I've posted this before, but here is a comparison between Neat Image, Noise Ninja & CS2's Reduce Noise filter on a ISO 3200 shot:
<http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/Misc/Noise%20Test/Misc_008.htm> Dave S. On 4/22/06, Fernando Terrazzino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > Last week Boris asked me to see examples of some high ISO images with > and without being noise cleaned by NeatImage. > I've been busy, my apologies for the delay, but here they are: > http://www.flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/sets/72057594113578363/ > > All of them where shot with an FA35/2, wideopen, istDS, processed to > TIFF (16 bits) with Capture One (noise reduction default parameters). > The "non-neatimaged" ones were converted to JPG with Infranview (max. > quality), and the other by NeatImage itself (max. quality). > > No idea about the validity of this test, just a real world situation > using my usual workflow (AKA you don't like it, run your own tests...) > > Here are the direct links to the large size images (available from the > top link as well) > > ISO 1600 - No NeatImage > http://static.flickr.com/50/132714644_d514f5cc9b_o.jpg > > ISO 1600 - Cleaned using NeatImage > http://static.flickr.com/45/132714645_939a783758_o.jpg > > ISO 3200 - No NeatImage > http://static.flickr.com/54/132714642_1fa11604a2_o.jpg > > ISO 3200 - cleaned with NeatImage > http://static.flickr.com/48/132714643_ec7c409e13_o.jpg > >
