[Fl_Gulfer]

All I have is Elements 10 and not all software will work with it.

[dosdan]

How good is the alignment process?

Here's a test of 14 hand-held K20D ISO3200 PEFs (the size of a burst before the buffer fills) in PhotoAcute:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/digital-processing-software-printing/7470...king-test.html

Dan.

[itanium]

I think you're right.

I had a chance to take a closer look since I last wrote my comment and it looks like the software does a little NR along the way. And the evidence of this can be seen in the color detail shifts following processing. Having said, the software does a good job of reducing a process into a single click affair which seems like a pretty good deal. And so if we were comparing apples to apples, I'd say this would be an equivalent to stacking with NR. And so to investigate, I compared output from the ArcSoft Low Light NR with a stacking + NR action in Photoshop:



load in tabs for direct comparisson

NB. The CS5 Action was based on a default JPG NR profile. Though I'm thinking a little tweaking could yield better results. Likewise, since these were processed from poorly processed JPG images. I'd expect further definition and detail retention with RAW on the Photoshop Action side of things when all is said and done.

Hope this helps.

PS. the PS Action took aprox. 22 seconds to process on a high performance workstation.

THX. It looks ArcSoft Low Light NR can be simplified to some very complex actions into one click, you can get almost the same result. Very good.

[itanium]

How good is the alignment process?

Here's a test of 14 hand-held K20D ISO3200 PEFs (the size of a burst before the buffer fills) in PhotoAcute:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/digital-processing-software-printing/7470...king-test.html

Dan.

Sounds like PhotoAcute is doing the same thing. Can you help to compare these two NR software?

[JohnBee]

Sounds like PhotoAcute is doing the same thing. Can you help to compare these two NR software?

I've found that though PhotoAcute definitely does a better job on the initial stacking, that it has two major drawbacks in comparison to Arcsoft.

1) it's excruciatingly slow
2) it's external(separate from editor/developer etc).

Which means the NR and sharpening phase needs to be compounded into the workflow. Which is why I opted for a Photoshop process, so that I could create an action(single click) solution for comparisson.

That being said, I'm confident that if someone were to go the distance using PhotoAcute, Photoshop and Topaz Denoise, that the results would be significantly better. Though I'd say the issue of effort vs reward would likely come-up. To which I'd add... I'm thinking a person would be better off shooting with a lower ISO and longer shutter instead

THX. It looks ArcSoft Low Light NR can be simplified to some very complex actions into one click, you can get almost the same result. Very good.

Yep it seems fairly close.
Can't say I'd want to use it for anything critical, though I think it could do the trick for snapshots and the likes.
Personally... I'd like to see something like this integrate into Photoshop and perhaps even allow for a 3'rd party NR etc.

[robgo2]

Robgo2,
Thanks a lot. But the photo you attached is too small. I can't see the details. Can you help crop a 100% area that like I did before?

Sorry, but I have been on the road since posting that sample and cannot give you a 100% crop, but I assure you that it looks very good. Why not download trial versions of several programs of interest and run your own comparisons?

Rob