NeatImage was the first thing I tried, it improves but I was not totally
happy about the result, it left a trace of pattern when you look for it.
Stronger NR may eliminate the pattern but I hate the lost of details and
artificial look. I once do NI on almost all digital images but I found it
look too smooth to my taste so later when I really need NI I leave some
noise.
Mask? what is mask, why I need that much work when other cheaper DSLRs don't
require it.
C.H.Ling
----- Original Message -----
From: "Moose"
> C.H.Ling wrote:
>> When you shot RAW and push the exposure to near 1 stop you will see it.
>> Here is an example:
>>
>> http://www.accura.com.hk/temp/IMG_7622.CR2 (8MB)
>>
>
> I can understand your frustration.
>
> I appreciate all the effort you have gone to to give me more reasons to
> put off any rash purchase to replace my 5D. ;-)
>
> Still, it doesn't seem insurmountable. NeatImage does quite a nice job
> of eliminating the banding noise.
> <http://www.moosemystic.net/Gallery/Others/CHLing/PatternNoiseNI.htm>
>
> I think that without the roll-over to compare, no one would notice the
> very subtle pattern left in the darkest areas at step one. A second
> application really cleans it up, if necessary.
>
> With this image, there isn't a noticeable effect, at least to me, on
> detail in the lighter areas. Where there is an effect, the NI layer may
> simply be masked to only affect the dark areas.
>
> I think the noise gives a sense of detail in the darkest smoke, but I
> think it's false. Upon close inspection, it seems to me that the first
> step loses no actual subject detail at all, and the second step maybe a
> tiny bit.
>
> A. Neat(Image) Moose
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|