Topaz Denoise 5 and Noiseware compared

Workingdog · 12-28-2010, 10:17 PM

So I downloaded the free version of Noiseware and the 30 day free trial of Topaz Denoise for comparison. Below are full size crops of a section of an out of camera JPEG with no in-camera noise reduction at ISO 2000 with Pentax K7. Taken in my basement and exposure for the mid-tone. My first attempts with both software; followed the Youtube tutorial for Topaz and had Noiseware set on "strong noise".
My opinion: Topaz is better but Noiseware is not bad at all for free. Both are better than the noise reduction in RawTherapee, UFRaw, and Paint Shop Pro. I tink I'll like Topaz even more once I know better what I'm doing. I'll post more examples/comparisons as I go along. Topaz first, then Noiseware, then original JPEG.
.
.
.

Last edited by Workingdog; 02-02-2011 at 04:46 PM.

Sparkle · 12-29-2010, 04:20 AM

I see the first one as noticeably better.

Jodokast96 · 12-29-2010, 04:29 AM

I agree. I can see why that's the free version. If you wouldn't mind, would you post a different example? That shot doesn't do much for any of the programs.

slip · 12-29-2010, 10:35 AM

what I tinker with in topaz is the micro details lever (hope I not getting mixed up with their infocus software) I also add a little bit of noise so skin tones don't have that unnatural "wax museum" look

once you start using manual adjustment the results are much better

randy

12-28-2010, 10:17 PM	#1
Workingdog Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: York, PA Photos: Gallery Posts: 736	Topaz Denoise 5 and Noiseware compared So I downloaded the free version of Noiseware and the 30 day free trial of Topaz Denoise for comparison. Below are full size crops of a section of an out of camera JPEG with no in-camera noise reduction at ISO 2000 with Pentax K7. Taken in my basement and exposure for the mid-tone. My first attempts with both software; followed the Youtube tutorial for Topaz and had Noiseware set on "strong noise". My opinion: Topaz is better but Noiseware is not bad at all for free. Both are better than the noise reduction in RawTherapee, UFRaw, and Paint Shop Pro. I tink I'll like Topaz even more once I know better what I'm doing. I'll post more examples/comparisons as I go along. Topaz first, then Noiseware, then original JPEG. . . . Last edited by Workingdog; 02-02-2011 at 04:46 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K7 + Topaz Denoise 5 or K5	Workingdog	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	11	02-13-2011 09:16 PM
Best way to use Topaz DeNoise 5?	robgo2	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	1	09-03-2010 10:59 PM
Topaz Labs DeNoise 4.1	Canada_Rockies	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	7	06-24-2010 07:54 AM
Topaz DeNoise	ordinaryimages	Pentax DSLR Discussion	32	06-12-2010 09:09 PM
Topaz Denoise 4 just released!	JohnBee	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	3	05-07-2010 07:46 AM

12-29-2010, 04:20 AM	#2
Sparkle Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,521	I see the first one as noticeably better.

12-29-2010, 04:29 AM	#3
Jodokast96 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Erial, NJ USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,134	I agree. I can see why that's the free version. If you wouldn't mind, would you post a different example? That shot doesn't do much for any of the programs.

12-29-2010, 10:35 AM	#4
slip Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,535	what I tinker with in topaz is the micro details lever (hope I not getting mixed up with their infocus software) I also add a little bit of noise so skin tones don't have that unnatural "wax museum" look once you start using manual adjustment the results are much better randy

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search