|
| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/02/2005 11:18:06 AM · #26 |
Originally posted by Gordon:
Usually I create a mask, based on the details in the image. (the sort typically used for edge sharpening - it only picks out details, effectively) I then apply NI to a duplicate layer of the image and apply the inverse of the edge mask to that noise reduced layer. Pretty much what you get then is noise removed from what should be smooth areas and no noise reduction on actual features or edges in the image. Works pretty well with some thought applied to the opacity and also a bit of further blurring/ contrast adjustment on the initial edge mask. |
I'm aware of these techniques and use them myself, but on the AA image the only questionale area was the sky, and none of this worked there. Or, rather, I worked it as hard as I could.
It's my observation that NI doesn't work especially well on a lot of B/W conversions. The real problem here was that we didn't get any really good weather in the AA window, and the original, color version of that shot really didn't have much action in the sky, just the palest of winter blues. So to get the dramatic sky I had to do some serious photoshop filtering in the conversion process, and this brought along noise as a byproduct.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
06/02/2005 11:22:57 AM · #27 |
NEAT-IMAGE or Noise Ninja?
Which is better and why.
I don't have either and the noise reduce filter in Photoshop 9 seems worthless ..or I should say I don't know how to use it successfully. |
|
|
|
06/02/2005 11:31:34 AM · #28 |
Originally posted by mcmurma:
This following, however, is typical of what we usually see here. This is an iso 1600 image with NI liberally applied.
Compare to the non NI version.
I prefer the noisy version, but thats just me. Careful application of NI (or other noise reduction routines) could give the image a cleaner appearence and preserve more detail than the first example. But use of any such application will destroy detail along with the noise. So go easy on it! Thats all I'm saying. |
AHA! I can up my score now, thanks to you. I will make all my images too plasticky...
See, i like the crisp detail in your 'noisy' pic much more than the soft version. it may have less noise, but the darn thing is too soft. Why buy good glass and then do away with the one thing only good glass can give you - details!
I have the 'free' version of NI. I use is occasinally, and am no expert by any means. Can it be used selectively on just an area of the image? I suppose the plug-in version for PS will work that way, but can the free one do it?
I guess I should go buy NI, huh? I mean, i can make platicky pics now and get ribbons! LOL
EDIT: Went to check on it..i was behind 2 versions. 5.0 came out may 23...so i'll try the newer version before i spend the $50.
Message edited by author 2005-06-02 11:38:31.
|
|
|
|
06/02/2005 01:50:39 PM · #29 |
Originally posted by Prof_Fate:
I have the 'free' version of NI. I use is occasinally, and am no expert by any means. Can it be used selectively on just an area of the image? I suppose the plug-in version for PS will work that way, but can the free one do it?
I guess I should go buy NI, huh? I mean, i can make platicky pics now and get ribbons! LOL
EDIT: Went to check on it..i was behind 2 versions. 5.0 came out may 23...so i'll try the newer version before i spend the $50. |
You can only work on selections with the plugin version of NI for photoshop. You can work around it by making a duplicate layer, making your selection and saving it, NI the dupe layer, load selection inverted and delete the part of the image you don't want Neat Imaged.
Robt.
|
|
|
|
Current Server Time: 09/14/2025 12:00:09 PM  |
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/14/2025 12:00:09 PM EDT.
|
