| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/10/2005 09:46:33 PM · #1 |
I went out and downloaded a demo version of neat image (just search neat image and it will come up) then applied it to a shot I took at the big e. Both images are posted, the original and the filtered. Big difference.  |
|
|
|
10/10/2005 09:54:29 PM · #2 |
Left a comment on the filtered one.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2005 10:36:01 PM · #3 |
just be sure not to use it too strongly on faces or intricate scenes. Indeed, it does work wonders on smoothe pictures, especially.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2005 10:44:08 PM · #4 |
WOW! That made a big difference. I just did the same thing. I downloaded it the other day and came up with this cool color version of this picture. I love neat image!!! I did use it strong on my face though. I kind of like it like that.
  |
|
|
|
10/10/2005 10:58:26 PM · #5 |
Very nice improvement!
Can anyone tell me how Neat Image compares to PS Noise reduction?
Thanks,
KS |
|
|
|
10/10/2005 11:19:13 PM · #6 |
Watch out with the downloaded version of NI. It only saves at a very low quality setting. If you're going to use it for challenge entries, I strongly suggest NOT using the trial version for that.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2005 11:23:11 PM · #7 |
try noiseware my imagenomic
|
|
|
|
10/10/2005 11:26:46 PM · #8 |
| How much is the version to buy it? |
|
|
|
10/10/2005 11:29:32 PM · #9 |
|
|
|
10/10/2005 11:34:25 PM · #10 |
I prefer Noise Ninja, seems to treat skin better avoiding the plastic look and preserves detail.
|
|
|
|
10/10/2005 11:48:27 PM · #11 |
Damn I didn't realize that the downloaded free version saves in low quality!! I did notice that my pics would come out a LOT smaller then what they went in as but figured it was just part of the process. Doh! Luckily I haven't used it that often.
You can get the "Home Edition" for $30. The differences between it and the "Pro" ($75 version) is: 1) No 16-bit image support, 2) Limit of 50 batch jobs, and 3) No support for plug-in version of filter, probably for use in PS?
|
|
|
|
10/11/2005 12:59:03 AM · #12 |
if you get the noiseware community edition its completely free and lets you see at a much less compressed file.
|
|
|
|
10/11/2005 06:34:19 AM · #13 |
Originally posted by longlivenyhc:
try noiseware my imagenomic |
I wonder if it depends on the camera. I saw no degradation when using the downloaded version, but it may have been the subject. Haven't tried it on a concrete image. Anyway, I do use just point and shoots, and perhaps they don't degrade as much as Canons. I also edited the original in photo impact first, then called up neat image. Did not use it as a plug in to photo impact. Then I went back to photo impact after applying neat image and resaved. |
|
|
|
10/11/2005 07:22:10 AM · #14 |
I have used the trial version, and cant see that it has reduced the quality or size. how can I tell?
Cheers
Alex |
|
|
|
10/11/2005 07:34:24 AM · #15 |
| It says in the pdf that you cant have 16bit or tiff compared to the pro version. thats about it. |
|
|
|
10/11/2005 08:23:48 AM · #16 |
As alexsaberi said, the demo version can't save in TIFF or BMP format, it only saves in JPG. But the compression is still good. Here's a quote from the Neat Image programmer from their forums;
//www.neatimage.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1201
"...because the Demo saves the output JPEGs with the quality level of 91, which is pretty high. The file is small simply because JPEG better compresses noise-free images. " |
|
|
|
10/11/2005 08:40:07 AM · #17 |
Originally posted by jhonan:
As alexsaberi said, the demo version can't save in TIFF or BMP format, it only saves in JPG. But the compression is still good. Here's a quote from the Neat Image programmer from their forums;
//www.neatimage.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1201
"...because the Demo saves the output JPEGs with the quality level of 91, which is pretty high. The file is small simply because JPEG better compresses noise-free images. " |
Unless NeatImage has been changed since I last ran the demo (which is certainly possible) it certainly did not use a 91 quality setting. The images out of the demo version were very highly compressed, even accounting for the file size reduction due to the noise removal.
|
|
|
|
10/11/2005 01:38:45 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
Originally posted by jhonan:
As alexsaberi said, the demo version can't save in TIFF or BMP format, it only saves in JPG. But the compression is still good. Here's a quote from the Neat Image programmer from their forums;
//www.neatimage.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1201
"...because the Demo saves the output JPEGs with the quality level of 91, which is pretty high. The file is small simply because JPEG better compresses noise-free images. " |
Unless NeatImage has been changed since I last ran the demo (which is certainly possible) it certainly did not use a 91 quality setting. The images out of the demo version were very highly compressed, even accounting for the file size reduction due to the noise removal. |
Not really the issue anyway; neat image as a photoshop plugin not only allows you to work on and save pdf and tiff files, it allows you to apply the effect to selected portions of the image. This alone is worth the price of admission. Think of it: clone the BG, apply light neat image to the whole, then clone THAT and apply more neat image to the sky, just for one example... You can't use layers in jpg, so none of that is possible.
Robt.
Message edited by author 2005-10-11 13:39:26.
|
|
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: 09/23/2025 06:13:41 PM EDT.
