Noise Ninja? Neat Image?

Harv

Noise Ninja? Neat Image? Can anyone out there comment on either or both of these products?

If any of this has been covered before, I apologize, but don't see any way to do a topic search here.

Thanks for looking.

ShepsMom

I use NeatImage and love it. Don't know much about the other one. Sorry, i wasn't much help, was i?

Harv

ShepsMom wrote:

I use NeatImage and love it. Don't know much about the other one. Sorry, i wasn't much help, was i?

Yes you were, Marina. I have also posted this on another forum and the majority of the replies prefer NeatImage and think it's an excellent program. Thank you.

arodney

Noiseware
Ror me its Noiseware:

http://www.ppmag.com/bonus/2006/08/review-imagenomic-noiseware.html

pathfinder

It is easy to make your own noise profiles with Neat Image.

I have used it for several years now, seems to work

Cameron

arodney wrote:

Ror me its Noiseware:

http://www.ppmag.com/bonus/2006/08/review-imagenomic-noiseware.html

Noiseware for me too - love it!

In reality, they're all good products.. pick one and learn to use it and you'll be happy.

Stu Engelman

Hi Harv,

Very recently I purchased Noise Ninja, and I think it's fantastic.

It provides three methods for reducing noise:

(1) NN provides noise profiles for most major cameras, specific to focal length, ISO, etc. These are great methods for handling noise reduction where you don't do alot of PS processing before using NN.

(2) If you plan to perform heavy processing before using NN (e.g., doing tone curves in ACR), NN has an incredible feature that let's you sample noise patterns directly from the image, permitting highly customized noise reduction that factors in the prior processing.

(3) If you wish to use method (2), but are having trouble because the noise patterns are too superimposed on detail areas of the image to isolate the former, NN has an "automatic" mode that does the sampling for you.

This is really an incredible product. It greatly reduces both ISO and slow-shutter noise, and does so in a way that preserves most of the detail. This lets you perform serious noise reduction, and still be able to get almost all of your original detail back via sharpening. Just try this once and you'll be hooked.

Best regards, Stu Engelman

Harv

Thanks a lot, folks. That's really good input. It's always great to hear from those who actually use a product.

claudermilk

For standalone, I purchased Noiseware a while ago. All three of the biggies (NN, Neat Image, and Noiseware) do excellent jobs of reducing noise. For me it was the interface and batching ability that sold me. It seemed that NN at the time required more knowledge of what was going on to realyl get the best out of it.

Now, I will likely be purchasing the least-expensive NN license to expand the use of the built-in NN in Bibble Pro. For most images, this really is the best noise-reduction option for me as it's now completely integrated with my RAW conversion and happens before de-Bayerizing the image. Lossless noise-reduction! On the few images where I get odd color artifacts, I revert back to Noiseware. I now have the best of both worlds.

Ric Grupe

I used Neat Image and for the most part liked it.

Now...I use none. Any noise reduction destroys detail. I'd rather have the noise!:D

pathfinder

Ric,

Why settle for one or the other, when you can have both??


The secret to using Noise software - I use Neat Image too - is to do it on an adjustment layer and then mask out the areas that you do not want de-noised.. I frequently just use de-noising in the sky, as that smooth, evne blue displays the noise in the blue channel better than almost anything else in the image.

I create a duplicate layer with ctrl-j, select the sky with the magic wand, color select or whatever - take your pic - and then run the de-noising algorithm on the selected area. I can then use the opacity slider in normal blending mode to fine tune.

Or I can create a layer mask, and use a black brush to paint away areas that do not need de-noised or that I think need to retain their pristine sharpness.

I find this very useful with images from point and shoots that suffer from higher noise at higher ISOs. It has become part of my routine for P&S images like this one


Panasonic DMC-LX1 at ISO 80 - de-noising limited to the sky only

Ric Grupe

First...let me say, I'm a Corel PhotoPaint user...next to PS the best image editor out there IMO. They just had poor management and let Adobe take over.

Anyway...like you, since I do wildlife, the sky or deep shadows are the only thing that I'm concerned with. Quite often I will just blur out the noise...using a feathered color mask...and gaussian blur. I hardly ever shoot over ISO 800.

Still, you bring up an interesting alternative. I will remember this method and see if I can figure it out in CPP. (by remember, I mean bookmark)

Great input...THANKS!

claudermilk

Hmm, good tip, pathfinder.

Though it makes the NN license inflict the maximum pain if I want to use it outside of Bibble. :cry

S. Horton

I use NoiseWare/Pro from Imagemonic.

Download trial copies of whatever software you're considering, check them out for yourself. Each has different sliders, but they all work pretty well.

pathfinder

I suspect using the the one you've got well, is more important than which one you chose to use - JMO

S. Horton

^^ HUGE +1 for that wise advice!

Zoom in, be careful to reduce in the range/type you really want and need for any given set of images.

digismile

I don't know if there is a lot of difference between the main competitors now. A couple of years ago, I found this in depth review of almost all the noise reduction programs at the time. A lot probably don't even exist now!

You can actually see the before and after that the guy did with each one. he spent a lot of time trying to judge the subtle differences between them. It would be nice if he updated the review to current versions. At the time, he put NN, and Noiseware 1 & 2.

I ended up with Noise Ninja pro, with both the photoshop plugin and stand-alone program for batching many photos. So NN gets my vote.

Harv

Thanks a lot for the input, folks. Much appreciated.

Hindsight

How does the noise reduction in Lightroom 1.1 compare to NN plugin for PS? Is there a huge difference in quality? I just had an evening shoot and the noise is God awful on ISO 800 with a D200. I'm relatively new to the D200 and I'm none too pleased with the noise level. The color and luma noise reduction in LR aren't doing all the much to help me, but then there's a saying about the polishing of turds that comes to mind. Love the D200 at ISO 100-250, but wow.

Maestro

Noise Ninja here. I have found that it is excellent for people portrait work and can save some of my grainy wildlife low light shots.

S. Horton

Hindsight wrote:

How does the noise reduction in Lightroom 1.1 compare to NN plugin for PS? Is there a huge difference in quality? I just had an evening shoot and the noise is God awful on ISO 800 with a D200. I'm relatively new to the D200 and I'm none too pleased with the noise level. The color and luma noise reduction in LR aren't doing all the much to help me, but then there's a saying about the polishing of turds that comes to mind. Love the D200 at ISO 100-250, but wow.

Lightroom I cannot comment on, but when I see noise THAT bad I ultimately find that the shots are underexposed.

claudermilk

S. Horton wrote:

Lightroom I cannot comment on, but when I see noise THAT bad I ultimately find that the shots are underexposed.

I've heard that the D200 at ISO800+ is just that bad. A shooter I know that has several systems (Canon, Nikon, Mamiya, and Hassy--yes wayy too much money on this stuff) swapped a 20D for a D200, and deeply regretted it. It seems the "polishing a turd" cliche is fairly accurate in this case.

PhotoHound

I've tried all of the big 3 in depth, and they all do a good job. Ended up staying with Ninja; I just liked the results a teeny bit more.

sonny_c

This is my little attempt comparing Noiseware vs Noise Ninja. No PP other than white balance. Morgan was in a dark room with a desk lamp shining down on her face .


original image-ISO3200, 1/60, Auto WB, f/4.5, spot meter, RAW.

NN-full image-Mark II n custom profile.

Noiseware-full image-default settings

original 100% crop

NN-100% crop-Mark II n custom profile.

Noiseware-100% crop-default settings.

Hindsight

NW wins. Thanks for the comparison.

LAB.rat

I like NW too, mainly for its interface and because some of the others not always wanted to function in actions.

Nik has a brand new update as well:
www.niksoftware.com/dfine/en/entry.php