Dave, that's much better than mine...
On 4/22/06, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've posted this before, but here is a comparison between Neat Image,
> Noise Ninja & CS2's Reduce Noise filter on a ISO 3200 shot:
>
> <http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/Noise%20Test/Misc_008.htm>
>
> Dave S.
>
> On 4/22/06, Fernando Terrazzino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > Last week Boris asked me to see examples of some high ISO images with
> > and without being noise cleaned by NeatImage.
> > I've been busy, my apologies for the delay, but here they are:
> > http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/sets/72057594113578363/
> >
> > All of them where shot with an FA35/2, wideopen, istDS, processed to
> > TIFF (16 bits) with Capture One (noise reduction default parameters).
> > The "non-neatimaged" ones were converted to JPG with Infranview (max.
> > quality), and the other by NeatImage itself (max. quality).
> >
> > No idea about the validity of this test, just a real world situation
> > using my usual workflow (AKA you don't like it, run your own tests...)
> >
> > Here are the direct links to the large size images (available from the
> > top link as well)
> >
> > ISO 1600 - No NeatImage
> > http://static.flickr.com/50/132714644_d514f5cc9b_o.jpg
> >
> > ISO 1600 - Cleaned using NeatImage
> > http://static.flickr.com/45/132714645_939a783758_o.jpg
> >
> > ISO 3200 - No NeatImage
> > http://static.flickr.com/54/132714642_1fa11604a2_o.jpg
> >
> > ISO 3200 - cleaned with NeatImage
> > http://static.flickr.com/48/132714643_ec7c409e13_o.jpg
> >
> >
>
>
