I have to admit this is the best noise software for noise out there. I've tried them all and this wins hands down. Truely amazing... I had to buy the new plug-in too. http://www.imagenomic.com/index.asp
Larry
i tried it but i have to disagree. i have found no increase in quality or advantage over either NN or NI that would make me purchase this product at this time.
Noiseware is nice, but I don't see that the results are noticeably better than Neat Image. I chose Neat Image because it has more advanced controls than Noiseware.
I haven't noticed Noiseware being any better or worse than Neat Image in terms of out and out image quality, but I like Noiseware's batching process much more. I also like the price - $26 for the standard edition will tide me over nicely until C1 is out for the 20D.
Do the canned profiles for either NeatImage/Noiseware work for images developed using C1?
I seem to have better results shooting JPEG and correcting noise with Noise Ninja than developing my JPEGs from RAW using C1 with the noise reduction set at the default second notch. The images developed using C1 are also different in "grain/noise structure" as compared to standard JPEGs out of the camera, so I was wondering if either NI or Noiseware works well with the RAW-developed JPEGs.
tom in mpls wrote:
sam, c1 and noiseware have different purposes, and compliment each other. i, too, await the 20D upgrade for c1, but i will still need noiseware.
Tom -
I only use Noiseware for Color Noise Reduction. C1 has CNR as part of the conversion process already (not part of the noise reduction functionality, which I do not use), and therefore I find I don't need an additional program for most of my prints. I didn't use any noise reduction on any of my high-ISO work until I bought the 20D and lost the ability to use C1.
JeffBowser wrote:
I still think ISO 100 outperforms them all !
Ofcourse, the better the image you start out with, the better the end result will be. No amount of digital processing can make a really noisy photo as good as a photo that was absolutely clean to begin with. But sometimes ISO 100 is not an option.....
To a large extent the choice of which noise filter is subjective...it's in the eyes of the beholder.
Here are my very unscientific, horrify the purists, findings that I did last weekend:
I tried five different filters ( Neat Image, Noiseware, Noise Ninja Plug-In, Helicon, and Grain Surgery) on 18 different noisy pictures gleaned from the samples shown by many manufacturers and a few more of my own photos. I then graded them one to five and totalled the scores. My ratings, using the default settings on all filters, were:
I bought Noiseware Pro because they had a promotion that included their new plug-in. I find that their software works well without having to use camera specific noise samples. it's also very fast and intuitive.
I have had to many issues with Neat image blowing out the fine details of an image. In my experence Noiseware has not done that so i will take Noiseware any day.
beast wrote:
I have had to many issues with Neat image blowing out the fine details of an image. In my experence Noiseware has not done that so i will take Noiseware any day.
I have to agree...its just an excellent tool to have.
Larry
Hi,
I use NeatImage for pictures from my digital camera, Noiseware is better suited for pictures that don't have an accurate profile build bij NeatImage, i use it for pictures from the web.
You can't just compare these programs, Noiseware for example sharpens the image by default, the sharpness-slider in the "0" position means sharpening is on giving the impression of more detail, "-5" means no sharpening
