Options

Noiseware - LR or PS Plugin

MDalbyMDalby Registered Users Posts: 697 Major grins
edited September 29, 2012 in Finishing School
[sorry, I can't change the subject line]

What I really want to know is the difference between the standalone version of Noiseware or the PS plugin. I really don't use Photoshop for my post processing. I only use PS for poster generation etc.

I currently use LR4 for my cataloging and exposure adjustment etc.

Is there any downside to getting the standalone Noiseware vs the PS plugin?

Thoughts?
Nikon D4, 400 2.8 AF-I, 70-200mm 2.8 VR II, 24-70 2.8
CBS Sports MaxPreps Shooter
http://DalbyPhoto.com

Comments

  • Options
    pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,698 moderator
    edited September 28, 2012
    Personally, I prefer my NoiseWare to be a Photoshop plug in, so that I can use it on layers with selections, thus, allowing me to only use noise reduction on the parts of the image I choose to. In other words, I prefer not to do all noise reduction globally, but locally, like in just the sky.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • Options
    arodneyarodney Registered Users Posts: 2,005 Major grins
    edited September 29, 2012
    MDalby wrote: »
    [sorry, I can't change the subject line]

    What I really want to know is the difference between the standalone version of Noiseware or the PS plugin. I really don't use Photoshop for my post processing.

    The net results are the same in either place. LR has to render a TIFF, then apply Noiseware or any other 3rd party product that alters pixels. The LR engine is locked. If you send the TIFF to Photoshop you'd get the same results. So the plug-in is designed for someone like you. Either you want to limit Photoshop use or don't use it at all.
    Andrew Rodney
    Author "Color Management for Photographers"
    http://www.digitaldog.net/
Sign In or Register to comment.