Antonius Posted March 29, 2010 Share #1 Posted March 29, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Some of my Leica friends and some people in this forum who loves their M9s have been less satisfied with it's noise handling. Some people using LR2 to convert their DNG files says shadow noise is not only very apparent but appear in some kind og ugly "cluster pattern" (if you understand what I mean). Trying out LR3 beta 2, I see a very much improved noise handling, with no more cluster patterns in the shadow noise and far better control with the noise adjustment and tools. Anyone else got experience with this version of LR and Leica DNG files? Antonius Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 29, 2010 Posted March 29, 2010 Hi Antonius, Take a look here Noise handling improvements in LR3 beta 2. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
yanidel Posted March 29, 2010 Share #2 Posted March 29, 2010 Noise, but also sharpness control are mch improved in LR3. Though I cannot convert my old library yet, I have fully switched for my new pictures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted March 29, 2010 Share #3 Posted March 29, 2010 It's a great improvement IMHO and I'm REALLY looking forward to it's final launch. However, and Adobe do stress this, it's best ONLY to use the Beta on copied images as there are still bugs and risks. Yanidel - I'd be very wary of defaulting to the Beta for real work... Best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted March 29, 2010 Share #4 Posted March 29, 2010 Yes its great improvement with .dng files. I hate Lightroom anyway (I must be the only person) but the new processing engine is top drawer work, not only for the amount of reduction in noise, but the way that the noise thats left is organised into what looks like film grain and is far more acceptable on the eye. Can't wait for CS5 or the next ACR! Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andalus Posted March 29, 2010 Share #5 Posted March 29, 2010 Noise Ninja works great in the LR beta. Give it a try. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted March 29, 2010 Share #6 Posted March 29, 2010 All the raw converters these days are doing wonders, IMO. I just shot a family gathering on my M8 with a 35 Lux (at about 2.8), and I had set the ISO set to 1250 for testing--and forgot to set it back! This is from C1, but it's a good lesson in why you shoot RAW: to be able to take advantage of improvements in technology later! This is me and my father on his 90th birthday. I focused the M8 and passed it to someone at the table Yes, there's noise there at 100%, and no, it's nothing like it used to be on the M8 and this would print wonderfully. Most of that improvement is down to improvements in the raw converter. I'm sure LR is doing similar things. I don't use Neat Image or Noise Ninja at all anymore... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/116727-noise-handling-improvements-in-lr3-beta-2/?do=findComment&comment=1276855'>More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted March 29, 2010 Share #7 Posted March 29, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) FYI, there's a similar thread in the DPP Forum section: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-post-processing-forum/120020-ligtroom-3-beta-2-merged.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yanidel Posted March 29, 2010 Share #8 Posted March 29, 2010 IYanidel - I'd be very wary of defaulting to the Beta for real work... Best I am an optimistic by nature Did more tests tonight with M9 at ISO2500 + LR3. After learning to play with noise reduction sliders, the results are simply amazing. Some sharpness is lost but it is very clean, much better than what I got in the past with M8 + LR2 at ISO1250. Looking at my 24" imac with full preview, I just can't see any noise unless I glue my eyes against the screen Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted March 30, 2010 Share #9 Posted March 30, 2010 I am an optimistic by nature Did more tests tonight with M9 at ISO2500 + LR3. After learning to play with noise reduction sliders, the results are simply amazing. Some sharpness is lost but it is very clean, much better than what I got in the past with M8 + LR2 at ISO1250. Looking at my 24" imac with full preview, I just can't see any noise unless I glue my eyes against the screen It reminds me of a recent thread about shooting RAW/dng or JPEG, and my position along with some others, was shoot RAW because you never know what will come along.....and now we have LR3 that gives another stop, maybe two, of noise free higher ISO images in a photographers back catalogue. That it does it so easily, and in a better rendering (imo) compared to Noise Ninja, etc is another bonus. Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 30, 2010 Share #10 Posted March 30, 2010 All the raw converters these days are doing wonders, IMO. I just shot a family gathering on my M8 with a 35 Lux (at about 2.8), and I had set the ISO set to 1250 for testing--and forgot to set it back! This is from C1, but it's a good lesson in why you shoot RAW: to be able to take advantage of improvements in technology later! This is me and my father on his 90th birthday. I focused the M8 and passed it to someone at the table Yes, there's noise there at 100%, and no, it's nothing like it used to be on the M8 and this would print wonderfully. Most of that improvement is down to improvements in the raw converter. I'm sure LR is doing similar things. I don't use Neat Image or Noise Ninja at all anymore... [ATTACH]195131[/ATTACH] Try an out-of-camera jpg at 2500, Jamie. I find the results hard to match in RAW. As long as you shoot a full histogram, the results are very good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted March 30, 2010 Share #11 Posted March 30, 2010 Try an out-of-camera jpg at 2500, Jamie. I find the results hard to match in RAW. As long as you shoot a full histogram, the results are very good. Jaap--you mean with the M9 or M8? If M9, what compression settings on the DNG? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 30, 2010 Share #12 Posted March 30, 2010 M9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted March 30, 2010 Share #13 Posted March 30, 2010 M9 So what compression settings on the DNG? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 30, 2010 Share #14 Posted March 30, 2010 Compression? What is compression? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted March 30, 2010 Share #15 Posted March 30, 2010 Compression? What is compression? We'll continue in that other thread Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.