Neat Image question - standalone or Photoshop plug in? (1 Viewer)

What is the benefit of getting the plug-in version (it's about twice as much in cost). I have Photoshop Elements 7 at home.

I think it is worth the extra. I use it as a filter in my photoshop and everything can be done in one place. It's not like it is a yearly fee. Only a one time fee and tech help is available at all times.

I have the standalone version and other than having 2 programmes open at the same time I don't have any problems. I tend to use it after any tweaking is done in PS anyway so I usually use it with batches of images rather than induvidually.

If it's half the price for the standalone, where's the dilema???

I started off using NI as a stand-alone, but there's an awful lot to recommend the plug-in from an efficient workflow point of view.

Applying NR processing from within PS, PSP or PSP doesn't necessarily mean a better end result, but keeping the entire PP process in one place strikes me as a more efficient use of my time, and (this matters to me) it means that the entire process from opening the converted file to producing the finished result can be performed in one place, in real time.

It also means that selective NR (and sharpening) can be applied to an image by use of (in my case) Duplicate Layers and the Eraser brush. I can't do without that ability.

But no, there's no need to use NI as a plug-in.

On the wider issue of NR though - I've been a fan of NI for years now, and it is very good: but it has been entirely replaced in my affections and workflow by Topaz Denoise 5, which is unquestionably capable of better results - and in a far more straightforward way - than NI (or Noise Ninja, which I also own).