There is a good noise reduction module in Davinci Resolve, studio version (paid), with both dynamic and static noise reduction options.
It may be worth buying the studio version (one payment with life time updates, no subscription), and get a complete solution with plenty of great features, than just a noise reduction module from a 3rd party.

I got a bit more than this for 1650 photos.
But I'm not happy about it, because my work was abused to compete against me, without my explicit consent.

Just upgrade your GPU and you will be happier than before.
Especially if you also do video.

You can find good deals on ebay. I just bought a 3080Ti, but you can buy a 1080Ti for less than $200.

Edit. Sorry, I just realised that you have a laptop. Different story.  Desktops are much easier to upgrade.

Quote from: cosus on September 14, 2023, 14:05

We still hold the copyright, but they have taken an perpetual license to use our images and are paying us a one-time payment of an amazing $0.069 per image. At least that's the amount I got for each image. None of us would agree to something like that. But the way the agencies set it up, if you don't leave, you agree.

On a purely per-image uploaded basis, my total is different: $0.118, so the metric must be something else. Mat said it was heavily weighted toward sales totals, so they must be ignoring the pictures I have of box elder bugs that no one has ever bought

For me it's $0.51 for every image in my port.
This shows that not all images are treated equally.
Big concern for me, when I see this number!

Quote from: Jo Ann Snover on September 14, 2023, 11:44

But we still hold the copyright to our work, with whatever value the buyers will place on that over time.

We still hold the copyright, but they have taken an perpetual license to use our images and are paying us a one-time payment of an amazing $0.069 per image. At least that's the amount I got for each image. None of us would agree to something like that. But the way the agencies set it up, if you don't leave, you agree.

Yes indeed. If can withdraw all my images from the market and stop selling them because I own the copyright, I can't withdraw them from the already trained algorithms and from the AI market.

Bits of my images will be sold forever without my consent.

I am very concerned by the large payment I received (close to $700).

This means that my assets were heavily used to directly compete against myself.
We need a way to opt out from shooting ourselves in the foot for money.

Good month for me (best since Nov '22):

Quote from: Zero Talent on August 30, 2023, 20:51

Very nice!

Video?

Video.

Yes, yes, yes... keep them coming.

Post on reddit, spread the word. Samsung is a scummy company with misleading marketing.

Already posted on r/GalaxyS22 (4.7k views), r/S22Ultra (5.9k views), and r/s22ultraphotography (599 views) before talking to Samsung.

But, I don't have much hope from Reddit; if there is a chance to fix it, it will come from logging that ticket with Samsung.

For users of Samsung S22 Ultra (and S23 Ultra, and maybe other variants).
I noticed that the new Lightroom AI denoise algorithm doesn't work with this phone's DNG files.
I went back to RAW photos I shot in December, and guess what? Those RAW photos can be denoised by the new LR algorithm!

After digging deeper, I realised that something happend in between.
Most likely, a firmware update screwed things up.

Below is the before/after EXIF data.


We can clearly see that the new DNGs are not uncompressed RAW anymore, but Linear RAW with embedded JPEG compression.
This explains why LR AI Denoise doesn't work on these files anymore

I suspect that the problem started sometimes in April, when Expert RAW was added as an option inside the default camera app, in Pro mode.

Expert RAW always had these linear RAW files (since these are HDR DNGs), and I suspect that when the two things were combined, the Expert RAW DNG generating algoritm replaced the original RAW algorithm. Not good.

Also, as a side note: The x3 and x10 sensors have 10Mpix native resolution (3648 x 2736), but the outputs of Expert RAW and the regular camera app in photo mode are 12Mpix (4000 x 3000)!

So Expert RAW is upscaling the output of the x3 and x10 cameras. This is not what RAW files are supposed to do. It only confirms that the DNG is in fact a JPEG file in a DNG container.

Anyways, I opened a case with Samsung. Hopefully they will realise the error and restore the original capabilities.

Davinci Resolve, studio version, has an excellent built-in noise reduction module.

Not necessarily. If you work from 9 to 5, you have an hourly wage right (probably a monthly salary but still).

Then you have to commute to work. One takes ten minutes, the other two hours. This time is not factored in. Then you probably drink coffee in the morning, you take a shower (who wants to smell when getting at work?). You eat breakfast because you need some energy to do your work. You sleep during the night to be able to do your work the next day.

So it can be quite arbitrarily what you may count or not as being part of how much time it actually costs to make this hourly wage/monthly salary.

You count in this and that. Doug counts in this and that. You disagree but both of you are not wrong or right.

And in that sense Doug came out better asking you for your calculation with an open vision while you only ridiculed him and did not show how you would calculate stuff.

A realistic calculation, as several others have suggested, must be done like for a regular business, no matter if you may, or may not have fun doing that business (while wishing everybody to be lucky enough to also enjoy doing their main jobs, not just microstock)

Include the time spent planning, the time spent traveling (or a proportion of it), the time spent shooting, the time spent editing, storing the files, the time spent keywording, maintaining/upgrading your equipment, then deduct amortization and depreciation, and any other expenses, as indicated by the IRS rules (which, btw, are also allowing for some meal deductions, fyi), etc.

Basically talk to an accountant if all this feels overwhelming.

Only then you may arrive at the realistic hourly/rate, instead of that $348/hour non-sense based only on feelings, on fun or not fun.

Btw, I didn't ridicule him. I simply proved him wrong.