Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/03/16
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Nathan - Actually, what I posted was straight out of Photoshop after correcting for the deliberate one-stop underexposure. It was really quite dark in the restaurant. I was shooting at an effective ISO of 800. Here's the same photo processed through Noise Ninja. http://gallery.leica-users.org/PEOPLE/L1000113_v2_nn_web I'm not sure it will show up in this low res posting, but the overall effect is to smooth out the noise at the expense of some detail. This was done using the recommended Digilux 2 profile and settings. The full res image still has quite a lot of unpleasant digital speckles, though far fewer than the original. This file makes an acceptable 5x7 (inch) print, but I'm not sure one could go much bigger than that. I need to explore Noise Ninja more to see if any improvement is possible. B.T.W. shooting at such low "signal" levels (let me slip into engineer-speak for a second) also tends to bring up artifacts in the sensor, vis. the horizontal bands in my son's turtleneck. These are totally invisible when more light is available. Regards, Dick Boston MA >Dick, > >The images still look noisy. Perhaps it is just a feature of the >Digilux, but these seem to have more noise at 400 than my Canon >images do at 1600. > >In general, I find that software like Noise Ninja that promises a >free lunch usually does not deliver. > >Speaking of the Digilux, it was the only Leica I saw while walking >around the Jardin de Luxembourg in Paris last Sunday. > >Nathan > (snip) >>http://gallery.leica-users.org/PEOPLE/L1000113_v2_web_001 >> (snip) > >Nathan Wajsman >Almere, The Netherlands > >General photography: http://www.nathanfoto.com >Seville photography: http://www.fotosevilla.com >Stock photography: http://www.alamy.com/search-results.asp?qt=wajsman >http://myloupe.com/home/found_photographer.php?photographer=507 >Prints for sale: http://www.photodeluge.com