Rules clarification - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

08/23/2002 03:51:32 PM · #2

Originally posted by ganders:
Sorry if somebody has asked this before, I couldn't see anything obvious...

I have a pretty cheap and nasty camera, which means that I have to do some pretty serious post-processing to get a half-way acceptable result. Aside from the wonderful toys in Photoshop (I can hold myself to the hue/saturation/levels toys, I'm sure!) I rely heavily on a program called Neat Image.

Basically all it does is some very fancy noise removal - kind of like despeckle but a whole lot more powerful because it does some sort of fancy mathematical analysis of the image before it starts. It sharpens too.

Now then, on to the question - is it allowable to use such a program under the rules? I am just using it to clean up the noise from my low-tech camera but technically I guess you couldn't really call it "despeckle". So, is it allowed? Or is this another reason I can use to persuade dear Kavey to let me have that Minolta Dimage 7i I keep gazing longingly at?! :-)

Ganders

Is the program shareware/freeware, or is there a trial available online? If so, could you link me to a place where I can get it? Based on your description this certainly seems to be within the spirit of the rules, but it would not be my place to say that it were or were not allowed.

Thanks,
Terry

sohr

Nikon Coolpix 990

08/23/2002 04:00:45 PM · #3

I checked it out myself-- they have a website at www.neatimage.com.

While it may be in the "spirit of the rules", I don't think under the current rules it would be allowed since it appears to do a lot of non-standard manipulation with the image.

Maybe we need an amendment to the rules allowing the use of noise-reduction filters/software-- but strictly for the usage of noise reduction (since you can get some pretty unique texture effects simply by overapplying them)...

* This message has been edited by the author on 8/23/2002 3:59:49 PM.

ganders

Canon EOS-40D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

08/23/2002 04:05:20 PM · #4

As sohr says, www.neatimage.com - they have a demo which is pretty much the same as the full version only it doesn't allow saving to anything but bmp and it feels like the full version is a touch quicker.

Certainly the way I read the rules it seemed pretty much 'on the edge' and frankly looking at this weeks challenge I'd struggle to come up with an idea anyway, but a man can dream!

Thanks,

Ganders

08/23/2002 04:23:16 PM · #5

Does anyone else use this model camera: Jenoptik JD1300F?

(It's pants thus the asking about what is allowed coz the results are poo)

;)

ClubJuggle

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

08/23/2002 04:29:26 PM · #6

Originally posted by Kavey:
Does anyone else use this model camera: Jenoptik JD1300F?

(It's pants thus the asking about what is allowed coz the results are poo)

;)

At this point he's the only user listing that camera in his profile. I only a few months ago upgraded from a 1 MPixel camera so I feel his pain.

-Terry

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

08/23/2002 04:33:37 PM · #7

Here's another good reason for some relaxation of the rules... it would help level the playing field between the high end cameras and the lower end units...

ganders

Canon EOS-40D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

08/23/2002 04:41:56 PM · #8

That's the one thing (well, that and my lack of imagination!) that puts me off entering until I upgrade - I KNOW that nothing I can achieve with my little 1mp camera can come close to what you guys manage to pull off - at least without some serious luck and post-processing.

On the other hand, I can totally understand the desire to have the rules so that it's the photographic skills that count and not the photoshop skills!

Ganders

ClubJuggle

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

08/23/2002 04:51:00 PM · #9

Originally posted by jmsetzler:
Here's another good reason for some relaxation of the rules... it would help level the playing field between the high end cameras and the lower end units...

John, The more I think about this the more I see your point. I'm not convinced yet, but I certainly could be. Of course the flip side is offering a viable alternative to those who don't have Photoshop.

I have a question for the GIMP users.... does that offer similar filters to Photoshop?

-Terry

HBunch

HP PhotoSmart 315

08/23/2002 04:51:29 PM · #10

Originally posted by ganders:
That's the one thing (well, that and my lack of imagination!) that puts me off entering until I upgrade - I KNOW that nothing I can achieve with my little 1mp camera can come close to what you guys manage to pull off - at least without some serious luck and post-processing.

On the other hand, I can totally understand the desire to have the rules so that it's the photographic skills that count and not the photoshop skills!

Ganders

Don't give up!! I only have a 2mp camera and I got lots of great comments last week and 41st place! Applying some hints and what I call "poor man's tips" This weeks photo is already 5/10's higher in score than last weeks. Which, if going by last week's challenge, would bump me up to somewhere around 24th-ish. So don't ever give up!! I say enter anyway. I don't even have a photo editing program, so what i shoot is what you see. So with a photo editing program, you can make it up there too. besides, you will get a lot of great help from comments made, and you can't get comments if you don't enter!!
I hope to see some of your photos soon.
~Heather~

puppet10

Canon Digital IXUS

08/23/2002 11:32:42 PM · #11

GIMP has most of the functionality of Photoshop. IIRC the biggest differences are no native GIF support (because of the UNISYS patent) and I think it has trouble for people in the printing business because of lack of some things in the CYMK color space for some reason I don't fully understand (not being a printer ;>)

lisae

Olympus C-720UZ

08/24/2002 05:52:39 AM · #12

My camera is 1.3MP. I don't do particularly well in the challenges, and every week there's some technical reason given by a lot of comments for my score being a bit low that I don't really have much control over (not the only reason, but obviously enough to have some influence). This week I'm sitting on 5.9 though, which is so cool! So it's possible for a good idea or an image with high appeal/impact to bring your score up despite technical difficulties. I'm sure I would be higher if my image weren't a bit blurry, if the exposure was more even, if the resolution was higher, etc. But does that matter? Not to me.

However, I do think it would be a good idea for noise reduction programs to be allowed under the rules. I'm going to download this demo and try it out :)

08/24/2002 08:21:19 AM · #13

Lisae
As I've been into photography since I was about 12 I have a LOT of negatives lying around so a month or two ago (when I finally got a short term contract for a job) we bought a neg scanner. It's not a posh one, but it's not the most basic one either - it's the Dimage Scan Dual II.

At first I was NOT impressed. I was expecting something at least vaguely comparable with the lower end photo CDs that I've had done when having film processed at cheapy places, and the results were just horrendous.

We - Ganders (Pete) is my hub - did know that the results were meant to be better using other software than that provided, from having done some research before buying...

Well Pete got this neatimage thing recently, and I cannot believe the difference it makes. It's not changing the image, and it's applied to the whole image (so I am hoping it is allowed in the rules) but it makes the scans by our low-grade scanner look a little more like scans from a high-end scanner.

I am figuring if we can use it on output from the camera that it may do the same, and as John says, even out the playing field in one area at least.

Anyway, lisae, would be interested to see if you think it helps your shots.

lisae

Olympus C-720UZ

08/24/2002 09:44:08 AM · #14

Well, I'm very impressed! I tried it on a lot of photos. I remember now that jonr told me about this program a while ago, but since I didn't think it would be within the rules, I didn't try it. Here is a before and after comparison of my "Glass Comet" photo for the Shadows challenge. Yeah, it's one of my lowest rating photos, for good reason, but also happens to be one of my noisiest. The results are great! This is slightly scaled, but you can still see how good it is:

08/24/2002 09:54:10 AM · #15

That's a massive reduction in noise!

I really hope it will be allowed, I guess we'll need to wait for comment from our leaders :) because, IMHO, I think all it's really doing is a more intelligent noise reduction than the various noise reduction filters within post processing applications. It's across the whole image and is not spot editing.

Will wait and see anyway...

:)

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

08/24/2002 06:29:16 PM · #16

Right then, well I took a few quick snaps today and finally can see how really truly bad our camera is! (The shot isn't brilliant anyway, and that's just down to me, but the camera is also poo)

Anyway, decided to submit, and so read the rules and did the processing allowed.

According to rules despeckle and sharpen are both allowed.

Since what neatimage does is reduce noise and to sharpen, I've assumed that is IS allowed in the current rules, and have applied it to my photo. Not a huge difference but it looks marginally improved.

Anyway, if it's decided that this is NOT allowed, please could someone alert me so that I have time to withdraw the photo, and submit the copy which hasn't been through neatimage. Can't say there's much difference but it just cleans the raw image a little.

THANKS!

* This message has been edited by the author on 8/24/2002 6:28:46 PM.

jeremya

Minolta DiMAGE 7i

08/24/2002 11:58:56 PM · #17

I have personally been pushing for Neat Image (and other noise reduction software) to be clarified in the rules....

Sure, my camera has some of the best noise removal firmware around so I rarely need to use it... but then I have seen some camera's like the Olympus E-10 (original firmware) that could really use it! not to mention the numerous 1 and 2mp camera's around DPC....

Personally, I'd just use it... if you get pulled up for it.. the rules will be clarified :-) And some of us will be backing you if that happens...

If you havent seen it yet www.neatimage.com .... yes theres a free fully working demo avalible... I also have the BETA freeware version on file... PM me if you need it...

hokie

Nikon D2X

08/25/2002 12:04:41 AM · #18

I am always for software that allows you to get your photos in as good a condition as possible.

All I have ever thought we should keep out were spot edits like cloning/removal of things and heavy art brushes.

Beyond that if it makes the photo nicer and stays within the intent of the this site..go for it!!

* This message has been edited by the author on 8/25/2002 12:03:47 AM.