My experience with DXO vs. DPP vs. no noise reduction

[William]

@Bryan in your shots I think DPP looks better, but softer. Unfortunately that

[freelanceshots]

Anyone have a RAW image file of a good, well composed image that has noise issues that we can use? We seem to have a variety of people who have access to different software so I think it would be fun to see the differences. I will look into the topaz software for $80.00 but I will leave that up to someone else to use it. I will look for a noisy image of mine and see what I can come up with.

[Fast Glass]

it looks like DXO is the second one in your set.

Ding ding ding, we have a winner![]


At Bryan.


I used 4 on the luminance and 20 (max) on the crominance. I tried tweeking it some more but it just became a trade off between how sharp to how much noise, any sharper the noise would be much higher and any more NR itwouldbe much softer.


Interesting thread and even more how it got started[]


John.

[neuroanatomist]

For me, it's about more than just noise. I tried Noise Ninja, and found it similar to DxO (and better than DPP and PS) for what it does. I haven't tried Topaz. However, DxO is a complete package and it's lens corrections are better than those available with ACR.


Here's an example of multiple corrections needed, noise, sharpness, and especially geometry:


[img]/cfs-file.ashx/__key/CommunityServer-Components-UserFiles/00-00-00-35-15/Art-Appreciation-Uncorrected.JPG[/img]

[Fast Glass]

Thats exactly why I bought it, coming from DPP it was a no brainer. Plus I got the standard version on sale $100, and the Elite was $200. They have sale every year if your interested.


John.

[MikeG2012]

Any of you guys have experience with the NIK noise reduction software? I

[freelanceshots]

I'm liking the DXO pro the more I use it. I don't use all the features but I like the noise reduction and chromatic aberration features. Wish they offered a basic no thrills version for around 30 bucks.

[William]

(Post error - sorry)