What NR software do some of the folks on BPN use and are they safisfied with the product ?
Printable View
What NR software do some of the folks on BPN use and are they safisfied with the product ?
Judy, I use Noise Ninja and feel very satisfied with it.
Hi Judy
I use Imagenomic's Noiseware.( a free software)
Mostly I use the "Landscape" setting as this does not degrade vegetation or soften feathers too much.
Originally I just used the "Default" setting but seldom these days.Occasionally "Portrait" setting.
Whatever gives best result.
I have Neat Image in Photoshop Elements but rarely use it.
Ian McHenry
I use Noiseware also. Also used Ninja. Personally, I think you'd like
either one. I'm to lazy to check, but I'm sure both have a trial version
you can try.
Doug
Another vote for Noise Ninja :)
Noise Ninja all the way!!
One more for Noise Ninja!!!
I use Neat Image, I'm still trying to learn how to use it effectively.
Thanks to all for their information.
Neat Image has a good demo available which I've used - it's limited in that it will only export High Quality JPEGs (oh the humanity). I've found it can be quite good, but I think as with all noise reduction software, using it is a tradeoff between detail and noise, so must be used carefully - and there are a lot of settings to play with. Some judicious use of masking will assist in that respect, as often it's the background that's horribly noisy, but fixing that fully will destroy the fine detail of feathers etc.
I have/am using Neat Image, Noise Ninja and now Noiseware. I am very much liking Noiseware right now and recommend it. Thanks to Andy Rouse for recommending it to me.
I have been using Nik Define 2.0 and really like it.
Nancy
I've been using Noiseware for close to a year and really like it, based on a Michael Reichmann suggestion (in one of his videos--he never wrote an article, which was strange).
Before that, I was using Neat Image.
Nikon NX and Adobe PS CS3.
Nothing fancy.
James
Am I being over cynical but do these really work? Are we saying the software developed by Adobe and Canon and Nikon is really in need of modification by an independant product that has to be purchased separately? I am not pretending to know more than anyone else - in fact the reverse is probably true but as you remove noise you remove detail. I suppose the criteria is to trade off losing more noise than detail?
Jon
Jon,Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Michael Ashton
The short answer is that yes, noise reduction works. It has to be used sparingly, but the better programs like Noiseware and Neat Image and Noise Ninja have controls to temper the adjustments made. I can't speak to Nikon, but Canon's software is atrocious.
Canon is a hardware company and they have no business whatsoever even trying to make software. They should make all of their cameras capture in the universal DNG raw format and stick to bundling Photoshop Elements. I say this because hardware companies (and to some extent Epson is also guilty of this) seem to expend all of their energy on the hardware and pay lip service to the software. My own feeling is that if you're going to do a half-assed job of it, admit it and stop wasting your time.
Now, what about Adobe's built-in noise reduction? As I alluded to in my second statement, Adobe's implementation of noise reduction is basically two sliders. It's a very coarse approach to reducing noise, and I believe that they did it this way because they were too busy with all of their other projects, like making Camera RAW work and improving functionality of Photoshop. Plugins arise when Adobe doesn't refine what is a good idea. However, in the case of noise reduction, plugins actually came first and then Adobe engineers still dropped the ball.
To use an analogy:
Should a user of Microsoft Windows really acquire a third-party antivirus program?
My recommendation is that it's always good to be skeptical, but why not download the trial versions of Noiseware and Neat Image and Noise Ninja and give them a spin?
Further to my earlier post on this subject. I was previously Noiseware exclusively but could not get the image I wanted on a particular picture so got free trial of Noise Ninja which did give me the required result.
So I purchased Noise Ninja and now use both !!! Whichever gives the better result on a particular image.
Ian Mc
Ian,
Brought up a good point, you do get different results from different products.
I find NR software hit and miss. I use Neat Image and sometimes it really works great. Other times I can't quite tweak it enough to come up with something I like. What I do like is the ability to preview a small portion of the image inside a square while I am tweaking the settings. This way I can see how it will look before actually running the software with the settings I have chosen.
I don't think anyone has mentioned Noise Ninja yet............Have they???;)
I have been very happy with NN so far!
Neat image is what I have been using and they do a nice job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Michael Ashton
Are you kidding?? :confused:
Only one other response on the thread mentioned Dfine 2.0 by Niksoftware.com
Noise Ninja seems to be the most popular, but most manufacturers allow for a trial download,
so you can try them out and compare.
Dfine 2.0 has some very nice features for selectively applying the noise reduction that beat doing
the masking yourself.
There are some videos on their website that demonstrate it. I ultimately decided on Dfine 2.0
over Noise Ninja, but I'm no expert.
I guess I am the only one using Noise Ninja. :p
Move over.........I use it too but I have to admit that I've had to use it less once I moved up from the Canon 1D and will probably have less of a need with future cameras.....whether they be Canon or.........Nikon;););)Quote:
Originally Posted by George DeCamp
I have never used anything but the sliders in ACR but I try not to shoot at anything over ISO 800 (1Ds2). Now that I am in Florida shooting birds, I find I may need higher ISOs which raises a related set of questions. What ISO setting do you find requires noise reduction software? Does the noise reduction in the new Canon bodies work as an alternative?
I own Neat Image, but haven't launched it in probably 6 months. I do slight noise reduction during conversion with ACR, but really find little need for noise reduction any more (Canon 5D, 40D)...maybe I would if I went beyond ISO 800 frequently.
With any technique or tool in image optimization the sucess or failure really depends on how you use it and to what extent. Used properly and mildly, noise reduction works great, even ACR or PS NR work well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonathan Michael Ashton
Used properly you dont have to sacrifice any detail or sharpness of the subject. You can guarantee this by only using the NR on the BG and not on the subject.
Robert
I've been using Imagenomics "Noiseaware" software for over a year now and find it very useful.
