wildimages@lineone.net wrote/replied to: >Loking at just the heron picture: to me the processed one is worse than >the noisy one. I'd love to have seen the raw (unprocessed) frame you took >at ISO 100 straight after the ISO 1600 one. Not enough light for that Bob. That's why I ended up shooting at 1600. The reason you like noise is you're just used to film grain :-) I think that were I to have a large print made of one of these, I'd likely use the effect much less and let some grain and more sharpness come through. But, again, I'm trying to illustrate what 'can' be done. Getting an effect somewhere in between the two extremes is not hard to do and more usual in real world situations. > >It's an old computer saying: > >"rubbish in rubbish out". Well, it's a sample, and a test of what can be done. I do believe Neatimage can help an image be better. But better is defined by what the user does with it, and how he wants it to look. >I've yet to see a piece of software that breaks that. >If I had a D10 I might use ISO 1600 for very very very rare occasions. >If what you are showing is typical of it's results it looks hardly worth >the bother (for nature work). I have to look long and hard to find these images for the samples. I agree and rarely go beyond ISO 400. >Thinks: >Does the D10 have an "Aperture AND Shutter" priority mode? That is, you >set the shutter speed and aperture manually and it chooses the ISO to suit? > Can I patent that idea? ;o) Actually in Green mode (never tried it), it's supposed to auto pick the ISO for you. So yes, it does have that mode. Guess you can't patent it :-) Jim Davis - checkout the Motorcycle Headlight Relay Kit at: http://jimdavis.oberro.com/html/bike_acc_.html
