Virtual Photographer Plugin

[Archangel]

I downloaded a few days ago the Virtual Photographer Plugin.
I must say that I find it very useful indeed as it speeds up the process of applying specific effects.
Though I get the same problem with a few of the included presets.

The problem, is intense image blockiness mostly visible on uniform areas, like skies, of walls and generally where there is a uniformity of color when specific presets are used at the default settings.

The problem occurs only in B&W Plugin Section and when presets are used at default settings and is mostly and clearly visible when image is viewed at full size.

Presets: Anvil, Character, Dramatic, Fashion Shoebox, Spooky and Still Life.

Has anybody noticed the same the problem? If not can you tested yourselves and post your findings?
Here is an example of "Before-After"


http://dpnow.com/galleries/data/594/Virtual_Photographer.jpg


Regards

George

[Martin]

Hi Georgem
I have had VP for some time bit tend not to use it a great deal but I have never noticed much deterioration from my original pics. I have had a play around using an image with a bland sky and was not able to emulate the blockiness you describe. However I was quite pleased with the shoe box effect on this image so thanks for stimulating my interest .:D :)
A 100% crop of the sky area did not reveal any serious imperfections.

http://dpnow.com/galleries//data//624/Sowerby_Bridge_and_Wainhouse_Tower_SB.jpg

Regards
Martin

[Martin]

Sorry about the M in your name - Don't know where that came from:o

[Archangel]

Hi Georgem
I have had VP for some time bit tend not to use it a great deal but I have never noticed much deterioration from my original pics. I have had a play around using an image with a bland sky and was not able to emulate the blockiness you describe. However I was quite pleased with the shoe box effect on this image so thanks for stimulating my interest .:D :)
A 100% crop of the sky area did not reveal any serious imperfections.

Regards
Martin

I doesn't happen in all photos Martin. In some of them it does though and not necessarily with all these plugins at the same photo.
It was just an observation and it seems to me that it is related with specific hues in the photos.
No problem with the "m" at the end of my name. Mistypings happen very often to everybody :D

George

[JonMikal]

the presets you mentioned: Anvil, Character, Dramatic, Fashion Shoebox, Spooky and Still Life all lend themselves to high grain b&w film IMO and you should expect those results. but i'm like you and want to create the effect without pixel loss....so after i run VP i head into Neat Image to clean it up...works wonders for me.

give the demo version a go: http://www.neatimage.com/download.html

[Steve40]

Virtual Photographer is good, but I have been playing around with one I think is better. Alien Skin Exposure v1.0, you can download a fully functional 30 day trial. After this you can determine whether you think it is worth the $199.00. :eek: :D

Oh, it is a PS plugin.

[Archangel]

the presets you mentioned: Anvil, Character, Dramatic, Fashion Shoebox, Spooky and Still Life all lend themselves to high grain b&w film IMO and you should expect those results. but i'm like you and want to create the effect without pixel loss....so after i run VP i head into Neat Image to clean it up...works wonders for me.

give the demo version a go: http://www.neatimage.com/download.html


John,

I use Neat Image, Noise Ninja and NoiseWare for denoising.
I like Noiseware a little better than the other two and use it most of the times, plus it has ready denoising presets (e.g Night Scene...e.t.c)

George

[Stephen]

Hi George, after you posted this thead, I was a little suprised at your findings so had a look at the specific filters you mentioned on a fairly random landcape image of my own. I was able to detect some minor blockiness in cloud areas, though nothing as bad as in your example. I suspect that saving at fairly high compression levels will exagerate this.

However it has to be said also that these particular filters are fairly agressive ones and do not lend themselves to all types of image. Infact I find it often wise to modify the level of filtration offered by default to suit my own taste. The sliders certainly offer great control and I found that the blockiness can be reduced by doing this.

I've used VP for some years now, and think its a great plugin. Frankly I can't believe how they offer it for free whilst others charge so much :)

[Archangel]

Hi George, after you posted this thead, I was a little suprised at your findings so had a look at the specific filters you mentioned on a fairly random landcape image of my own. I was able to detect some minor blockiness in cloud areas, though nothing as bad as in your example. I suspect that saving at fairly high compression levels will exagerate this.

However it has to be said also that these particular filters are fairly agressive ones and do not lend themselves to all types of image. Infact I find it often wise to modify the level of filtration offered by default to suit my own taste. The sliders certainly offer great control and I found that the blockiness can be reduced by doing this.

I've used VP for some years now, and think its a great plugin. Frankly I can't believe how they offer it for free whilst others charge so much :)


Stephen,

It is a very nice plugin indeed and gives you some control over the image with some personal effects selection.
The problem does not appear in all photos. In some of them it does more intense, in some others very slightly noticeable regardless of brand camera, since I've tested images from 2 different brand cameras.
It doesn't seem to be a serious issue though. Maybe it is a minor bug on the effect algorithm.
Now considering that it is free, it is excellent plugin, no problem at all :)


George