DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Individual Photograph Discussion >> Which one is better?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 14 of 14, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 12/30/2003 09:58:01 AM · #1
Ok, I downloaded Neatimage last night, and have been messing around with it a little. The first image is one that I had taken yesterday and posted here.



Now here is the same image after using neatimage. I think that it is better, it looks crisper to me, but part of the field seems slightly over sharpened to me. I would love to hear what everyone else thinks.



Thanks,
Shannon
 12/30/2003 10:02:31 AM · #2
The filtered version is definitely oversharpened. I tend not to use the sharpening options in Neatimage at all, just the noise reduction. I shapren in Photoshop. NeatImage might very well do a good job sharpening, just that I have no direct experience with it. I do know that NeatImage's default settings are often quite agressive.
 12/30/2003 10:03:08 AM · #3
I acctually prefer the first one: while it's softer it looks more leike a painting, whereas the Netimage-version is overdone regarding sharpening: it just looks too digital.

Jörg
 12/30/2003 10:06:29 AM · #4
Shannon:

To my eye, both the field and the structure look oversharpened in No.2. You've lost some detail in the barn, and the grain (wheat? corn stubble?) doesn't look real. I'd stick with No. 1. IMHO.

Peter
 12/30/2003 10:09:42 AM · #5
Ok, here is one more attempt, I tried neatimage again, but this time I did not use the sharpening tools.



Any Better?

Shannon
 12/30/2003 10:10:03 AM · #6
I hope you dont mind Shannon but I took number one and had a go myself. I think it improves upon the original, and doesnt look so over-processed as the neatimage version. I'll tell you the steps I took if you're interested. It only took me 3 minutes or so.


12/30/2003 10:12:13 AM · #7
Originally posted by Konador:
I hope you dont mind Shannon but I took number one and had a go myself. I think it improves upon the original, and doesnt look so over-processed as the neatimage version. I'll tell you the steps I took if you're interested. It only took me 3 minutes or so.



Yes, I'd love to know the steps that you took, you can either post them here or PM me with them. Thanks for taking the time to look and help, I really appreciate it.

Shannon
 12/30/2003 10:14:58 AM · #8
Originally posted by Shannon:
Ok, I downloaded Neatimage last night, and have been messing around with it a little. The first image is one that I had taken yesterday and posted here.


If you were going for that very grainy look than ignore this comment, but to me it looks like your file size was too small and then once you blew it up to this size, you lost all resolution hence the pixelated detail. And if it's not the file size than it's definetly over sharpened. I've no problems with trying new things but this effect takes away from the photo itself [which is pretty good].
12/30/2003 10:21:13 AM · #9
Okay :)

First of all I resized the image to 600 on the longest size. This made it smaller, which stopped it looking as blurry as it did before.

After that I did a light USM:
Amount 70%
Radius 0.4px
Threshold 0

I then did a 4.5 pixel gaussian blur, which I faded to about 40-45%. This helped a bit with the noise. Then I did the USM again, but at Amount 40% this time.

I then pasted it into neatimage where I sampled on the sky. The settings were at:
Noise Filter:
High +10%
Medium -100%
Low -100%

Y +150%
Cr +150%
Cb +50%

Amount +70%


Sharpening: None


This made a very poor image, but it was still smooth. I pasted it over the top of the non-NI version and made opacity 60% back in photoshop. I then erased the whole layer except for the sky.

To make it look slightly more realistic and less neatimaged, I added some noise with photoshop (altho a very tiny amount). This helps to sharpen it a bit too.

I then made a slight Brightness/Contrast adjustment, with brightness about -10 and contrast about +10.


Obviously with more time to experiment with different parameters in these adjustments I could have got it looking a bit better, but the basic steps are there.

Hope this helps. :)

Message edited by author 2003-12-30 10:21:49.
 12/30/2003 10:23:18 AM · #10
Shannon, I think your second effort right where you want to be, a great balance between noise reduction and holding detail.
12/30/2003 10:43:43 AM · #11
Hi Shannon, just like Konador i redid it my self.



You can work around problem like noise etc. but in my mind, the less you edit your photo in any software the best it is. If i was you i'd try too find why are you getting that noise amount without not enough details and i'd check these 3 things:

1. What is the ISO i was shooting at

2. what is the file size/compression mode i was shooting in

3. is the noise reduction of my Digital Camera turned on?

Message edited by author 2003-12-30 10:44:31.
 12/30/2003 10:43:52 AM · #12
I think your compositions is awesome, but the it is way to grainy and pixelated to be fixed. This is my oppinion. Did you use a tripod? Did you use zoom? If I was you I would go back and take it again and this time try different technics to get a better shot. Keep shooting.
 12/30/2003 10:54:27 AM · #13
Thanks for all the help and input everyone I truly appreciate it, I think that my problem is that I have been shooting at too high of an ISO which is resulting in the high grain and lack of detail. I will definatley be experimenting more as soon as I get the chance, thanks again for all the great help!

Shannon
 12/30/2003 11:22:51 AM · #14
i try not to use an iso over 400 if it can be helped.
a tripod can make up for the speed of the film if its not a moving subject, or the wind is light...

problem with grain/noise is it gets worse as the image size gets larger - say for printing. resampling will bring the grain out even more than on the smaller version.

could also be the image recording option you have chosen. use the highest quaility possible to shoot with ( maybe not raw mode, but large/fine jpeg at least ).

Pages:  
Current Server Time: 08/30/2025 10:46:41 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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: 08/30/2025 10:46:41 AM EDT.