[CCRII]

HOLY MOLEY!!! NEAT IMAGE ROCKS!!! I cannot believe how well it works! I was skeptical but not anymore. I had a 800 ISO Image that was great because it was very close and pretty sharp but extremely noisy. Neat image cleaned it right up and I now have a masterpiece!!!!!!! Thanks for the suggestions guys!

[mike from ebbw]

I use it all the time.Brilliant isnt it!

[Keith Reeder]

Yep, it's very good.

I often run pictures through NE even if noise isn't an issue, because it does a very good job of blurring backgrounds without any observable impact on feather detail etc.

It's an instant DOF effect, and can really add to the separation between bird and background.

It makes for nice small image file sizes too, without any unnecessary mucking about.

[Boy George]

Originally Posted by mike from ebbw

I use it all the time.Brilliant isnt it!

Anyone have any views on how it compares with "Picture Cooler"?

Adrian

[Clive Watson]

Quick question for the three of you above who rave about Neat Image - is that the free version or the one you have to pay for (yes, I know this overlaps a bit with a thread on the Photoshop etc.. subforum)

[CCRII]

Originally Posted by Clive Watson

Quick question for the three of you above who rave about Neat Image - is that the free version or the one you have to pay for (yes, I know this overlaps a bit with a thread on the Photoshop etc.. subforum)

I have been using the free version test driving it a bit. I think I am going to buy it though. It does amazing things with high ISO photographs or even slightly out of focus images. It has made some real tossers into pleaser's.

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by Boy George

Anyone have any views on how it compares with "Picture Cooler"?

Adrian

I prefer Neat Image to Picture Cooler myself. Recently I have been using Noise Nija and I am getting to like it very much.
Just my opinion I suspect you may get different views.

[mike from ebbw]

Originally Posted by Clive Watson

Quick question for the three of you above who rave about Neat Image - is that the free version or the one you have to pay for (yes, I know this overlaps a bit with a thread on the Photoshop etc.. subforum)

Hi Clive.Yes I use the free version.As it will only do files of a limited size you would need the full version to filter full size files.It is ideal for posting shots on the net though.

[a.dancy]

Certainly seems like NE is the bee's knees. However I deleted my free issue. I did not want that yellow flower stuck in the middle of my screen.

[Tim Taylor]

I paid for the full version which integrates pretty seamlessly into Photoshop CS2. I wouldn't be without it.

[canonman77]

when you pay for the full version to get the license, do you have to keep upgrading or updating it at all, or is it just one payment & off you go. I have just got the demo & It wont do files above 1024x1024. If I got the full version am I correct Inthinking that It will do these files above 1024x1024.

[Tim Taylor]

Prompted by your post, I just upgraded from Neat Image 5.8 pro+ to 5.9 pro+. No charge for the upgrade. I see I bought my original license in 2006 and I don't think I've had to pay at any stage since although I could be mistaken.

With the edition I have, it easily handles full size files (tiff converted from RAW) from my 30D. In addition I get the standalone version and the photoshop plugin.

[nsclayton]

I have seen Neat Image mentioned for some time and I even downloaded it and have it as a plugin to my CS3 but until this thread have never actually used it, I am amazed how good it is and wish I had tried it earlier. It removes the noise from the background and doesn't touch the subject in the forground. I am so impressed I have been moved to show the following example to show non users what they are missing, I am at present only using the free download. The top part of the image is before and the bottom after Neat Image.

http://www.pbase.com/nickclayton/image/105550963

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by nsclayton

It removes the noise from the background and doesn't touch the subject in the forground

Are you using a layer mask? if not then it will also remove noise from the suject as well I think.

[nsclayton]

Originally Posted by Roy C

Are you using a layer mask? if not then it will also remove noise from the suject as well I think.

Hi Roy

I'm quite new to neat image but what I can gather from the few images I have used it on is that the noise which is only in the out of focus background with the images I have used it on is dealt with (it seems to give a sort of Gaussian blur effect), but the foreground subject which doesn't have noise is uneffected, I haven’t used a layer mask, neat image seems to be able to distinguish between foreground detail and background noise, very clever.

Thanks
Nick

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by nsclayton

Hi Roy

I'm quite new to neat image but what I can gather from the few images I have used it on is that the noise which is only in the out of focus background with the images I have used it on is dealt with (it seems to give a sort of Gaussian blur effect), but the foreground subject which doesn't have noise is uneffected, I haven’t used a layer mask, neat image seems to be able to distinguish between foreground detail and background noise, very clever.

Thanks
Nick

I have been using NI for years Nick and if you are not using a layer mask then any noise reduction will apply to the whole image - I suspect that because noise tends to show up more on the background then you are thinking that NR it is not being applied to applied to the bird, but it is.
Next time you run NI look very carefully at the fine detail on the bird before and after you run it and you will see fine detail being lost (this is easily checked on your CS3 by applying the NR and then going into EDIT > Fade )

This is one of the reasons why I prefer Noise Ninja because it has a built-in mask - I sometimes sample the image and then paint the mask over the bird before running the NR. That way the NR will not apply to the bird.

Having said that I very often do not use NR software at all, preferring to use the CS blur tool on the background if needed

P.S. I am only pointing this out Nick because indiscriminate use of Noise reduction software can ruin a good image.

[nsclayton]

Thanks Roy I appreciate your advise and you are obviously more experienced at using noise reduction software than myself, although on the before \ after shortcut that I previously posted and I repeat below I cant see where the foreground has been effected but you can see the noise reduction on the background, or is it the foreground has been effected but my eyes cant make it out?

http://www.pbase.com/nickclayton/image/105550963

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by nsclayton

Thanks Roy I appreciate your advise and you are obviously more experienced at using noise reduction software than myself, although on the before \ after shortcut that I previously posted and I repeat below I cant see where the foreground has been effected but you can see the noise reduction on the background, or is it the foreground has been effected but my eyes cant make it out?

http://i.pbase.com/o2/99/782399/1/10...Comparison.jpg

Hi Nick, cannot get into your pbase files - get a forbidden notice saying I do not have permission.

[nsclayton]

Sorry Roy, does this link work, please could someone tell me how to attach a photo to a forum post rather than having to add a link.

http://www.pbase.com/nickclayton/image/105550963

[BobCesme]

Roy c QUOTE:~"This is one of the reasons why I prefer Noise Ninja because it has a built-in mask - I sometimes sample the image and then paint the mask over the bird before running the NR. That way the NR will not apply to the bird.
Having said that I very often do not use NR software at all, preferring to use the CS blur tool on the background if needed."



I have also been using Noise Ninja for some years now,and agree totally with Roy,but its horses for courses I suppose.

[Boy George]

Does anyone have a view on using sharpening within a Noise Reduction programme as opposed to doing it later, which seems to be the recommended thing to do, in say PS, after other processes such as saturation, cropping, brightness, contrast etc? I ask because both Picture Cooler and Neat Image have sharpening facilities and the NI people say that it should in any case be done after Luminance and Noise Reduction and that their running order within NI does place it last. How do others find the two ways compare please.

Adrian

[Roy C]

Originally Posted by Boy George

Does anyone have a view on using sharpening within a Noise Reduction programme as opposed to doing it later, which seems to be the recommended thing to do, in say PS, after other processes such as saturation, cropping, brightness, contrast etc? I ask because both Picture Cooler and Neat Image have sharpening facilities and the NI people say that it should in any case be done after Luminance and Noise Reduction and that their running order within NI does place it last. How do others find the two ways compare please.

Adrian

Hi Adrian, I use sharpening in CS2 after Noise reduction because I only sharpen the Luminance channel. Must admit I have never tried sharpening from within a noise reduction prog.

[IanF]

Originally Posted by Boy George

Anyone have any views on how it compares with "Picture Cooler"?

Adrian

A good while back I moved from Neat Image to use Picturecooler. I rarely use anything else. I did try Noise Ninja for a while but didn't like the layout so much.

I like everything to be on one screen with the effects of adjustment seen straight away.

Neat Image is much more adjustable/customiseable but for web images Picturecooler is so much quicker and simpler to use - open a photo adjust sliders and save image!

Like most things in life - each to their own!

[Boy George]

Originally Posted by Roy C

Hi Adrian, I use sharpening in CS2 after Noise reduction because I only sharpen the Luminance channel. Must admit I have never tried sharpening from within a noise reduction prog.

Thanks for your reply Roy.

Could you perhaps explain "I only sharpen the Luminance channel" and the thinking behind it? It's a new one on me. I only have PS Elements 3, so I suspect that in any case it would not be a facility available to me in what is a relatively basic toolkit, but the more one finds out about these things from folk who have tried and tested them, the better. In any case, it may well help other readers.

Adrian

[Marcus Conway - ebirder]

Interestingly I sharpen in CS3 before running through neat image. I see others are running this the other way. May be worth doing some trials.