Originally Posted by Chuck Lee
It matters what kind of camera I use? Isn't noise, noise? I have a Canon XT being converted to IR, and a new T1i (someday I'll get a 5D Mk II... but for now, I blow my money on lenses). Of course I shoot RAW. Convert to TIFF in DPP. Though I probably will start doing it in PS.
Originally Posted by Chuck Lee
I don't know what advantage (if any) there is in using a different RAW editor/converter instead of DPP or PS. Batch processing is fine, but I don't shoot so much that I need a program that is faster at batches. Irfanview? Really? Windows seems to do fine with thumbnails, and proof sheets went the way of the dodo, didn't they?
I hadn't heard of Neat Image before. Dunno... looks OK, but Noise Ninja and Topaz seem to be "bigger" names. They both have PS plug-ins, too. I think a lot of it probably comes down to ease-of-use/personal preference, and the results from testing it out. I'm sure some packages are better than others at different operations. I rarely shoot at high ISOs, so most of the noise I deal with is sensor artifacts (blown highlights, dark shadows, etc.) instead of high-gain.
Originally Posted by Chuck Lee
Well, I don't consider grain = noise. Grain is grain. Noise is unwanted. There's nothing inherently wrong with a grainy image, but when the graininess is different colors than the surrounding image, then it's noise. I've shot plenty of B/W where the grain was a desired part of the image. And given how smoothing/de-noising can posterize digital images, putting 'grain' back into the shot is a good thing. That's one thing that I'm looking for in de-noising software: the ability to de-noise without mucking up the image so much that I have to buy another plug-in to get rid of posterizing.
Originally Posted by Chuck Lee
You mean tooling with the histogram? There's only so much you can do with a single image. All HDR software does is automate the process of masking & layering multiple images taken at different exposures. Blown highlights or dead shadows in a single exposure are irretrievable, no matter how much you tool with the histogram curves. What I like about HDR is having the ability to capture the best parts of different exposures and put them together. Yeah, I'm not one for the "HDR look"--I mean, that has its uses, but tonemapping for me is about getting a sky that's not blown out when I'm trying to capture details in shadows. I'm on the fence between Photomatix & HDRTools because Photomatix lends itself to easily getting that "HDR look," but I don't want to fall into that trap. On the other hand, HDRTools has less control over tonemapping and the interface is a bit obtuse.
I'd stick with PS for HDR, but every comparison I've seen between PS's native HDR and any other third-party HDR software/plug-in makes PS look like garbage. Weird color artifacts, blown highlights, blur, softness, washed-out colors... the PS HDR image looks better than the E0V, but the third-party images all look better than the PS HDR. Particularly for anything blue--like sky or water, which is what I'd be using HDR for about 90% of the time.
I hope I didn't come off as dismissive of your suggestions. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts, but I guess I'm trying to solicit opinions about three things: 1) HDRTools or Photomatix? 2) Noise Ninja or DeNoise? 3) any other third-party/plug-ins that I shouldn't overlook? Adjust by Topaz does HDR, and I thought they had something in Adjust or Simplify that could add film grain--or maybe I'm thinking of another package. In any case, I'm stumped to think of anything outside of de-noising, HDR, and/or some other effect (like Clean 2) that would be terribly beneficial for someone like me who does primarily outdoors/landscape/nature photography... and as soon as I get my next lens, macro!
Originally Posted by Madison
That SilverEfex looks good. I miss shooting B/W film, and that could really open up a lot of possibilities--particularly with the different film emulation profiles. Though trying to find how to puchase with an academic discount ended me up looking at German retailers [:O] .
And after reading what you said about Noiseware, I took another look--I really like how it seems to save all the details of a shot while removing the noise. But the pricing was intimidating... until I figured out where they were hiding their academic pricing!!! I'm not a huge fan of their Portraiture examples (ahh, and here was the Real Grain I had seen before!), but getting the full suite for $90 is a great deal.
Now maybe it's 1) Noiseware vs. Topaz DeNoise....




Reply With Quote