FMB Posted June 16, 2010 Share #21 Posted June 16, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's there someone comparing the noise reduction tools LR3 vs. CR6.1 (Photoshop Cs5)?As I've heard the both systems practically use same tools with same results. I'm waiting for my upgrade to CS5. Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 16, 2010 Posted June 16, 2010 Hi FMB, Take a look here M9, High ISO, Lightroom 3. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ianspector Posted June 16, 2010 Share #22 Posted June 16, 2010 Probably worth mentioning that LR3 uses exactly the same NR engine as Photoshop CS5. For my uses the improvements in Adobe Camera Raw being discussed here are making the add in applications such as Nik redundant. Ian Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted June 16, 2010 Author Share #23 Posted June 16, 2010 +1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 16, 2010 Share #24 Posted June 16, 2010 +2 - though I'm m8 rather than m9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted June 16, 2010 Share #25 Posted June 16, 2010 +3 - like Steve - I used to have NoiseNinja installed in CS3 but I recently reinstalled it on another drive. Couldn't be bothered to install NN as I find the noise reduction sliders in LR3 do the job for me. Well done Adobe! LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted June 18, 2010 Share #26 Posted June 18, 2010 I find the new LR3 to be absolutely phenomenal. I have no hesitation to shoot at max ISO 2500 now, a few slider adjustments make the files look mighty clean. Totally random desk shot 5 minutes ago. ISO2500, 50Lux@1.4 I am seriously impressed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted June 18, 2010 Share #27 Posted June 18, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Vlad, that is a really incredible shot. This is exactly what I have seen and felt that was going on with Canon. Except, Canon has been doing it in camera. Kind of levels the playing field, doesn't it? Canon smoothes out the image and you can't do anything about it in PP. It is already done for you and you can't go back and retrieve the detail. With the M9 it looks like you can because it is done in PP in light room and it can be backed out. This is huge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ash Posted June 18, 2010 Share #28 Posted June 18, 2010 That is a great point you mentioned. I always felt that Leica's approach is superior to the approach of Canon and Nikon but could not understand way the in-camera NR was superior to doing it in PP. Regards Steve Canon smoothes out the image and you can't do anything about it in PP. It is already done for you and you can't go back and retrieve the detail. With the M9 it looks like you can because it is done in PP in light room and it can be backed out. This is huge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillM82 Posted June 18, 2010 Share #29 Posted June 18, 2010 Any idea how the Noise Reduction performance in LR3 compares to that of Aperture 3? As I saw nothing about it when A3 came out, I assume it was nothing special in that regard? I am really tempted to switch from A3 if LR3 (for $99) is so advanced, but reluctant to go through that learning curve. Has anyone compared the two products yet? Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overgaard Posted June 18, 2010 Share #30 Posted June 18, 2010 Any idea how the Noise Reduction performance in LR3 compares to that of Aperture 3?As I saw nothing about it when A3 came out, I assume it was nothing special in that regard? I am really tempted to switch from A3 if LR3 (for $99) is so advanced, but reluctant to go through that learning curve. Has anyone compared the two products yet? Regards, Bill In terms of usability they are quite the same, just the features placed differently. So don't worry about the learning curve too much. I decided for LR3 because that is the one Leica work with, so I have a hope that, despite that Aperture might lead the game occasionally, Lightroom will continue to be the best of te two for Leica cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted June 18, 2010 Share #31 Posted June 18, 2010 I find the new LR3 to be absolutely phenomenal. I have no hesitation to shoot at max ISO 2500 now, a few slider adjustments make the files look mighty clean. Totally random desk shot 5 minutes ago. ISO2500, 50Lux@1.4 I am seriously impressed. It looks really good!!! Please some Crops! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted June 19, 2010 Share #32 Posted June 19, 2010 It looks really good!!! Please some Crops! 100% crops with standard output sharpening applied. Now the last crop without any NR applied: Now, I just quickly played with the sliders, this is may only just scrape the surface of what may be possible with the NR in LR3 PP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted June 19, 2010 Share #33 Posted June 19, 2010 Any idea how the Noise Reduction performance in LR3 compares to that of Aperture 3?As I saw nothing about it when A3 came out, I assume it was nothing special in that regard? I am really tempted to switch from A3 if LR3 (for $99) is so advanced, but reluctant to go through that learning curve. Has anyone compared the two products yet? Regards, Bill I feel like speed-wise, A3 has the edge over Adobe's LR. I blame this on special optimizations for MacOSX that Apple knows about and won't tell the competition. The learning curve is nothing to be worried about, it's very intuitive. I have decided to stick with LR3 after playing with it for a few days now. In the end, it's still kinda the same s**t with a different name. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted June 19, 2010 Share #34 Posted June 19, 2010 Thank you very much! This is as you wrote Phenomenal! I can see the letters of the right side of the bottle (should be were you focused) sharp and clean of noise. The ISO 2500 is now useful and IHMO makes the M9 a new camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted June 19, 2010 Author Share #35 Posted June 19, 2010 Thank you very much! This is as you wrote Phenomenal! I can see the letters of the right side of the bottle (should be were you focused) sharp and clean of noise. The ISO 2500 is now useful and IHMO makes the M9 a new camera. I think you're right. I've been looking back over earlier work I did from 1600 to 2500 re-processed through LR3 and the difference is amazing. Sometimes all you need to do is to shift to the 2010 process version and the image stands - not even a need to adjust noise reduction. VERY pleased. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted June 19, 2010 Share #36 Posted June 19, 2010 I've just tried L3. I'm not used to this program but the NR works incredible! Some test shots 2500. I'm happy:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted June 21, 2010 Share #37 Posted June 21, 2010 Should I expect similar results with my high iso M8.2 files (if it ever comes back from Solmes?) Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 21, 2010 Share #38 Posted June 21, 2010 Pete, yes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stealth3kpl Posted June 21, 2010 Share #39 Posted June 21, 2010 Pete, yes. I've just found my M8.2 in the corner of the office!!! I've been on holiday, and no one mentioned a parcel had arrived. (Rangefinder adjustment). There's going to be some serious pixel peaking tonight:D Pete Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptarmigan Posted June 21, 2010 Share #40 Posted June 21, 2010 Without wishing to pee on anyones bonfire, it's the high ISO in very low light shots where you're marginal on exposure that we need to see, not the easily well exposed, plenty of light stuff - that's when the M8 struggles. I've some nice ISO 2500 shots that have great exposure and that looked fine even before LR3. Anyone? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.