Looking for advice/opinion replacing Nikon 5700 with Nikon 8800, Please!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by All Things Mopar, Feb 10, 2005.

  1. Ed Ruf commented courteously ...
    Hi, Ed.

    I'm interpreting your comment to mean that you downloaded
    the PSP 9 trial version but didn't like it enough to pay
    the upgrade fee. Am I right?

    Everyone has their own threshold of pain, and likewise we
    all have our own threshold of noise. My threshold of
    scanner and digicam noise is very low, but haven't
    investigated stand-alone pictures because I'm lazy and
    don't want to do multiple steps in different apps, saving
    to a non-lossy format in between.

    I fell in love with PSP 9's DCNR, and I like it more and
    more as I get better at using it. In PSP 8, I used Edge
    Preserving Smooth, which I found quite useful. Of course,
    like most noise reduction filters, EPS can have a serious
    effects on image sharpness and detail.

    So, I "test drove" EPS in comparison to DCNR and was
    simply blown away at how easily I could kill the noise
    with DCNR and how little damage it did to the
    sharpness/detail. Besides digital noise, that I don't
    suffer with all that much, I find DCNR to be outstanding
    for scans of half-tone printed photos in books and

    There's a guy at Corel (Jasc) that is something like their
    Chief Scientist, by the name of Kris Zaklika. He's perhaps
    the most knowledgeable person I've ever run across when it
    comes to raster or vector graphics. Of course, he knows
    PSP 7/8/9 better than anyone on the planet, as well he

    His team at then-Jasc developed DCNR from scratch.
    Naturally, he won't reveal the mathematical algorithms,
    but he's expained enough about how to use it and why it
    works, that one can deduce how the algorithms might be

    With that as a long-winded pre-amble, I'm interested in
    what you didn't like about DCNR. I don't have a hidden
    agenda, I'm not a shill for Corel, and I have no intention
    of "taking you on". I just want to learn.
    I'll do that, Ed. Thanks for the heads up. As I may or may
    not have mentioned, 5 MP is more than enough for me. Right
    now, I'm shooting at the relatively coarse resolution of
    1600 x 1200, then cropping and resizing down to 1280 x 960
    for final save. That suits 99 44/100% of my needs.

    On the rare occasions when I need to print larger than 4 x
    6, for which there are enough PPI at 1280, I just use the
    photographer's rule of increasing viewing distance as the
    print size rises. I wouldn't expect you to agree with
    this, but I've printed pictures as large as 13 x 19 with
    my HP 1220C from itty bitty 1280 pictures - that's only 70
    PPI. But, when viewed from maybe 5 feet, the look fine (to
    me, at least!).

    Whatever new camera I buy, I think I'm gonna up my
    shooting resolution into the 2.5-3 MP range, and up my
    save size to maybe 1400 x 1050.

    I have no doubt whatsover that I could find a camera from
    Pansonic, Sony, Konica/Minolta, Canon, Fuji, or others
    that easily fit my needs for daylight shooting. I'm having
    trouble finding something in a non-DSLR that can do
    available light without excessive noise, and I haven't
    done any test drives on the flash issue, which is the
    primary reason to dump my 5700.

    In the end, there just isn't any substitute for testing
    any new camera under the shooting conditions I find
    typical on the subjects I most like. No one can tell me
    that for sure, but I highly value your opinion and the
    opinions of others that have responded to my request for
    advice. These are all valuable data points which will help
    me reach a correct buying decision.

    Thanks again for your perspectives and suggestions.
    All Things Mopar, Feb 11, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. All Things Mopar

    Ed Ruf Guest

    Correct. There are other new features in it besides the new noise filter,
    however I've been evaluating other tools/wotkflow that allows me the
    ability to work with the full range of raw files and also in other color
    spaces and PSP9 is still lacking here. Right now I'm using Nikon Capture
    and/or PSP8 with the limitations. I have times where I need to run noise
    filtering on batches of images and NI allows this easily. Similarly Capture
    allows quick batch processing of raw images for those times I need it. I'm
    about to give Adobe PSE3 a try next. In the end I think I'll have two
    different flows, one for batches when needed quickly and then some other
    final editor. At work I really only need the editor, so right now that's
    been PSP8.
    That's when the batch capability of NI can be a help and also with the
    slightly more costly upgrade you can also have the plugin which can be used
    inside of your editor, so you have both options.
    Same here. I've been in the comp......p-s-p group on/off and have read
    Kris's draft describing PSP9's DCNR. Given more time I probably could get
    good results with DCNR. It was more of given what I all ready had been
    using for quite a while and the need for running batches of images, it
    wasn't a total solution, so the upgrade wasn't justified. As I said above,
    I'm still searching. There is also the buyout of JASC by Corel, which was
    the deathnell of other products I used to use such as Micrografx Designer
    and Picture Publisher.
    Then you have an additional way to help high iso noise. Use the full
    resolution of the camera, then down sample. This will also help quell the
    noise along with the use of noise filtering as well.
    Good luck.
    Ed Ruf, Feb 12, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. [snipped in its entirety for brevity]

    Hi, Ed.

    Thanks for clarifying your position. Like just about
    everything in digital photography and computer graphics
    there never is a "right" answer to something as complex as
    noise reduction.

    Kriz Z gave me some early-on hints on how to use DCNR,
    else I'd have given up on it long ago,too. The short
    version of the answer is that you have to move the 3 noise
    sampling cross-hairs around with your right mouse button
    to where *you* think the noise is, not where DCNR thinks
    it is when it does its initial auto sampling.

    Once I figured that out, my scans (primary use for DCNR,
    not usually digigams unless I'm dealing with high ISO or
    underexposures) that are inherently noisy went from DCNR
    strenghts above 30 to around 8-12. Thus, instead of my
    resulting image looking like I'd applied Gaussian blur,
    they are now needle sharp (well, you know, within the
    realities of noise reduction).

    I'll close by saying that I am a firm believer that it is
    much better to be very good with an app that you know,
    than to struggle along with mediocre expertise on an app
    somebody told you was "good".
    All Things Mopar, Feb 12, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.