Should I fine-tune anything?

[saturndude]

I have downloaded a set of ready-made profiles posted by another NeatImage user. So far, they seem to be very good, and they will save me many hours of shooting the test target with my own camera (Canon S3IS).

When I open one of my pictures, I can select a profile that exactly matches the picture I opened (same JPEG compression, same ISO and same shutter speed). This means it will "match" 100 percent.

But the "profile quality" is listed as 94 percent, or 78 percent, or sometimes even 70 percent. What does this mean?

1. Is there noise in my picture Neat Image cannot fix?
2. Is the picture underexposed (fireworks, city streets at night)?
3. Can I improve things by using advanced mode and the "noise filter settings" tab?


Can I improve these results? Should I even try?

Should I use "auto profile" to tell NI to look for a uniform area in the photo itself? When I tried this, NI frequently has a hard time finding a good test area, and the "profile quality" may be even lower than the profile that I downloaded (or made myself from the calibration target).


Any suggestions are very much appreciated.



So far, NI is just wonderful. They say even a 2 MP camera is fine for putting photos on the web. This makes me think that looking at a computer monitor is a poor way to judge the quality of a picture. But with NI, I can sometimes see improvement (and no "plastic" look) even with low-noise ISO 80 shots!

[NITeam]

the "profile quality" is listed as 94 percent, or 78 percent, or sometimes even 70 percent. What does this mean?

It means the noise analysis is not entirely complete or perfect, it could be improved.

1. Is there noise in my picture Neat Image cannot fix?
2. Is the picture underexposed (fireworks, city streets at night)?
3. Can I improve things by using advanced mode and the "noise filter settings" tab?

1. No, the profile quality is not about that.
2. No.
3. Yes, you can make better profiles if you build them in a controlled way using the recommendations of the user guide.

Can I improve these results? Should I even try?

With a little practice, yes. It depends.

Should I use "auto profile" to tell NI to look for a uniform area in the photo itself?

This is one of the available ways to get a noise profile for an image. It is often the easiest one.

When I tried this, NI frequently has a hard time finding a good test area, and the "profile quality" may be even lower than a profile made from the calibration target.

Regarding finding a good test area, you can assist Neat Image and select a better area manually. The resulting profile quality is less important when you build a profile to process just one image than in case of building a profile set that will be used with many images. That's why building a reusable profile set takes some initial effort with special target, profiling different camera modes, etc., but then you can use good reusable profiles.

So far, NI is just wonderful. They say even a 2 MP camera is fine for putting photos on the web. This makes me think that looking at a computer monitor is a poor way to judge the quality of a picture. But with NI, I can sometimes see improvement (and no "plastic" look) even with low-noise ISO 80 shots!

Yes, I also have the same experience. Some cameras produce images even at lower ISO rates that can be significantly improved. I am glad Neat Image is able to help.

Vlad