then select the tree images
    and click "Datei" and download.

    Lots of Greetings!
    Volker
     
    Volker Hetzer, Jan 16, 2005
    #16
  17. Volker Hetzer

    Stacey Guest

    Volker Hetzer wrote:

    > Stacey wrote:
    >>
    >> You didn't look as closely as I did. It does change subtlely things like
    >> tree bark and grass detail etc if you look closely unless you crank back
    >> the NR. For most people this wouldn't be an issue as it does take more
    >> than a click of the mouse to go there...

    > Hm. Looked again, to no avail. Here's the link to three pictures,
    > the original, one with the default (no very low frequency noise) and one
    > with the extra low noise. Maybe you can point me to the right spots?
    >


    Easy, look at the shadow area in the lower right hand corner, on the cleaned
    ones there are no needles on the pine branches. They were turned into
    blobs. Like I said some people don't see this and in "normal" prints you'd
    probably never notice it. Using my technique, you could run the NR at a
    higher level so the sky was cleaner yet still maintain every detail in the
    lower portion of the shot. On higher rez, sharper images this becomes even
    more apparent.
    --

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, Jan 17, 2005
    #17
  18. Stacey wrote:
    > Easy, look at the shadow area in the lower right hand corner, on the cleaned
    > ones there are no needles on the pine branches.

    Sorry, I'm, still lost. Are we talking about the same pictures here?
    I can't remember any pine trees and I can't see them on the picture.
    Would it be ok if you drew a little circle or cut out the part with the
    blob, compress it down as much as possible and send it to me so that I
    can look at the same spot in the high res image? My email is valid.
    Does the problem occur in both denoised images?
    (Btw, I've noticed something else. The printouts contain a lot of dark
    where the image does have still details on it. But right now I'm looking
    at the original with nikon editor.)

    > They were turned into
    > blobs. Like I said some people don't see this and in "normal" prints you'd
    > probably never notice it. Using my technique, you could run the NR at a
    > higher level so the sky was cleaner yet still maintain every detail in the
    > lower portion of the shot. On higher rez, sharper images this becomes even
    > more apparent.

    Yes, I fully agree, cutting out the sky does solve that problem. I've
    got some test images in development and I'll see how this turns out,
    especially with the tree branch in the sky on the left side. I didn't
    select that one and I'm hoping that the white circle stuff won't
    happen with this.

    Lots of Greetings and Thanks!
    Volker
     
    Volker Hetzer, Jan 17, 2005
    #18
  19. Volker Hetzer

    Stacey Guest

    Volker Hetzer wrote:

    > Stacey wrote:
    >> Easy, look at the shadow area in the lower right hand corner, on the
    >> cleaned ones there are no needles on the pine branches.

    > Sorry, I'm, still lost. Are we talking about the same pictures here?


    OK it's grass, not pine brush but the details are gone in the shadows. I
    expect on the original uncompressed file it would be even worse?



    > Would it be ok if you drew a little circle or cut out the part with the
    > blob, compress it down as much as possible and send it to me so that I
    > can look at the same spot in the high res image?


    Compression is part of why you can't see the difference, it destroys details
    as well. I made a web page so you can see where I'm talking about and maybe
    if you look at the uncompressed originals you can see this better. Again
    it's not a huge problem on this file, but you could run a stronger NR and
    totally clean up the sky if you used this other technique without harming
    ANY of the details.

    http://www.geocities.com/kievgurl/E300/NR.html

    And here's a shot I took with my E300 using this techique. The original is a
    20MB tiff so some details are lost in the downsizing but it shows how clean
    you can get the sky and still have crisp details.


    http://www.geocities.com/kievgurl/E300/weblake.html


    --

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, Jan 17, 2005
    #19
  20. Volker Hetzer

    paul Guest

    Stacey wrote:
    >
    > Compression is part of why you can't see the difference, it destroys details
    > as well.



    See what you think of this:
    <http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php&DIR=Misc/photography/raw-vs-jpg&PG=1&PIC=4>
    It's using D70 fine jpeg compression on the left, Nikon Capture noise
    reduction in the middle & RAW on the right 400% magnified so you can see
    exactly what's happening (800% is even easier to tell). Look at the
    crazy texture in the reddish band at the right and the subtle
    undulations of the flat wall at the left side with paint brush texture
    then how much the noise reduced version is posterized and those
    paintbrush strokes are gone. That noise reduction was set at the minimum
    to be smoother than the jpeg & the Capture noise reduction was pretty
    crude in the steps available. I'm amazed how much more noise RAW has!
    I'd like to try these super enlarged comparisons with Neatimage, etc
    starting with RAW. I know you can't see this much detail with bare eyes
    but for big prints this is the reality that contributes to the gestalt.
    When saving a jpeg in photoshop try zooming in 800% before saving &
    adjust the compression slider to see exactly what's happening.
     
    paul, Jan 17, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Sony Press Department

    Sony to bundle Noise Ninja w/ F828

    Sony Press Department, Jan 3, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    390
    HRosita
    Jan 3, 2004
  2. Michael M. Cohen

    Noise Ninja

    Michael M. Cohen, Jul 7, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    519
    Gisle Hannemyr
    Jul 9, 2004
  3. Jason Sommers
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    519
    Jason Sommers
    Jan 19, 2005
  4. David Arnstein

    Neat Image vs Noise Ninja

    David Arnstein, Oct 5, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    728
  5. John Navas

    Noise Reduction software (Neat Image, Noise Ninja, etc.)

    John Navas, Oct 19, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    471
    John Navas
    Oct 19, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page