<<< Want to know what Neatimage can do for you? Want to see how well a image Stabilized lens works? Want to see what an Egret looks like up close? >>> Look no further than: http://jimdavis.oberro.com/html/neatimage.html Jim Nice shot. As before, I actually prefer the first shot (pre neatimage) or maybe it is the eye that spoils it on the treated one - it appears the treatment has blurred it slightly. If you have a "history brush" type tool on neatimage you could just not treat the eye-area the same way. It's the same for me with unsharp mask in PS. It improves the "look" of the feathers but spoils the look (enhances noise in) the eye. It's a shame (for the demo) it's a white bird. I'd like to see how well it handled the feather detail. In this shot it could be just that it's too white to tell. At 68K for the size you have shown it jpeg will have killed any fine detail anyway. Bob PS >Want to see the kind of detail a 10D produces? Actually I do: but I need to get my hands on one before I (consider to) buy. As you note: the slight blurriness is probably explained by the jpegging. PPS Is the raw really untreated? Does not the camera do some work before you get even that. I thought (a while back) I read that they filled in known dead pixels at a quite low level. Freeserve AnyTime - HALF PRICE for the first 3 months - Save £7.50 a month www.freeserve.com/anytime
