Yeah I understand, perhaps I didn't expressed myself well.
I meant downloading the ASF GEM application as a PS plugin as opposite
to using this as a built-in into NikonScan software.
Can the pluging be purchased separately ?
Alex
--- "Nagaraj, Ramesh" <Ramesh.Nagaraj@ca.com> wrote:
> I did not try to run as standalone application, I used it as PS
> plugin and it ran well.
> Neat Image, seems to have elobarate grain/noise profiling
> mechanism(at least I see many controls).
> In ASF's GEM, I see very few controls.
>
> Regards,
> Ramesh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alex Z [mailto:alexzfoto@yahoo.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 1:33 PM
> To: Nagaraj, Ramesh
> Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Nikon's GEM vs.NeatImage
>
>
> Aga, well worth considering approach indeed.
> Did you get the ASF's GEM software to run as a stand-alone
> application
> ?
>
> I used to apply certain GEM on portraiture and other kind of
> people-related stuff, while refrain from applying one in most cases
> on
> other kind of images (landscapes, architecture, ...)
>
> Alex
> --- "Nagaraj, Ramesh" <Ramesh.Nagaraj@ca.com> wrote:
> > When I archive full data(without GEM). So I do not use GEM of Nikon
> > scanner.
> > At post-scan stage, If needed, I use some s/w tool to remove the
> > grains. In future, if somebody comes up with a
> > tool that removes grains more efficiently(without or hardly loosing
> > sharpness) then I can run it on my archived data.
> > So, I would suggest using GEM tool at post-scan stage instread of
> > scan stage.
> > In my macro shots, I do see the reduction in the sharpness due to
> > GEM. I have decided to stick to 100ASA
> > and avoid using GEM.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Ramesh
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alex Z [mailto:alexzfoto@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 11:17 AM
> > To: Nagaraj, Ramesh
> > Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Nikon's GEM vs.NeatImage
> >
> >
> > Thanks Ramesh.
> > >From my very limited experience with NI demo (comparing JPEGs :-(
> )
> > one image showed a very slight difference in sharpness giving an
> edge
> > to NI (while producing about the same level of smoothness), while
> on
> > several others I wasn't able to distinguish any discernable
> > difference
> > in terms of sharpness. And yes, GEM is considerably faster then NI.
> >
> > I think I'll borrow a PRO version from the friend of mine and will
> > run
> > a real test on TIFFs.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Alex
> > --- "Nagaraj, Ramesh" <Ramesh.Nagaraj@ca.com> wrote:
> > > 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
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > 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
>
>
> __________________________________
> 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
__________________________________
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
