<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Noise Ninja Released for Aperture</title>
	<atom:link href="http://photofocus.com/2008/08/07/noise-ninja-released-for-aperture/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://photofocus.com/2008/08/07/noise-ninja-released-for-aperture/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 19:39:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Spence</title>
		<link>http://photofocus.com/2008/08/07/noise-ninja-released-for-aperture/#comment-6382</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Spence]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Aug 2008 05:52:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twipphoto.com/?p=827#comment-6382</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have done a few more tests, and found images where Noise Ninja produces results I do prefer to what Adobe Camera Raw (3.7) does, so after a bit more playing around, I will say that Noise Ninja is capable of similar or better results, to my eye.

When added to the convenience of integration into Aperture, I will say it now makes sense to get this plugin.

Definitely much better than the builtin Noise reduction in Aperture 2.1.1. This on images shot with Canon 350D and 400D.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have done a few more tests, and found images where Noise Ninja produces results I do prefer to what Adobe Camera Raw (3.7) does, so after a bit more playing around, I will say that Noise Ninja is capable of similar or better results, to my eye.</p>
<p>When added to the convenience of integration into Aperture, I will say it now makes sense to get this plugin.</p>
<p>Definitely much better than the builtin Noise reduction in Aperture 2.1.1. This on images shot with Canon 350D and 400D.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Spence</title>
		<link>http://photofocus.com/2008/08/07/noise-ninja-released-for-aperture/#comment-6387</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Spence]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Aug 2008 05:52:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twipphoto.com/?p=827#comment-6387</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have done a few more tests, and found images where Noise Ninja produces results I do prefer to what Adobe Camera Raw (3.7) does, so after a bit more playing around, I will say that Noise Ninja is capable of similar or better results, to my eye.

When added to the convenience of integration into Aperture, I will say it now makes sense to get this plugin.

Definitely much better than the builtin Noise reduction in Aperture 2.1.1. This on images shot with Canon 350D and 400D.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have done a few more tests, and found images where Noise Ninja produces results I do prefer to what Adobe Camera Raw (3.7) does, so after a bit more playing around, I will say that Noise Ninja is capable of similar or better results, to my eye.</p>
<p>When added to the convenience of integration into Aperture, I will say it now makes sense to get this plugin.</p>
<p>Definitely much better than the builtin Noise reduction in Aperture 2.1.1. This on images shot with Canon 350D and 400D.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Spence</title>
		<link>http://photofocus.com/2008/08/07/noise-ninja-released-for-aperture/#comment-6381</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Spence]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Aug 2008 02:03:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twipphoto.com/?p=827#comment-6381</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Does seem a lot better than Aperture&#039;s built-in Noise reduction, but still not quite as good as the one in Photoshop&#039;s RAW importer, which I originally compared it with way back when someone first pointed me to Noise Ninja. What I find a little strange is that the Noise Reduction filter within Photoshop is also way less effective than the one in the RAW importer.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does seem a lot better than Aperture&#8217;s built-in Noise reduction, but still not quite as good as the one in Photoshop&#8217;s RAW importer, which I originally compared it with way back when someone first pointed me to Noise Ninja. What I find a little strange is that the Noise Reduction filter within Photoshop is also way less effective than the one in the RAW importer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Spence</title>
		<link>http://photofocus.com/2008/08/07/noise-ninja-released-for-aperture/#comment-6385</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bob Spence]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Aug 2008 02:03:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twipphoto.com/?p=827#comment-6385</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Does seem a lot better than Aperture&#039;s built-in Noise reduction, but still not quite as good as the one in Photoshop&#039;s RAW importer, which I originally compared it with way back when someone first pointed me to Noise Ninja. What I find a little strange is that the Noise Reduction filter within Photoshop is also way less effective than the one in the RAW importer.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Does seem a lot better than Aperture&#8217;s built-in Noise reduction, but still not quite as good as the one in Photoshop&#8217;s RAW importer, which I originally compared it with way back when someone first pointed me to Noise Ninja. What I find a little strange is that the Noise Reduction filter within Photoshop is also way less effective than the one in the RAW importer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://photofocus.com/2008/08/07/noise-ninja-released-for-aperture/#comment-6380</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 13:49:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twipphoto.com/?p=827#comment-6380</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have just purchased this plugin and found it very effective on some shots that were taken on a G9 at ISO 1600 (The shots were taken quickly and the ISO dial must have been turned when the camera was in my pocket... I don&#039;t recommend high ISO on the G9!!)

I agree with Adam here, it is very hard to see the results with the yellow grid while using the evaluation version, but it was just enough to see some improvement. I&#039;m looking forward to the review; I&#039;ve some older low light images that would benefit from a clean up.

Dave]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have just purchased this plugin and found it very effective on some shots that were taken on a G9 at ISO 1600 (The shots were taken quickly and the ISO dial must have been turned when the camera was in my pocket&#8230; I don&#8217;t recommend high ISO on the G9!!)</p>
<p>I agree with Adam here, it is very hard to see the results with the yellow grid while using the evaluation version, but it was just enough to see some improvement. I&#8217;m looking forward to the review; I&#8217;ve some older low light images that would benefit from a clean up.</p>
<p>Dave</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://photofocus.com/2008/08/07/noise-ninja-released-for-aperture/#comment-6383</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anonymous]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 13:49:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twipphoto.com/?p=827#comment-6383</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have just purchased this plugin and found it very effective on some shots that were taken on a G9 at ISO 1600 (The shots were taken quickly and the ISO dial must have been turned when the camera was in my pocket... I don&#039;t recommend high ISO on the G9!!)

I agree with Adam here, it is very hard to see the results with the yellow grid while using the evaluation version, but it was just enough to see some improvement. I&#039;m looking forward to the review; I&#039;ve some older low light images that would benefit from a clean up.

Dave]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have just purchased this plugin and found it very effective on some shots that were taken on a G9 at ISO 1600 (The shots were taken quickly and the ISO dial must have been turned when the camera was in my pocket&#8230; I don&#8217;t recommend high ISO on the G9!!)</p>
<p>I agree with Adam here, it is very hard to see the results with the yellow grid while using the evaluation version, but it was just enough to see some improvement. I&#8217;m looking forward to the review; I&#8217;ve some older low light images that would benefit from a clean up.</p>
<p>Dave</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam</title>
		<link>http://photofocus.com/2008/08/07/noise-ninja-released-for-aperture/#comment-6388</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Adam]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:18:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://twipphoto.com/?p=827#comment-6388</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I tried this out and I think it looks good.  Im so glad it released because I was so close to buying Nik Software DFine 2.0 after your review the other day.  As I said, I only did the trial so far so I am really looking forward to seeing your review on the full version plugin.  The trial leaves a grid on your images that is really a bit extreme, making it hard to see how good the results are.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I tried this out and I think it looks good.  Im so glad it released because I was so close to buying Nik Software DFine 2.0 after your review the other day.  As I said, I only did the trial so far so I am really looking forward to seeing your review on the full version plugin.  The trial leaves a grid on your images that is really a bit extreme, making it hard to see how good the results are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

