speedmaster20d wrote: Daan B wrote: speedmaster20d wrote:
yes again, as I said it does *not* remove FPN. It has *less* color noise and a bit less FPN as you can see in the example above, this makes it possible to remove the FPN later w/o significantly degrading IQ.
It also shows less detail and color saturation. I understand it works for you, but I prefer the LR rendering in general. There is other software that will (try to) remove banding, such as DFine.
Any ways, my purpose was to demonstrate what can be done with DPP. Of course a better solution might be to sell all of your gear and buy Nikon and not have to deal with this issue if it really affects your work.
The thought has crossed my mind on several occasions
I am not sure if I agree, to my eyes DPP has just as much detail if not more, look at the stripes on the shirt. The difference in sat. is just the default profile, you can increase it.
I don\'t like LR rendering t all, it generates coarse grain with inferior fine detail IMO...
Here is one example that shows this.
If you are interested here is a field example ISO 3200, 5D3 with DPP, a result like this is just not possible with ACR.
It is DPP that is showing coarse, large-scale grain. ACR samples there have tight, film-like, naturally looking 1 pixel-sized grain of an even nature while DPP has that mix of smoothed out and tight \'grain\' and large blotch \'grain\' look. And what settings did you use for ACR pre-sharpening and what post sharpening did you use?
May 02, 2012 at 01:53 PM
Previous versions of skibum5's message #10599209 « 5d3 shadows much better than thought? »
