<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	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:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>NoFilmSchool &#187; noise</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nofilmschool.com/tag/noise/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nofilmschool.com</link>
	<description>NoFilmSchool is a site for DIY filmmakers and independent creatives.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 18:41:42 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Let&#039;s Settle This: Do Canon DSLRs Perform Best at ISO Multiples of 160?</title>
		<link>http://nofilmschool.com/2011/05/lets-settle-this-shoot-isos-multiples/</link>
		<comments>http://nofilmschool.com/2011/05/lets-settle-this-shoot-isos-multiples/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 May 2011 20:24:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Koo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[canon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dslr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hdslr]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iso]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[latitude]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[noise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[technicolor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tests]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nofilmschool.com/?p=11915</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;m confused. In the DSLR Guide&#8217;s chapter on ISO noise, I originally stated that it was optimal to shoot at ISOs divisible by 160, because the camera&#8217;s noise levels were lowest. Then I was told that this came at the expense of highlight headroom, so I recanted a bit. Now, as part of the Technicolor [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style=' float: left; padding: 4px; margin: 0 7px 2px 0;'  src="http://nofilmschool.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/5672069943_a38b74eac8_b-500x281-224x100.jpg" alt="" title="5672069943_a38b74eac8_b-500x281" width="224" height="100" class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-11920" />I&#8217;m confused. In the DSLR Guide&#8217;s <a href="http://nofilmschool.com/dslr/iso-noise/">chapter on ISO noise</a>, I originally stated that it was optimal to shoot at ISOs divisible by 160, because the camera&#8217;s noise levels were lowest. Then I was told that this <a href="http://nofilmschool.com/dslr/iso-noise/comment-page-1/#comment-64705">came at the expense of highlight headroom</a>, so I recanted a bit. Now, as part of the <a href="http://nofilmschool.com/2011/05/canon-technicolor-cinestyle-dslr-picture/">Technicolor CineStyle picture setting release</a>, the user manual mentions that one should shoot at &#8220;multiples of 160.&#8221; I assume Technicolor knows what they&#8217;re talking about, but the question remains. <a href="http://nofilmschool.com/2011/05/lets-settle-this-shoot-isos-multiples/#more-11915" class="more-link">(more&#8230;)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://nofilmschool.com/2011/05/lets-settle-this-shoot-isos-multiples/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Which is Better for Noise Reduction, Neat Video or Magic Bullet Denoiser?</title>
		<link>http://nofilmschool.com/2010/12/noise-reduction-neat-video-magic-bullet/</link>
		<comments>http://nofilmschool.com/2010/12/noise-reduction-neat-video-magic-bullet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Dec 2010 15:47:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Koo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[news]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[denoiser]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[magicbullet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[neatvideo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[noise]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[noisereduction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[plugins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[postproduction]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nofilmschool.com/?p=9003</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When Red Giant Software released their latest Magic Bullet product, Denoiser, I wondered how it would compare to my plugin of choice for noise reduction, Neat Video. Now, thanks to Andrew Reid at EOSHD, I don&#8217;t have to do this comparison myself, as he&#8217;s just compared the two:]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style=' float: left; padding: 4px; margin: 0 7px 2px 0;'  src="http://nofilmschool.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/denoiser-224x125.jpg" alt="" title="denoiser" width="224" height="125" class="alignleft size-medium wp-image-9083" />When Red Giant Software <a href="http://nofilmschool.com/2010/09/red-giant-releases-magic-bullet-suite-10-now-includes-grinder-photolooks-and-denoiser/">released</a> their latest Magic Bullet product, <a href="http://www.redgiantsoftware.com/products/all/magic-bullet-denoiser/">Denoiser</a>, I <a href="http://nofilmschool.com/2010/11/reducing-video-noise-magic-bullets-denoiser/">wondered how it would compare</a> to my plugin of choice for noise reduction, <a href="http://neatvideo.com/">Neat Video</a>. Now, thanks to Andrew Reid at EOSHD, I don&#8217;t have to do this comparison myself, as he&#8217;s just compared the two: <a href="http://nofilmschool.com/2010/12/noise-reduction-neat-video-magic-bullet/#more-9003" class="more-link">(more&#8230;)</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://nofilmschool.com/2010/12/noise-reduction-neat-video-magic-bullet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to fix a noisy MacBook Pro fan</title>
		<link>http://nofilmschool.com/2009/02/how-to-fix-a-noisy-macbook-pro-fan/</link>
		<comments>http://nofilmschool.com/2009/02/how-to-fix-a-noisy-macbook-pro-fan/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 03:25:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ryan Koo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[consumerism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[apple]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[howto]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mac]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[macbook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[macbookpro]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[noise]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nofilmschool.com/?p=462</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A step-by-step guide for eliminating loud fan noise from a Macbook or Macbook Pro -- without buying a new fan.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style=' float: left;'  class="alignleft"><script src="http://www.stumbleupon.com/hostedbadge.php?s=5"></script></div>
<p>My three year-old MacBook Pro recently started emitting a constant racket from its left fan (which sounds something like <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdQvf3WPKKA">this</a>). Most people will <a href="http://macmost.com/replacing-a-macbook-pro-fan.html">tell you</a> you need a <a href="http://www.ifixit.com/MacBook-Parts/MacBook-Pro-15-Inch-Core-Duo-Left-Fan/IF185-023">new fan</a> for $50, but I decided to try to fix it instead, and so far (it&#8217;s been <span style="text-decoration: line-through;">two weeks</span> nine months), the repair has worked great. As any google or youtube search for &#8220;noisy macbook pro fan&#8221; produces thousands of results, I hope this saves someone fifty of their hard-earned bucks during this, the <a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0209/18840.html">winter of our hardships</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://nofilmschool.com/2009/02/how-to-fix-a-noisy-macbook-pro-fan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>191</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

