Then look at them in the "improved" versionĢb. Look at the red detain in the water of the beach in the unaltered image. Though one is usually important, its not here for the even worse reason that the originals were all far better than the filtered images! Why bother uploading this rubbish? Did you even bother to compair or is your eye that attracted to the early digital noise reduction effect of smearing?Ģa. This is what any self respecting site that has to so with image comparisons would do. Or simply have one image and a list of links that dynamical and instantly change that image so comparisons can be made in detail. When doing comparison shots, have a mouse over load the second image and a mouseoff show the first. With this experience with a wide range of digital images from a cross-section of cameras, it is time to discuss the impact of Noiseware in more detail. A large selection of images has been Noiseware-processed in the last few weeks. Some cameras showed dramatic improvement in noise and others, like Nikon and Canon cameras, showed very little improvement with Noiseware processing. The results were so impressive we tried the Noiseware processing with other camera images. Gary certainly has the credentials that persuaded us to try his suggestion and we were frankly astounded at the results we achieved by processing the Sigma JPEG files with Noiseware. It isn't super speedy, but I've got model test shots I've shot with it and lots of sample images on my SD14 test images website at if someone wants to really see what is possible with the SD14 in real life." Noiseware saved my shoot and I was able to save the images and use them in my latest gallery exhibition of my photography at Moral of the story? The SD14 works just fine when you know the nature of the best and have the right tools to pull the results you want from this camera. Even Noise Ninja couldn't clean up those images. When I got back to Florida and post processed the images, I thought the shoot was a complete bust, until a pro buddy of mine suggested Noiseware from Imagenomic. But after spending all this money on the helicopter, I was going to try to get my money's worth. It was a disaster in the making, forcing me to shoot at ISO 800. We couldn't remove the doors off the helicopter, so I had to shoot through the canopy which lowered the light about two F-stops and also needed to use a polarizing filter which further lowered the light. I found this out after a helicopter shoot of the Hawaiian Islands with the SD14. If you sent me the raw images of the pictures you posted shot at ISO 800, I'm sure that Noiseware would take care of the noise in these images easily, salvaging them for you. So how does someone who wants to shoot at higher ISOs with the SD14 deal with this? Imagenomic's Noiseware program is the best solution I've found to date. In fact, the SPP 3.2 and 2.5 versions of the Sigma Software barely address noise after the fact. The SD14 doesn't do any serious noise reduction in the image coming out of the camera. The supposedly raw images produced by most Bayer-sensor cameras are in fact heavily edited images prior to downloading them to the computer. I've found that other DSLR systems use in camera noise programs that produce soft, but less noisy images right out of the camera even when shooting raw. There is a lot of controversy concerning the low light performance of the SD14 and also higher ISO 400 and up noise issue. "I've been using Sigma DSLRs from the very humble beginning of the SD9 to the current SD14. He provided us with useful insight to the SD14 noise "problem" and a suggestion: We received a very interesting email from a Gary Mercer, one of the professional photographers featured in the Popular Photography December 2007 Sigma SD14 promotion.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |