Neat Image vs. Noise Ninja

[gpgyo]

Very soon I will be buying either Near Image or Noise Ninja. If you have used either or both I would like to hear what you think. I probably can't go wrong with either one. The biggest difference between the two I can tell is that NI is available as a Photoshop plug-in while NN's plug-in interface is beta at this time. Is plug-in more convenient or otherwise better than a stand alone program (it costs more.) Also, where do you incorporate use of noise reduction software in your workflow.

Many thanks,
Greg

[Steelsun]

Have not tried either one yet.

Did run accross this yesterday: http://denoiser.shorturl.com/
It's a free denoising program, although not a PS plugin yet.

Have not tried it though, but it got good comments on DPReview.com

[Walker]

Originally Posted by Steelsun

Did run accross this yesterday: http://denoiser.shorturl.com/
It's a free denoising program, although not a PS plugin yet.

Have not tried it though, but it got good comments on DPReview.com

I just downloaded it and gave it a try. It does work very well, but the interface to it is a bit awkward. For one thing, you cannot zoom out beyond 100% -- so you cannot see an entire image on the screen without saving it and viewing it with something else.

It would probably make a nice PS plugin

[Walker]

Ack...

I just discovered that the "picture_cooler" denoiser also strips all EXIF and IPTC data from the image. That makes it a no-go for me.

[Hogleg 44]

Originally Posted by Walker

I just downloaded it and gave it a try. It does work very well, but the interface to it is a bit awkward. For one thing, you cannot zoom out beyond 100% -- so you cannot see an entire image on the screen without saving it and viewing it with something else.

It would probably make a nice PS plugin

You might be sure it doesn't do a lot of additional compression on the file size. Some of those free utilities will really reduce it, destroying data.

[anorcross]

Hi Greg,
As you know from the sports forum, I use Noise Ninja. I've tried the PS plugin beta, but don't like it as much as the standalone. It doesn't seem to have as many options, and I didn't like the results as much. As for where in the workflow to apply noise reduction, the Noise Ninja people, and some on the dpreview boards, say as early as possible. Noise Ninja allows you to use profiles based on specific cameras and ISO levels (you can also create your own profiles, or just profile each picture individually). The more processing you do to the picture before using Noise Ninja, the less likely the profile is to match the picture. I've noticed that the profile for the Rebel at ISO 1600 works extremely well with large jpegs. If I shoot RAW, however, the RAW processing options (I use Canon's free DPP conversion software) affect how well the default profile works in NN. Occasionally I have to use the 'profile picture' option in NN rather than using the Rebel profile for images I've processed from RAW (either into jpegs or tiffs).

[TexIndian]

I use Neat Image as a PS plug-in and like it just fine. You can control almost every variable if you want, or you can let it do most of the work. You can build and save your own filter sets for things like "D1X - 800 ISO", for instance. The auto features work quite well, but you'd probably have to read a book on noise filtering to fully utilize each of the controls available.

It shows up in Photoshop in the Filters drop-down. When clicked, a Neat Image window pops up for you to adjust the filters. A small zoom-able preview box lets you see the results of your fiddling before you hit the Go button. Then it automatically reverts to your PS window.

[TheObiJuan]

i have both programs that I acquired from a friend. I used neat image for a few months then tried NN. I prefer NN, the interface and ease of use made me choose it.

[jeffkohn]

I use Neat Image Pro Plus as a PS plugin. Greatly simplifies my workflow and the results are great. Using as a plugin means you have all the flexibility of Photoshop combined with noise removal: layers, selections, history brush, etc.