PentaxForums.com - View Single Post - Which do you think does a better job at noise reduction?

deejjjaaaa · 08-22-2008, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by hwblanks

To see if spending more money on yet another computer program to handle noise (or even justifying getting a K20), as opposed to correcting it in LR, I did a little test comparison...all were taken at ISO1600 on my K10D

The original...the noise is pretty obvious

Processed in Neat Image

Processed in Noise Ninja

Processed in Lightroom--I tried to recreate the K10D ISO1600 profile settings found both in NN and NI

Which one do you think is better?
Thanks!
Heather

I think that it is useless to compare default (I guess, if not - then why do you think that managed to get the best out of both ?) settings of NN & NI on just one image... and then there are free programs like GREYCstoration :
http://cimg.sourceforge.net/greycstoration/download.shtml

08-22-2008, 06:43 PM	#5
deejjjaaaa Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: steel city / rust belt Gallery Photos: 0 Posts: 1,019	Originally Posted by hwblanks To see if spending more money on yet another computer program to handle noise (or even justifying getting a K20), as opposed to correcting it in LR, I did a little test comparison...all were taken at ISO1600 on my K10D The original...the noise is pretty obvious Processed in Neat Image Processed in Noise Ninja Processed in Lightroom--I tried to recreate the K10D ISO1600 profile settings found both in NN and NI Which one do you think is better? Thanks! Heather I think that it is useless to compare default (I guess, if not - then why do you think that managed to get the best out of both ?) settings of NN & NI on just one image... and then there are free programs like GREYCstoration : http://cimg.sourceforge.net/greycstoration/download.shtml __________________