Denoise Programs

[Brownbear]

Thank you Gerry. The reviews seem to favour Topaz, too.

I've tried them all and Topaz DeNoise (to me) the best of the lot. New NR algorithms allow much better retention of detail. Removes noise in individual color channels, and also banding noise. Very good two-part instructional video on the web. Really shows how to use the product to its full advantage. Search in Google.

Nik Define 2 is very good -- but Topaz DeNoise is better!

[rpcrowe]

You do have a lot of control with NIK Define 2 as you do with Topaz DeNoise. The book Nik Software Captured: The Complete Guide to Using Nik Software's Photographic Tools by Tony Corbell is pretty a pretty good manual. There are also Kindle editions of this book as well as other NIK books on Amazon.com.

http://www.amazon.com/s/?tag=america...=7&Submit.y=10

I keep finding new uses for my Nook Tablet since I can set it up for Kindle books.

There are lots of NIK tutorial videos on YouTube.

http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...be.naBFzXtjqF8

I am definitely not necessarily recommending NIK over Topaz. I used the Topaz suite for a long while until I had a computer virus which resulted in my technician wiping my hard disk clean. This did away with my Topaz suite. Although I had the access code, I was never able to get Topaz back up and running.

I purchased the NIK software suite for other reasons than the Define 2 noise reduction capability when Google took over NIK and reduced the price considerably. But, since I have Define in the NIK suite, I now use that as my noise reduction program.

Actually noise doesn't bother me as much as over sharpening with its artifacts. Often nature photographers need/desire to crop their images severely because of lack of focal length when shooting. This can result in BOTH a noisy image (when there is inherent noise in the shot) and in a less than sharp image which the photographer sometimes makes up for by over sharpening.

It is often mentioned that a lens had no impact on noise and that the camera is the only equipment parameter (other than not underexposing) for noise control. I partially disagree with that statement. Although the cameras high ISO capability may have the major impact on noise, IMO, the choice of lenses can also contribute to the appearance of or lack of noise in an image because:

1. Longer lenses will allow the photographer to get a bigger image of the subject requiring less enlarging.

2. Faster lenses will (often but, not always) allow the photographer to shoot at a lower ISO.

[Brownbear]

Hi Richard,

Thank you for your very informative reply and some very useful advice on photography as applicable to nature shots, lens and sharpening and noise.

Thank you also for the link which I will check out.

[davidedric]

Hi,

Been following this thread with interest. I am speaking as a hobbyist photographer, shooting and developing for my own pleasure and occasionally family and friends. I am not trying to get into stock photos, so don't have the issues that Christina does. I use Lightroom 4.4 for most of my processing, but I do have the Nik suite of plug-ins for LR, as well as PSE11 and NeatImage, so I have a few options.

However, if I have read the thread right, then the LR noise reduction is reckoned pretty good, if not up there with the best. For me stepping out to a plug-in in the middle of workflow is a nuisance, because I then end with a TIFF with all the edits baked in, and I lose the continuity of the LR history. Or is it best practice to save noise reduction till right at the end of the workflow?

It also seems to me (happy to be corrected) that having noise reduction and sharpening in the same tool is a considerable plus, since the two work in opposite directions, to some extent.

So, I plan to stay in LR unless I find something that it just can't handle. Does that make sense?

Dave

[Shadowman]

Hi,

Been following this thread with interest. I am speaking as a hobbyist photographer, shooting and developing for my own pleasure and occasionally family and friends. I am not trying to get into stock photos, so don't have the issues that Christina does. I use Lightroom 4.4 for most of my processing, but I do have the Nik suite of plug-ins for LR, as well as PSE11 and NeatImage, so I have a few options.

However, if I have read the thread right, then the LR noise reduction is reckoned pretty good, if not up there with the best. For me stepping out to a plug-in in the middle of workflow is a nuisance, because I then end with a TIFF with all the edits baked in, and I lose the continuity of the LR history. Or is it best practice to save noise reduction till right at the end of the workflow?

It also seems to me (happy to be corrected) that having noise reduction and sharpening in the same tool is a considerable plus, since the two work in opposite directions, to some extent.

So, I plan to stay in LR unless I find something that it just can't handle. Does that make sense?

Dave

Dave,

It depends on what stepping out of the environment entails. A few third party programs cannot handle 16-bit images, some cannot handle TIFFs, so it depends on what steps need to be taken prior to processing. Also, I guess it also depends on where in the work flow you handle that form of processing. I read in a few of the how-to books that you should handle the big problems first, so if noise is your main issue you can get to work on de-noise immendiately after RAW conversion.

[rpcrowe]

This seems to be quite a good tutorial on using NIK Dfine 2 in the Manual, rather than automatic, mode. It was done by an independent photographer rather than a NIK guru.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5kG10DW1_o

I am not trying to say that the NIK Dfine is better than the Topaz Dnoise, just that since I purchased the NIK suite at a good price since Google took it over for other reasons than the Dfine 2 capability (mostly because of the "Control Point" system), I ended up using Dfine 2 which suits my purposes.

[Brownbear]

Hi Dave,

I think the noise reduction in LR is good... Generally it's default setting of reduce colour noise at 25% works just fine for me for 90% of my photos. It is only when trying to photograph dark coloured wildlife at higher isos, that noise at full size is a bit of a challenge, and that was more so with my Nikon D80... I just purchased a Nikon D7100 and I'm quite amazed at how high an iso I can get away with.

Sorry I don't know the answer to your work flow question.

Hi,

Been following this thread with interest. I am speaking as a hobbyist photographer, shooting and developing for my own pleasure and occasionally family and friends. I am not trying to get into stock photos, so don't have the issues that Christina does. I use Lightroom 4.4 for most of my processing, but I do have the Nik suite of plug-ins for LR, as well as PSE11 and NeatImage, so I have a few options.

However, if I have read the thread right, then the LR noise reduction is reckoned pretty good, if not up there with the best. For me stepping out to a plug-in in the middle of workflow is a nuisance, because I then end with a TIFF with all the edits baked in, and I lose the continuity of the LR history. Or is it best practice to save noise reduction till right at the end of the workflow?

It also seems to me (happy to be corrected) that having noise reduction and sharpening in the same tool is a considerable plus, since the two work in opposite directions, to some extent.

So, I plan to stay in LR unless I find something that it just can't handle. Does that make sense?

Dave

[Donald]

This seems to be quite a good tutorial on using NIK Dfine 2

That's excellent, Richard. Thank you for that link.

I've never really used noise reduction and don't see that I will have much of a need for it. But, at the same time, I was always a bit mystified as to how one was supposed to use Dfine 2. This provided an excellent answer.

[davidedric]

Thanks for your responses. I should also have said that I shoot in RAW!

It depends on what stepping out of the environment entails. A few third party programs cannot handle 16-bit images

Yes, even PSE can't handle 16-bits for many of it's features, but fortunately just using it as a vehicle for NeatImage seems to work OK, and you get the 16-bit TIFF back. Nik plug-in is not problem, either

I guess it also depends on where in the work flow you handle that form of processing

Yes, I am sure you are right and if noise is a big problem (it actually rarely is, for me) then it would make sense to handle it up front, in which case the workflow problem goes away. Alternatively, handle it right at the end, which I guess is what the LR developers envisaged given where they put the panel. Still, for me, having noise reduction and sharpening in the same tool without creating extra images (which is what happens if you go into Nik or NeatImage) is a real plus.

Dave

[davidedric]

This seems to be quite a good tutorial on using NIK Dfine 2 in the Manual, rather than automatic, mode. It was done by an independent photographer rather than a NIK guru.

Thanks very much for the link, Richard. If there are other users out there with both Lightroom and Nik, this companion video on LR noise reduction shows an example of where it works well, and another where LR struggles. I found the two together very useful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH2h7CTD2MA

[jcuknz]

..... , but I think a lot of people are overly obsessed with noise.

I'll second that

I remember when I applied USM at 500% twice, let's say that is 1000% USM ?, and the judge was nearly sick LOL.