Neat Image Plug-in for Photoshop (and Elements)

fish

In another thread, a plug-in for PS called "Neat Image" was mentioned. After some light research, I found myself at www.neatimage.com and spent a couple of hours reading through the documentation. All looked good and powerful, so I downloaded the plug-in for Mac OSX.

From the website:

Neat Image is a digital filter designed to reduce visible noise and grain in digital photographic images. It is a tool for owners of digital cameras, flatbed and slide scanners; and is for use by both professional photographers, and digital image processing enthusiasts. Neat Image not only reduces the high ISO noise associated with image sensors (CMOS, CCD) in digital cameras and scanners, it can also reduce the film grain visible in scanned slides and negatives, JPEG artifacts of overcompressed images, and color banding, and at the same time makes images sharper. Neat Image is indispensable in low-light, sport, and action photography.


Here is an image my Canon 20D at ISO1600, LF jpeg, with only ambient light:






It doesn't look too bad (20D is awesome at high ISO), but check out a 100% crop of the original, where the noise is readily apparent:








Now, apply the Neat Image filter (and stock 20D profile for ISO1600 jpeg) with conservative sharpening, low freq, high quality and high res settings:



Looks pretty good, huh? I could certainly tweak some of the settings to get some fuzzy detail back, but this is a pretty good example of how powerful this tool is. There are a LOT of variables available in this plugin, and I've only really been playing with it for an hour, but I wanted to get this out there so y'all can play with this shiny new toy too. Cost for pro version is about $40 USD, and is available for both Mac and Windows.

I give Neat Image my highest rating: :nod:nod:nod:nod:nod (five nods)

philspace

His licensing structure is giving me a headache. To be used as a plug-in for CS, if I build/record a macro including his filter, how can he limit the number of times it's run in batch when I preprocess a bunch of pictures in Photoshop?

ian408

philspace wrote:

His licensing structure is giving me a headache. To be used as a plug-in for CS, if I build/record a macro including his filter, how can he limit the number of times it's run in batch when I preprocess a bunch of pictures in Photoshop?

Apparently, he worked in the CAD/EDA industry selling software tools

edit: Fish, which version did you opt for?

Ian

wxwax

I've been using Noise Ninja for a while, and it does a fine job of removing noise. Although definitely not intuitive, the controls allow for a great deal of flexibility. One does have to load the profile for one's specific camera (they do a good job of keeping profiles up to date.)

My beef with all of these programs is that in order to lose the noise, one must also lose sharpness. The more noise you need to remove, the softer your image will be after processing.

So I've actually stopped using the thing, preferring to live with a little noise. I will occasionally use it on a heavily treated shot, where sharpness isn't important. And I suspect my eyes aren't good enough to detect the minor amount of noise that these programs can remove without substantially affecting sharpness.

.

fish

ian408 wrote:

edit: Fish, which version did you opt for?

Ian

Neat Image v2 Pro plug-in /Mac

pathfinder

wxwax wrote:

I've been using Noise Ninja for a while, and it does a fine job of removing noise. Although definitely not intuitive, the controls allow for a great deal of flexibility. One does have to load the profile for one's specific camera (they do a good job of keeping profiles up to date.)

My beef with all of these programs is that in order to lose the noise, one must also lose sharpness. The more noise you need to remove, the softer your image will be after processing.

So I've actually stopped using the thing, preferring to live with a little noise. I will occasionally use it on a heavily treated shot, where sharpness isn't important. And I suspect my eyes aren't good enough to detect the minor amount of noise that these programs can remove without substantially affecting sharpness.

.

I rarely use Noise Ninja also - much noise that is visible on a monitor is not really apparent in a printed image sometimes.

I downloaded the MAC plug in for Neat Image after Fish's very critical and weak endorsement of it - NOT!! I am in the process of getting the camera profiles set up. I am really looking forward to using the profiles for the Canon G5 as it is probably the best camera I own for family candids at Christmas.

fish

Overall, I'd prefer to use minimal post-processing. However, when faced with noisy high ISO (800+) images, programs like this can be the difference between the webpage and the trashbin.

PerezDesignGroup

I've found neatimage indispensable for scanned magazine pics (yes, I'm a fan of Maxim and Stuff photography) and scanned film too. It can work quite the wonder when only set at ½ noise-removal.
In the example below is (from left to right) an original untouched scan, a 'descreened' scan and finally, a 'descreened' and neatimaged scan. The full view is much nicer. I especially find it useful to archive these and use them for inspiration in lighting setups.

philspace

PerezDesignGroup wrote:

I've found neatimage indispensable for scanned magazine pics (yes, I'm a fan of Maxim and Stuff photography) and scanned film too. It can work quite the wonder when only set at ½ noise-removal.
In the example below is (from left to right) an original untouched scan, a 'descreened' scan and finally, a 'descreened' and neatimaged scan. The full view is much nicer. I especially find it useful to archive these and use them for inspiration in lighting setups.

Good catch, I have a film scanner that I use ever so occasionaly now, but even at 4000 dpi, the noise is terrible - this would be great for that.