That’s gonna be tough to find an answer to here, becasue most of the people around here don’t use Elements, and won’t be able to offer a comparitive review.
But I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that they’re probably identical.
Thanks for the reply, much appreciated.
I assumed that too, until I was reading the comparing list of PS CS3 to PS CS3 Extended, which seems to indicate PS CS3 Extended has a more powerful Filter.
steve
Thinking about this again, I’ll ask you to clarify:
Do you mean the filter for reducing noise, or the filter for adding noise?
I still can’t answer either way because I don’t use Elements, but somebody else might find the clarification useful.
I was reading the comparing list of PS CS3 to PS CS3 Extended, which seems to indicate PS CS3 Extended has a more powerful Filter.
CS3 and CS3 extended are the same application. the only difference is the serial number which unlocks the extended features such as the 3D and scientific support
You may be thinking of Stack Mode available in CS3 Extended. This can reduce camera noise if you have more than one original to stack and blend (limited use, because the subject and camera should be stationary)
I appreciate very much you responding and clarifying to see if somebody else does know.
Actually the Noise Filter has five selections to choose from.
I’m most interested in the Dust & Scratches tool. And, very surprised not to find a lot of ‘discussion’ about it, in fact almost none.
This whole Dust & Scratches Removal thing has got me scratching my butt trying to figure out if any of it by any software is NOT mostly hype.
(long reply follows)
"Retouching" tools like Dust & Scratches Removal seem to be useable only on a 1-by-1 file basis, with lots of ‘manual’ tweeking required, not as an Auto function to batches of lots of files at the same time.
Which in hindsight from experiences and what I’ve learned from those, makes sense, but, does not help me.
I have now concluded that ‘retouching’ some things like Dust & Scratches can only be done on a 1-file-at-a-time basis and takes quite a bit of ‘manual’ tweeking effort. And works IF one is capable of understanding how to do it. Otherwise, it – meaning me – only seems to make things worse instead of better.
My journey started last year when I got a German Braun Slide Scanner that included ICE, as well as Noise Reduction, which, like the included GEM and ROC only seemed to make things worse instead of better, especially worse when applying the same settings to every slide being scanned.
I have to process 100s or 1,000s of slides, and soon old photos too, at a price that most people can or are willing to pay, which is very low because of the numbers of slides and photos involved, so it’s imperative for me to have Auto Tools to apply to batches of files, instead of spending a lot of time ‘manually’ tweeking each and every file one at a time.
With the scanner, the ICE and other tools can only be used during the actual scanning of each slide, not after scanning on the resulting file. And those ‘tools’ invariably remove too much, details of faces and other stuff one wants to preserve, and fuzzy the focus.
The settings that work on the very first slide or photo do not work for any other. So, I had to turn off those tools altogether.
There was a software suite recommended for the scanner for after-scanning work, which was a European version of Photoshop, costing about as much as PS, but from the Trial version I couldn’t see any benefit to getting it.
I tried various Retouching programs for much less money, many not worth even trying, and again, even for those that did do what I needed to any degree, ran in to the same thing. Way too much time required for ‘manually’ tweeking each and every file 1 at a time, and never getting a good result because I’m no good at doing that.
THEN I recently got a Kodak Photo Scanner that does photos like the German scanner does slides, only, it does photos a LOT faster. It will scan up to 20 pre-loaded standard thickness photos of various sizes and orientations – in about 25 seconds.
But again, the problem with Dust & Scratches.
There’s a program suite for after-scanning ‘retouching’ available for the Kodak Photo Scanner – but they want $ 700 for that, and it’s pretty much a clone of Photoshop.
SO,
when I saw the comparison list between PS CS3 and the Extended version saying the Extended has a better Noise Filter,
It got me wondering……….
huh – that’s bizarre.
now I cannot find where I saw the comparison between products that said the Noise Filter was better and improved.
steve
For the most part the filters are identical and inter-changeable, as far as the Kodak suite, I have their noise filter that they offered free some time ago and I thought it did a better job on some images, but not all so not worth the price.
Steve, you should remember that there is no magic bullet for things like this and everybody has a favorite weapon. No matter what, you still have to compromise on the final result.
Hi Bart,
Thanks for the comments.
I pretty much was concluding that’s the reality concerning Dust & Scratches, but, hoping beyond hope there was a magic bullet.
BTW – the distributor I bought the Kodak Scanner from told me that I should check out www.hollywoodfotofix.com for photo stores and retailers and people or businesses that do this sort of thing for ‘consumers’ and other customers.
Hollywoodfotofix has 3 service levels,
basic – glare, teeth whitening, removing eye bags, hair, dust, scratches, colour, focus, etc stuff – for $ 2.50 per pic
complete – which also includes removing braces and stuff like that for $ 5.00 per pic
special – which includes the basic and complete plus making actual body changes like thinner thighs, extrapolations for damaged photos, or whatever, for $ 10 per pic
One uploads the pic files, inputs specific changes instructions, waits up to 3 business days or opt for a rush, and downloads the results.
They have an introductory offer of 20 free trys so you can judge the results before actually committing to the service.
While those prices are way too high for my customers to use on all their 100s and 1000s of pics, if it’s good, which I’m testing out right now with 3 very bad samples, it would be good for my customers for, oh, probably 1-10 pics of their choice. I doubt many would pay for more than 1-10 to have done.
steve
Use a pressurized air can. It doesn’t take that long.
I’d completely forget about filters or anything automatic for this.
That might be a good idea. I’ll have to try it. My scanner has so much lint on it my images are almost worthless when scanned above 300dpi. I tried one of those lint free cloths and it seams to just push the lint around.
While I am on the subject of bad scans, does anybody know if the poor film noise when scanning higher than 300dpi would be due to the printer or the film it self. If i recall the film was all 100 iso some may have been as high as 400 iso. Basic local store film from Kodak or Fuji. If it matters the camera was a Canon EOS Rebel SLR.
Sorry for getting off topic.
Higher the ISO, the higher the noise.
I have also found that when you use a dust & scratch filter you have to add noise back to make the photo more realistic.
IMO, the best use of the dust & scratches filter to reduce noise is inside a reverse luminance mask. That way it works mostly in the shadows, gradually losing effect towards the highlights. Usually, the noise is mostly a problem in the shadow areas.
dust & scratches filter to reduce noise is inside a reverse luminance mask
OOOOHH ! very intriguing idea ! I’ll have to try that. Thanks.
Re: lint free cloths, personally I’ve found the good ones for cleaning one’s glasses to work best, I use Nikon and Essilor cloths, and, sometimes a tiny tiny squirt of a very good lense cleaner fluid. I’ve been using AR66 made by Kleargo <
http://www.kleargo.com/products/C25/>
oh btw, the hollywoodfotofix site says regular time is 3 business days, but, I didn’t get my freebies back yesterday, which was day 3.
steve
I got my ‘free offer’ retouch pics back from hollywoodfotofix tonite.
I asked for the basic retouching instead of the full super deluxe, just dust and scratches and colour. I didn’t need thinned thighs or anything like that.
However, still, overall I was not particularly impressed with the results, considering the ‘expert’ service was highly recommended.
In fact, using my PSE 6, I was able to come close to achieving the same.
I guess Bart Cross was right when he told me "there’s no magic bullet".
oh well.
thanks to all for participating in this thread with your comments and ideas.
steve
Steve: Do not give up hope, all the answers were correct, it is just that each answer does not work on all images, hencely ‘no magic bullet’, it is only experience that lets you know which method works best and sometimes you have to try more than one method that gives the ‘result with the least misgivings’.
I only have one rule for Photoshop: if someone says they know everything there is to know about Photoshop, they’re lying.
