Regarding using pre-built profiles, they usually produce good results, but it is generally better to do one of the following: Batching can be done in Photoshop too, but that involves a bit more tricky procedure. The standalone program allows you to easily process batches of images. So, I recommend to use Neat Image as the first step in a workflow. Regarding the workflow, I recommend to reduce noise before doing other post-processing, to not aggravate the noise and not make it more difficult to reduce. I realize that results onscreen are not always the same on prints, but if two images look about dead even onscreen, can I expect them to be pretty even in printing? The process of editing seems easier in Neat Image, but does it offer any substantial advantages over Noiseware and Noise Ninja other than controls? I tested the ISO 1600 profile against Noise Ninja's automatic profiling and the effects were (as far as I can tell) dead even. I downloaded the profiles for my particular camera, the Lumix DMC-TZ5 (a pretty noisy camera), and installed them. I also don't know whether my images should be darkened, lightened, contrast and saturation-adjusted before removing the noise or afterwards? (My guess would be afterwards.)Īdditionally, do I gain anything from the standalone program if I use Photoshop programs? Two of them don't have Internet connections, and I wondered if that will be a problem. I don't pirate software, but I want something I can use on all three computers. I also have Photoshop 7 and CE (8), as well as Elements 7, which I bought because I thought it would give me faster speed. I have three computers: a notebook, a netbook and a desktop (which I use with Vista). I'm leaning towards Neat Image because of its controls and ease of use, but I'm curious about activation. I've now used Noiseware, Noise Ninja and Neat Image and am thrilled with all three.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |