Which do you prefer? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

03/19/2005 12:28:22 AM · #1

Playing around with this image. Did some minor curves, contrast & USM, resized & saved for web. That gave me this:

Ran it thru Neat Image & got this:

My knee-jerk reaction to the 2nd version was to toss it, but after looking at it a bit, I kind of like it. Just wondering what you all think.

cweed

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

03/19/2005 12:32:39 AM · #2

So i opened the first image and thought, oh this one is better it needs no noise reduction or sharpening.... so then i opened the second one and liked it more! the smooth lines neatimage created blend nicely with the wood lines...

hsteg

Fujifilm X-T20

03/19/2005 12:39:12 AM · #3

Def. the non neatimaged one. wayyy more details....

jmsetzler

Sony Alpha a6000

Sony 16-50mm f/3.5-5.6 E-mount

03/19/2005 12:39:31 AM · #4

Be careful. NeatImage seems to be addictive.

Tamron AF 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di LD Aspherical IF for Canon

03/19/2005 12:40:52 AM · #5

LOL cweed, you described my reactions exactly. Normally, I would really prefer the more "real" version, but time it's kind of growing on me.

cweed

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

03/19/2005 12:42:21 AM · #6

yup... i see the beauty in the second one not in the detail and realism, but the exact opposite, its more surreal and kinda umm flowy :)

SDW

Canon EOS-60D

03/19/2005 12:47:37 AM · #7

#1 is better for me. But you did achieve a unique effect with #2 but it just looks PS/NI and not natural. I think offers more of detail.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm f/4G ED VR

03/19/2005 12:49:40 AM · #8

Here's a couple more. Sorry about the bird crap... I didn't put it there.

fstopopen

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/19/2005 12:50:24 AM · #9

I love that neat image version. I have never pushed it that hard. That is a really cool look without making it look fake.

drake

Ozzie

Nikon D90

03/19/2005 12:57:29 AM · #10

I prefer the first one, the second is too overdone for me. That's just my preference. :-)

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/19/2005 12:59:05 AM · #11

Somebody stop me!

arpita

Canon EOS-350D Rebel XT

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/19/2005 01:05:39 AM · #12

I think I prefer the non NI one, it has a raw look that appeals to me. But the NI is good too, though it doesn't have as rough-and-real a look..

Beetle

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

03/19/2005 01:55:24 AM · #13

Wow, what a fascinating comparison!
Yes, you lost some detail because of NI, but now it looks like someone gave it lots TLC with some very fine sandpaper.
How very interesting..... thanks for sharing.

nsbca7

Mattel Barbie Photo Designer Digital Camera

03/19/2005 02:09:01 AM · #14

Originally posted by aronya1:

Playing around with this image. Did some minor curves, contrast & USM, resized & saved for web. That gave me this:

Ran it thru Neat Image & got this:

#1 looks good. #2 looks like it should be a prop on a Disney cartoon. People spend thousands of dollars on high res bodies and the sharpest lenses they can afford and the blur out the detail with Neatimage.

cweed

Canon EOS-10D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

03/19/2005 02:18:59 AM · #15

nsbca7, i think he what caught his attention with the ni'ed version is the unique look, not the sharpness or detail or realism captured by his equipment--i give you that many people, probably myself included get a bit ni happy, but i think there's room for getting that razor sharp perfect photograph and theres also room for photoshoping/modifying to achieve a weird look you may not normally caputure using even thousands of dollars of equipment...

completely off-topic, but nsbca7, i love your photograph titled "Scout (and Atticus): after the confrontation" something about it... very nice...

Message edited by author 2005-03-19 02:22:25.

Brad

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

03/19/2005 02:33:19 AM · #16

Hard to make a choice Tim, as each has it's own style and merits.
The non-NI version supports the rustic nature of the subject, where the NI version adds a "plastic-coated" feel, that give it a unique feel.

The_Itinerant

03/19/2005 02:48:50 AM · #17

I don't think this is really a matter of preference or appropriateness unless there is a specific goal in mind as to what is meant to be conveyed.

The first is realistic and detailed of the wear of many years while the second looks like a pencil drawing for a children's book. Both are good, though I have to admit that the NeatImage results are stunning in the illustrated look they achieve. It seems to reveal how they looked when these structures were first built.

Details are not always called for, in whatever medium one works in.

By the way, you forgot to post the second version of the third latch.

Message edited by author 2005-03-19 02:50:23.

Kylie

Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ35

03/19/2005 03:37:05 AM · #18

I am really loving these, and I am usually the first to scream about the editing.

Art Roflmao

Canon EOS-6D Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/19/2005 03:56:29 AM · #19

I would echo the majority of sentiments - the first has the detail that 'keeps it real' the second is Disneyland/Fantasy-ish. If it were for a DPC challenge like for "Rust" or "Old Things" or almost anything that the subject itself fit, I would go with the more realistic version. The NI'd one is interesting as many have said, but I don't know what you would do with it.