Picture Cooler - anyone fully using it/understand it?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by mark.thomas.7@gmail.com, Oct 27, 2006.

  1. Guest

    This is one decidedly odd program, but it seems to have a lot of
    promise. The quality of its denoising abilities compares very
    favourably to the Neat Image, Noise Ninja, Noiseware, etc.

    Has anyone paid for it and/or seriously using it? If so, what are the
    additional features like?

    The good:
    - the denoising and sharpening seem to work very well
    - it offers deconvolution (eg for helping address camera shake and
    o-o-f problems) but only if you pay for it
    - it seems to have a 'kill noisey pixel' function
    - it seems fast (although the free version has deliberately sabotaged
    save speed to annoy into buying it)
    - it is cheap ($15) (or even free if you can put up with deliberately
    slowed saves, no TIF saves, and lowish jpg quality)

    The bad:
    - it doesn't seem to offer a 100% view. The 200% view is annoying and
    makes it harder to judge results, imo
    - the method of operation, options and menu layout are all obscure and
    rather confusing
    - there is no useful Help whatsoever either in the program or at his
    website
    - the author initially used unpleasant tactics ('post a comment about
    my software and I'll give you a reg key') to promote it - thankfully he
    has dropped that idea now


    Any comments appreciated, before I part with any money.
     
    , Oct 27, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. SteveB Guest

    I used it a lot in its early days, not so much now. It's effective but I
    was disappointed the user interface was only ever made worse, and not being
    able to save favourite settings was silly, or has the latest version got
    that now?. On some images it's the most effective NR program around but
    generally speaking I much prefer Noiseware, so easy and quick.


    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > This is one decidedly odd program, but it seems to have a lot of
    > promise. The quality of its denoising abilities compares very
    > favourably to the Neat Image, Noise Ninja, Noiseware, etc.
    >
    > Has anyone paid for it and/or seriously using it? If so, what are the
    > additional features like?
    >
    > The good:
    > - the denoising and sharpening seem to work very well
    > - it offers deconvolution (eg for helping address camera shake and
    > o-o-f problems) but only if you pay for it
    > - it seems to have a 'kill noisey pixel' function
    > - it seems fast (although the free version has deliberately sabotaged
    > save speed to annoy into buying it)
    > - it is cheap ($15) (or even free if you can put up with deliberately
    > slowed saves, no TIF saves, and lowish jpg quality)
    >
    > The bad:
    > - it doesn't seem to offer a 100% view. The 200% view is annoying and
    > makes it harder to judge results, imo
    > - the method of operation, options and menu layout are all obscure and
    > rather confusing
    > - there is no useful Help whatsoever either in the program or at his
    > website
    > - the author initially used unpleasant tactics ('post a comment about
    > my software and I'll give you a reg key') to promote it - thankfully he
    > has dropped that idea now
    >
    >
    > Any comments appreciated, before I part with any money.
    >
     
    SteveB, Oct 28, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest

    SteveB wrote:
    > I used it a lot in its early days, not so much now. It's effective but I
    > was disappointed the user interface was only ever made worse


    My thoughts exactly. It's frustrating, because it seems to offer the
    best performance on many/most of my images. And the camera I am now
    using shows the odd dark pixel sprinkled through the shadows, so the
    noisy pixel thing is extra useful.

    If only he went to some user interface training!

    > and not being
    > able to save favourite settings was silly, or has the latest version got
    > that now?

    Doesn't seem to.

    > On some images it's the most effective NR program around but
    > generally speaking I much prefer Noiseware, so easy and quick.


    I agree - I like Noiseware too, but I keep coming back to PC on the
    worst images...

    I might just fork out the $15 anyway, and send him copious feedback in
    the hope he might tidy it up - but not hold my breath..
     
    , Oct 28, 2006
    #3
    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. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,286
    ZAK18
    Jul 4, 2005
  2. Silverstrand

    Cooler Master Aquagate Mini R80 Water Cooler

    Silverstrand, Dec 7, 2005, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    959
    Silverstrand
    Dec 7, 2005
  3. Silverstrand
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,200
    Silverstrand
    Feb 15, 2006
  4. Ian
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,521
  5. Ian

    Cooler Master V10 CPU Cooler

    Ian, Mar 11, 2009, in forum: Front Page News
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,475
Loading...

Share This Page