Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

cause its a pimped notebook chip. > > The best (virtual) lens/camera upgrade in years! > > Toine > > On Fri, 21 Apr 2023, 21:22 Paul Stenquist, > wrote: > > > Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest > > version of ACR that is said to u

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

s said to use SI for noise reduction. It does a very > nice job. Still trying to decide if it looks natural, but it can certainly > save a noisy shot. > > Paul > -- > %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List > To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRI

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction Photos

While packing up I ran across a Nikon "Film Camera" book. On 4/25/2023 4:00 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: There's a thread on the RangeFinder Forum in which the topic of Nikon F and F2 cameras is being discussed. It made me nostalgic for my old Nikon F Photomic FTn, which I owned and lived

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction Photos

Classic beauty. Dan Matyola *https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery * On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 4:00 PM Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > There's a thread on the RangeFinder Forum in which the topic of Nikon F > and F2 cameras is being discussed. It made me

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction Photos

Well, I set all of my cameras other than the iPhone to raw-only format output so I'm hardly one to complain about the size of a raw file. I use the Moment camera app on the iPhone specifically to allow use of raw format files with the 1x and 2x cameras (the 0.5x camera does not support

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction Photos

Very impressive. I guess the DNG files are much bigger than a jpg, but with noise recovery like this on offer it would be tempting to keep the output set to DNG. I read somewhere that jpgs may be supported by lightroom's denoise function in the future. Alastair On Wed, 26 Apr 2023, 8:00 am

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction Photos

There's a thread on the RangeFinder Forum in which the topic of Nikon F and F2 cameras is being discussed. It made me nostalgic for my old Nikon F Photomic FTn, which I owned and lived with constantly from 1969 to about 1976 or so. Which drew me to thinking about the early Nikon F plain prism

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

On 4/22/2023 6:12 PM, Larry Colen wrote: On Apr 22, 2023, at 2:53 PM, Comcast wrote: Of course. But it’s also important to note that Adobe doesn’t hold one’s files for ransom. Just the ability to access the work that you’ve done, and make updates later. For people who use photoshop

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

ll the extra features I need such >as focus stacking, panorama, HDR and has excellent tools for sharpening and >noise reduction. However, many of my lenses are not in the LR database. It >appears that Adobe is making these days a lot of progress steps compared to >competition with subject rec

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction Photos

rthday party. > > I basically did the processing the day before I moved, so I just narrowed > the sets down to “proof” level. One of my final steps was to do a mass > application of noise reduction. Some photos (wide angle) were taken with > the K-1, the tighter shots were t

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

stacking, panorama, HDR and has excellent tools for sharpening and noise reduction. However, many of my lenses are not in the LR database. It appears that Adobe is making these days a lot of progress steps compared to competition with subject recognition, improved noise reduction and now Firefly AI

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction Photos

I used the latest LRC to process a bunch of photos I did of a friend’s CD release/birthday party. I basically did the processing the day before I moved, so I just narrowed the sets down to “proof” level. One of my final steps was to do a mass application of noise reduction. Some photos (wide

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction Photos

PM, Bill wrote: > > I found a K5 file shot at ISO 51200. I doubt very much if I had in camera > noise reduction turned on. > The first image is the raw file at whatever defaults Lightroom opened it > with. > The second is with Denoise used, no other changes. > I left a small am

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

> On Apr 22, 2023, at 3:12 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > ... > For people who use photoshop $10/month is a great deal. For people who only > use lightroom, it’s not such a good deal, as much or more as we were paying > for annual upgrades, and we simply lose the ability to continue using an >

ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction Photos

I found a K5 file shot at ISO 51200. I doubt very much if I had in camera noise reduction turned on. The first image is the raw file at whatever defaults Lightroom opened it with. The second is with Denoise used, no other changes. I left a small amount of noise in to give the skin some texture

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 10:52 AM Comcast wrote: > I don’t know what “ransomware” is, but photoshop online has been a great > deal. It’s installed on my box and faster than the last CC version. It > costs ten bucks a month and includes bridge, ACR, photoshop, Lightroom and > more. It upgrades

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

> On Apr 22, 2023, at 12:09 PM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote: > > Am 22.04.23 um 18:51 schrieb Comcast: >> I don’t know what “ransomware” is, but photoshop online has been a great >> deal. It’s installed on my box and faster than the last CC version. It costs >> ten bucks a month and includes

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Sounds reasonable. I have never used Lightroom for more than a few minutes, so I’m not aware of it’s peculiarities. Paul > On Apr 22, 2023, at 6:12 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > >  > >> On Apr 22, 2023, at 2:53 PM, Comcast wrote: >> >> Of course. But it’s also important to note that Adobe

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

> On Apr 22, 2023, at 2:53 PM, Comcast wrote: > > Of course. But it’s also important to note that Adobe doesn’t hold one’s > files for ransom. Just the ability to access the work that you’ve done, and make updates later. For people who use photoshop $10/month is a great deal. For people

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Of course. But it’s also important to note that Adobe doesn’t hold one’s files for ransom. Paul > On Apr 22, 2023, at 4:09 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > It seems very easy for people to forget that what works, or doesn’t work, > for them is not a universal answer. > > >> On Apr 22, 2023,

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

It seems very easy for people to forget that what works, or doesn’t work, for them is not a universal answer. > On Apr 22, 2023, at 12:11 PM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote: > > Am 22.04.23 um 20:53 schrieb Godfrey DiGiorgi: > >> Anyway, I continue to be glad it's working well for you. It really

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

I don’t use Lightroom, but I know the Adobe photo package comes with a cloud version and an installed version. I use ACR and photoshop, save all my pics on two external drives and back them up on Dropbox. Paul > On Apr 22, 2023, at 3:09 PM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote: > > Am 22.04.23 um 18:51

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Am 22.04.23 um 20:53 schrieb Godfrey DiGiorgi: Anyway, I continue to be glad it's working well for you. It really doesn't matter what sort of software you use as long as you're happy with it and it gets the job you want done properly. :) Amen to that. Ralf -- Ralf R. Radermacher -

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Am 22.04.23 um 18:51 schrieb Comcast: I don’t know what “ransomware” is, but photoshop online has been a great deal. It’s installed on my box and faster than the last CC version. It costs ten bucks a month and includes bridge, ACR, photoshop, Lightroom and more. It upgrades automatically so I

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

> On Apr 22, 2023, at 8:29 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote: > > Am 22.04.23 um 16:48 schrieb Godfrey DiGiorgi: >> Ralf, I'm glad ON1 is working so well for you. >> >> I tested it pretty thoroughly some time back and found that it was near to >> unusable for my work. It seems to never stop

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

aight shot of the side of her... > > ann > >> On 4/22/2023 5:31 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote: >>> Am 21.04.23 um 21:22 schrieb Paul Stenquist: >>> >>> Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest >>> version of ACR that i

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Am 22.04.23 um 16:48 schrieb Godfrey DiGiorgi: Ralf, I'm glad ON1 is working so well for you. I tested it pretty thoroughly some time back and found that it was near to unusable for my work. It seems to never stop processing and be finished with a job, no matter how small the number of files

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Yes and no.  I'm remembering an older shot I think, without the people on the beach.. and yes I mixed up the names .. the people on the beach and the light house make the shot for me that I was confused about...  I just generally find straight shots of the side of a large modern day ship

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

are. > On Apr 22, 2023, at 2:31 AM, Ralf R Radermacher wrote: > > Am 21.04.23 um 21:22 schrieb Paul Stenquist: > >> Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest >> version of ACR that is said to use SI for noise reduction. It does a very >> ni

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

The latest update of LR Classic incorporates this "AI noise reduction" as well. I'll have to go backwards in time to find some older photos that need it, that I have already processed in older versions of LR and saved as TIFFs, so see what difference it makes. In general, none of

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

The latest update of LR Classic incorporates this "AI noise reduction" as well. I'll have to go backwards in time to find some older photos that need it, that I have already processed in older versions of LR and saved as TIFFs, so see what difference it makes. In general, none of

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Am 22.04.23 um 15:56 schrieb ann sanfedele: I"m guessing ON1 is something I can't afford :-( The regular price for a perpetual license is around 90 dollars but it drops as low as fifty-odd towards the end of the year. I have sooo many slides..  LIke this shot of the Pride of Bruges .. more

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

This one : https://www.fotocommunity.com/photo/pride-of-bruges-fotoralfbe/45950975 maybe your email software stripped what I was replying to? ann On 4/22/2023 10:01 AM, Daniel J. Matyola wrote: "LIke this shot of the Pride of Bruges" Which shot? Dan Matyola

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

"LIke this shot of the Pride of Bruges " Which shot? Dan Matyola *https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery * -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To unsubscribe send an email to pdml-le...@pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

04.23 um 21:22 schrieb Paul Stenquist: Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest version of ACR that is said to use SI for noise reduction. It does a very nice job. Still trying to decide if it looks natural, but it can certainly save a noisy shot. All major

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Am 21.04.23 um 21:22 schrieb Paul Stenquist: Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest version of ACR that is said to use SI for noise reduction. It does a very nice job. Still trying to decide if it looks natural, but it can certainly save a noisy shot. All

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 7:09 PM Comcast wrote: > Do you like the results? > > Paul > Yes, very much. I don't shoot a lot of high ISO, but this will be a great tool for those who do. I'll post a comparison image tomorrow at some point. bill -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List To

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

enoise is recreating some weird looking noise. >>> >>> Toine >>> >>>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 at 21:22, Paul Stenquist >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest >>>>

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

K1 files. bill On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 2:37 PM Comcast wrote: > My computer is a 2015 iMac, but it has a 4 GHz i7 4-core. So while it’s > not as fast as today’s best, it handles the ACR noise reduction in about a > minute on a 33 MH dng. > > Paul > > > On Apr 21, 2023,

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

and get usable results. bill On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 1:22 PM Paul Stenquist wrote: > Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest > version of ACR that is said to use SI for noise reduction. It does a very > nice job. Still trying to decide if it looks natural, b

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

My computer is a 2015 iMac, but it has a 4 GHz i7 4-core. So while it’s not as fast as today’s best, it handles the ACR noise reduction in about a minute on a 33 MH dng. Paul > On Apr 21, 2023, at 4:08 PM, Toine wrote: > > Yes, I tried it. It does a very good job and a no brainer

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

recreating some weird looking noise. > > Toine > > On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 at 21:22, Paul Stenquist > wrote: > >> Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest >> version of ACR that is said to use SI for noise reduction. It does a very >> n

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Denoise is recreating some weird looking noise. Toine On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 at 21:22, Paul Stenquist wrote: > Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest > version of ACR that is said to use SI for noise reduction. It does a very > nice job. Still trying

Re: ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

It uses AI for noise reduction, not SI. Fat finger typo. > On Apr 21, 2023, at 3:22 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: > > Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest version > of ACR that is said to use SI for noise reduction. It does a very nice job. &g

ACR Enhanced Noise Reduction

Has anyone else on the list tried this? It’s a function in the latest version of ACR that is said to use SI for noise reduction. It does a very nice job. Still trying to decide if it looks natural, but it can certainly save a noisy shot. Paul -- %(real_name)s Pentax-Discuss Mail List

Re: K3-iii noise reduction always on

Am 29.04.21 um 19:33 schrieb Larry Colen: I found this thread discussing how even when noise reduction is turned off, the K3-iii demonstrates that NR is being applied. Pentax have a history of messing around with noise reduction. When the K-7 first came on the market, its noise reduction per

Re: K3-iii noise reduction always on

On 4/29/2021 11:33 AM, Larry Colen wrote: I found this thread discussing how even when noise reduction is turned off, the K3-iii demonstrates that NR is being applied. I haven’t delved deeply into the math> https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4571492 It also says, that it manages to

K3-iii noise reduction always on

I found this thread discussing how even when noise reduction is turned off, the K3-iii demonstrates that NR is being applied. I haven’t delved deeply into the math> https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4571492 It also says, that it manages to do this without a loss of det

Re: K-1 noise reduction

Dunno. I just set it to "auto" and have no noise problems. Ignorance is bliss. Paul via phone > On Jun 8, 2016, at 7:23 PM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote: > > On page 50 of the K-1 manual (the pdf anyways) there is a menu for setting > noise reduction

K-1 noise reduction

On page 50 of the K-1 manual (the pdf anyways) there is a menu for setting noise reduction at various ISO sensitivities. Is that in the raw file, or just the JPEG? -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: In-body lens aberration correction, noise reduction etc. Yes or No?

allow you to disable the lens corrections. Nor should you, because such cameras and lenses are designed to be used with lens correction as part of the total imaging system and won't perform as well without it. Noise reduction in-camera usually means two things: - "Long exposure nois

Re: In-body lens aberration correction, noise reduction etc. Yes or No?

the lens corrections. > Nor should you, because such cameras and lenses are designed to be used with > lens correction as part of the total imaging system and won't perform as well > without it. > > Noise reduction in-camera usually means two things: > > - "Long e

Re: In-body lens aberration correction, noise reduction etc. Yes or No?

with lens correction as part of the total imaging system and won't perform as well without it. Noise reduction in-camera usually means two things: - "Long exposure noise reduction" is most typically dark frame subtraction where beyond a certain exposure length the camera makes th

Re: In-body lens aberration correction, noise reduction etc. Yes or No?

I think you have it right. I don't know if I turned those corrections off, but I figure since I shoot RAW it doesn't matter. I think noise reduction affects RAW but not sure. I leave it on "auto." I think the Pentax engineers are smarter than me. Paul via phone > On May 14, 201

In-body lens aberration correction, noise reduction etc. Yes or No?

A couple of days ago Bob Sullivan said this: > Yes, the K-1 came with lens corrections turned on, but it doesn't seem > to effect processing time in camera. Then yesterday in his eNewsletter Tim Grey strongly advocated for the use of in-camera noise reduction for long exposures. Well, e

Noise reduction

I just installed my new passively-cooled (no fan) video card. Silence *is* golden! -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the

Re: Noise reduction

Ice blocks? Alan C -- From: Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 9:31 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Noise reduction I just installed my new passively-cooled (no fan) video card. Silence

Re: Noise reduction

I just crank the music over the ambient noise. :) On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:31 PM, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote: I just installed my new passively-cooled (no fan) video card. Silence *is* golden! -- Mark Roberts - Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML

Re: Noise reduction

Also, come with your golden  years.   Jack - Original Message - From: Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Cc: Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 12:31 PM Subject: Noise reduction I just installed my new passively-cooled (no fan) video card

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On 1/12/2011 3:58 AM, Christine Nielsen wrote: Thank you, Boris... She's quite pleased with herself, hasn't stopped grinning yet. Another vote of confidence for the Adobe NR...! I'm thinking a software upgrade is in order for me... at the very least. ;) I concur. Being on a Adobe LR software

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On Jan 11, 2011, at 20:09, Christine Nielsen wrote: I have a confession to make: I think I'm not willing to manual focus. Is that bad? I've about reached that point. I cannot make myself get rid of my A-28, A-50 1.7, or M-40... but I don't really use them much, either. The A-50,

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

Once upon a time you always had to MF so you got really good at it. Now you will never be as practiced as they were in Ye Olde Days. Good enough for flowers and landscapes, maybe not for gymnasts. On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 9:09 PM, Christine Nielsen ch...@inielsen.net wrote: I have a confession

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On Jan 13, 2011, at 1:32 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote: Once upon a time you always had to MF so you got really good at it. Now you will never be as practiced as they were in Ye Olde Days. Good enough for flowers and landscapes, maybe not for gymnasts. Either that, or you just got a lot more

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On Jan 10, 2011, at 7:51 PM, Christine Nielsen wrote: Aside from a 50 1.4, which is substantially faster than your 50-135 but not long enough for the most part, anything faster than the lens you're using would have to be a prime, and an expensive one at that. And you won't have the

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On 11-01-10 10:25 PM, Christine Nielsen wrote: On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Bruce Walkerbruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote: Judging from the EXIF data it looks like these shots were taken as JPEGs and posted pretty much without any further processing. Is that right? That's odd... I wonder what

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

If you want fast, there is always the PK-A 50/1.2 . . . My vote: a. Stick with what you have for a meet or two. Even better, take a bunch of photos at practice sessions; if experiments don't work out, it won't be quite as painful as missing out on a great shot during competition. Evaluate what

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

Wow, Stan, another K7, two K5's, a couple of fast primes and the 50-135. Would you mind talking to my spouse sometime? I just can't make it sound this reasonable. On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Stan Halpin s...@stans-photography.info wrote: If you want fast, there is always the PK-A 50/1.2 .

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

Actually, with less than that kit budget Christine could probably afford to hire contractors to install much brighter lighting in the gymnasium. :-) -bmw On 11-01-11 6:06 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote: Wow, Stan, another K7, two K5's, a couple of fast primes and the 50-135. Would you mind

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

Or, she could get one of these, with an IR filter over an off camera flash: http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/digital_cameras/is/finepix_is1/index.html On Jan 11, 2011, at 4:02 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: Actually, with less than that kit budget Christine could probably afford to hire

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

My impression has been that, when POCKing (Photos Of Cute Kids), budget is of no concern. No direct experience myself. stan On Jan 11, 2011, at 6:02 PM, Bruce Walker wrote: Actually, with less than that kit budget Christine could probably afford to hire contractors to install much brighter

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

longing... 1) a k-5?  (for all the obvious reasons) 2) faster lens?  (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) What do you think? 1. K-5 will probably help you. I cannot say

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

I have a confession to make: I think I'm not willing to manual focus. Is that bad? Or, at least not exclusively... I have an old A50/2 that came on my k1000... and a vivitar 70-210 (the good one, even!)... and while I like the results of these lenses, I seldom use them. I throw the 50 on only

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

Interesting... for some reason, flickr is flaky in firefox, and I rarely can get to that actions drop-down... I have to switch to safari to see it... so, I only seldom see my exif data on flickr... On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 5:25 AM, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On 11-01-10 10:25 PM,

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

Stan, I like the way you think. Especially the part about buying 2 k-5s and keeping the k-7. And the part about the output media... I'll definitely try some prints before I buy more hardware. That's something I need to do more of anyway, with all the POCKing I do... :) -c On Tue, Jan 11, 2011

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On Jan 11, 2011, at 6:22 PM, Christine Nielsen wrote: Stan, I like the way you think. Especially the part about buying 2 k-5s and keeping the k-7. And the part about the output media... I'll definitely try some prints before I buy more hardware. That's something I need to do more of

My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

iso (or wider apertures) could get me faster shutter speed, which would also improve matters. So, I'm trying to decide where to focus my longing... 1) a k-5? (for all the obvious reasons) 2) faster lens? (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On Jan 10, 2011, at 9:46 AM, Christine Nielsen wrote: So... yesterday, my daughter competed in her first gymnastics meet. And (please pardon the bragging..), she did very well. Yes, she's got form nailed -- at such an early age. Cool Well enough, that I think there just might be many more

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

Christine - The improvement in the noise reduction function between CS4 and CS5 is huge. So much so, that many people will find additional noise reduction software unnecessary. The upgrade looks like the least expensive and most cost effective first step on your list. In addition

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

? (for all the obvious reasons) 2) faster lens? (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) What do you think? FWIW, I've considered asking her to switch sports. But it wouldn't help

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

Thanks -- on both counts. She works hard at it, so it was nice to see her do well. I practice a lot, too... but photography isn't as effective on the abs as gymnastics... :) -c On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Eric Weir eew...@bellsouth.net wrote: On Jan 10, 2011, at 9:46 AM, Christine

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

That's interesting -- thanks for the feedback, George. I'll look into it. On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:43 AM, George Sinos gsi...@gmail.com wrote: Christine - The improvement in the noise reduction function between CS4 and CS5 is huge.  So much so, that many people will find additional noise

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) What do you think? FWIW, I've considered asking her to switch sports.  But it wouldn't help much -- she also plays hockey...  :) Thanks, all, -c

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

also improve matters. So, I'm trying to decide where to focus my longing... 1) a k-5?  (for all the obvious reasons) 2) faster lens?  (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) What

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) What do you think? FWIW, I've considered asking her to switch sports.  But it wouldn't help much -- she also plays hockey...  :) Thanks, all, -c -- Where's the Kaboom

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

longing... 1) a k-5?  (for all the obvious reasons) 2) faster lens?  (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) What do you think? FWIW, I've considered asking her to switch sports

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

. Compared to film, noise was not a problem for you, but I like Lightroom. I wonder: is Lightroom's NR any different from that contained in cs5...? -c -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

Very cute. She's obviously a wonderful child and an excellent excuse to upgrade your camera. ;-) On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 12:58 PM, Christine Nielsen ch...@inielsen.net wrote: . Compared to film, noise was not a problem for you, but I like Lightroom. I wonder:  is Lightroom's NR any

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

2011/1/10 Christine Nielsen ch...@inielsen.net: So, I'm trying to decide where to focus my longing... 1) a k-5?  (for all the obvious reasons) 2) faster lens?  (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

(or wider apertures) could get me faster shutter speed, which would also improve matters. So, I'm trying to decide where to focus my longing... 1) a k-5?  (for all the obvious reasons) 2) faster lens?  (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On Jan 10, 2011, at 9:04 AM, Christine Nielsen wrote: Thanks -- on both counts. She works hard at it, so it was nice to see her do well. I practice a lot, too... but photography isn't as effective on the abs as gymnastics... In that case you should get a 645D. -- Larry Colen

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

The develop module in Lightroom 3 uses the same code as Adobe Camera Raw in CS5, so yes, the NR is the same. gs George Sinos gsi...@gmail.com www.georgesphotos.net On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:58 AM, Christine Nielsen ch...@inielsen.net wrote: . Compared to film, noise was

RE: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

. And even higher iso (or wider apertures) could get me faster shutter speed, which would also improve matters. So, I'm trying to decide where to focus my longing... 1) a k-5? (for all the obvious reasons) 2) faster lens? (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

, where people are moving all over the mat, has helped me to appreciate zoom lenses. 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) This might be the most cost effective solution, because it'll improve any shot that you've taken so far

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

?  (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) What do you think? FWIW, I've considered asking her to switch sports.  But it wouldn't help much -- she also plays hockey...  :) Thanks

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

lens? (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) What do you think? FWIW, I've considered asking her to switch sports. But it wouldn't help much -- she also plays hockey

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) Your results are much better than reasonable, I'd say, Christine. They are very, very good indeed! Judging from the EXIF data it looks like these shots were taken as JPEGs and posted

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

?  (most shots are within the 50-85mm range) 3) noise reduction software? (I only have what's available in ACR/cs4... open to suggestions, thoughts on this) What do you think? FWIW, I've considered asking her to switch sports.  But it wouldn't help much -- she also plays hockey...  :) Thanks

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com wrote: Very cute.  She's obviously a wonderful child and an excellent excuse to upgrade your camera.  ;-) Indeed! I'll definitely thank her if/when that happens! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 1:52 PM, eckinator eckina...@gmail.com wrote: oh, and great pics, I forgot to say. admire her discipline and diligence, too (or she wouldn't be where she is in her sport) and the picture of her on the podium with the Kamik boots is cute - was it that cold there? be

Re: My Little Gymnast, OR: Why I Might Need a K-5, OR: Better Noise Reduction Software

On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 2:11 PM, Bob W p...@web-options.com wrote: that's a really nice set of well-executed pictures. It doesn't look as though you had much of a problem. However, to answer your question, I think you should go for a faster lens and try to avoid problems rather than fixing

  1   2   3   >