NeatImage Version 8 profile quality

questions about practical use of Neat Image
Post Reply
LPradetto
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:09 pm

NeatImage Version 8 profile quality

Post by LPradetto »

I recently updated to version 8 and when I try to do an auto profile I can't get it to go above 80% quality no matter where I position the profile box. They are usually lower than 70%. If I go back into the 7.6 version I can usually get it to somewhere in the high 90's.
Is there something I'm doing wrong or is this the way it is and will the quality of the noise reduction be better even though the quality of the profile is much lower?
I've checked this on a regular basis and because of the lower quality I haven't been using the 8 version and pull up the older version to use when needed.

Linda
NITeam
Posts: 3173
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2003 4:43 pm
Contact:

Post by NITeam »

The quality measurements have changed in v8, so the same percentage means somewhat different thing in the new version. v8 is more strict about that measure too, so it is normal that you may get lower values now than in v7, when using the same areas.

Try to use (1) uniform areas without any details, (2) large areas, (3) middle-bright areas (not almost black, not almost white), (4) areas with most visible and strongest noise.

If you do that, then resulting noise profile will be accurate and you will get good results in the end. In most cases, the results will be better than in v7, even if you do the profiling the same way.

Vlad
Last edited by NITeam on Mon Oct 24, 2016 3:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
LPradetto
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2014 11:09 pm

Post by LPradetto »

Thanks Vlad,

I thought it was something like that. I downloaded the manual and started to read it but thought it was the old one geared toward 7 and under. I'm right in the middle of the wedding season (it's changed from June to September/October) and haven't had time to play with it. I'm thinking that as soon as I have a little time (HaHa!!) I'll get in there and do some experimenting.

I figured that it was as you said and changed, I just haven't been able to trust it with the low %.

I've been using neat image for years now and do love it!! I almost never use the first profile as it always goes to the whitest area in the image. I've found that in the older versions that the middle values in the smoothest areas will give the best readings, I'll even use dark areas over the whites that neat image defaults to in auto profiling. This makes it somewhat hard to do batch noise reductions.

Thanks again,
Linda
NITeam
Posts: 3173
Joined: Sat Feb 01, 2003 4:43 pm
Contact:

Post by NITeam »

You may want to consider building a high-quality reusable set of profiles for your camera using the Calibration Target. Then you could simply load the matching profile for each input image using Auto Match function, instead of building a new one for each image. That could ensure higher accuracy of profiles used to process the images, especially if an input image has not many areas for analysis -- Auto Profile would not be able to build a very good profile, while Auto Match would likely be able to find and load one of those pre-built profiles that you know are good.

The profiling procedure is described in the user guide in the Device Noise Profiles section. Using Auto Match is described in the Filtration process details section.

Hope this helps,
Vlad
Post Reply