I have used trial versions of Neat Image and ASF's new Digital GEM Plug-in.
I found that both produce almost same results and latter is fast.
Thanks
Ramesh
-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Z [mailto:alexzfoto@yahoo.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2003 3:42 PM
To: Nagaraj, Ramesh
Subject: [filmscanners] Nikon's GEM vs.NeatImage
This is for Nikon scanner users that have ICE3.
I used to enjoy my IV ED and besides of ICE that is tremendous tool got
used to apply GEM to most of my portrait/people-related stuff.
The smoothness appearance it produces gettign rid of grain is just
terrific, though the effect is most prononced on GEM 3 and 4 (I use 4
quite often) but at teh expence of sharpness.
Setting GEM to 4 indavertantly makes certain impact on sharpness
(nothing terrible, but still discernable once observing the image at
100% on the screen).
I was wondering how Neat Image software (there is a lot of talk about
one in the net - specifically in the field of digital cameras noise
reduction) would be compared against the GEM.
I tried the demo version and the JPEGs processed (demo saves JPEGs only
even while processing TIFFs) and the image looks really nice and clean
- just on pair with GEM set to 4.
Having said that, I have yet ran the real test of GEM against NI,
though intend to do it soon.
Meahwhile I'm curious whether there is somebody who have his personal,
real life proven experience with both and is able to draw his
conclusions (would NI make less sharpness impact with similar level of
grain reduction as GEM at 4) ?
Regards, Alex
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or
body
