jochiongv Posted January 28, 2016 Share #1 Posted January 28, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Trying to learn how to (best) manage noise with shots in dark conditions. Your feedback would be appreciated. (Uploaded to my Google Drive original DNG and various JPGs at different stages of LR editing--file names captures what I did. Please access at your convenience.) Are the patterns that run horizontally what are commonly referred to as "banding"? Is this the best one can do with the image without further smearing details? Thx in advance. https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B9YDav4kiHL0T2IyelNubEVobUk&usp=sharing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 28, 2016 Posted January 28, 2016 Hi jochiongv, Take a look here Seeking advice: M-P 3200 ISO files, managing noise.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted January 28, 2016 Share #2 Posted January 28, 2016 Although it is not quite up to date, I think that the book " real world sharpening " by Schewe and Fraser is required reading if one wants the best results at high ISO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jto555 Posted January 28, 2016 Share #3 Posted January 28, 2016 A plugin for Photoshop called Noiseware (http://www.imagenomic.com/nw.aspx) works very well and cost about $80. I have tried a few plugins and I find this one to be the best. With Noiseware you can create a second layer and you can mask out areas where the noise reduction has removed too much detail. Here is a video to show you how to use it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmx_2 Posted January 28, 2016 Share #4 Posted January 28, 2016 Jto555: did you try this one: https://www.topazlabs.com/denoise The commercial was nice (as always... But would be good to rear a vote from a real user:)) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jto555 Posted February 1, 2016 Share #5 Posted February 1, 2016 Hi MMX_2, just to say that I am a real user for Noiseware and no I do not work/have anything to do with Imagenomic. I have tried Topaz and found it very slow on my system I also was not too impressed with the output. Nik software was good but it smeared the detail a bit more that I liked. Give Noiseware a try. However, if Topaz works for you then that is great. I love choice! Noiseware is about $80 I think, so it is not the cheapest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Lowe Posted February 3, 2016 Share #6 Posted February 3, 2016 Switch to a 246, SL, or Q. The 240 is not good at 3200 and up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jto555 Posted February 3, 2016 Share #7 Posted February 3, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Switch to a 246, SL, or Q. The 240 is not good at 3200 and up. That is an inspired idea. Really. So when should we expect your cheque? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Lowe Posted February 3, 2016 Share #8 Posted February 3, 2016 That is an inspired idea. Really. So when should we expect your cheque? Point taken. To me, it boils down to time, money, and results. If the OP's primarily taking photos in these conditions and is having to spend a lot of time removing noise from individual photos then switching platforms is worth considering. It will cost some money up front but it will save a lot of time and produce superior results. If OP's only taking the occasional photo in these conditions then the cost of switching cameras probably isn't worth it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Black Posted February 3, 2016 Share #9 Posted February 3, 2016 NIK noise reduction works wonders, in particular the debanding option. This was snapshot with M @ ISO 6400 after being cleaned up with NIK. Quite respectable performance from the CMOSIS sensor IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmx_2 Posted February 3, 2016 Share #10 Posted February 3, 2016 Hi MMX_2, just to say that I am a real user for Noiseware and no I do not work/have anything to do with Imagenomic. I have tried Topaz and found it very slow on my system I also was not too impressed with the output. Nik software was good but it smeared the detail a bit more that I liked. Give Noiseware a try. However, if Topaz works for you then that is great. I love choice! Noiseware is about $80 I think, so it is not the cheapest. Thanks a lot for the tip!! I will check Noiseware instead /Joakim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted February 4, 2016 Share #11 Posted February 4, 2016 Switch to a 246, SL, or Q. The 240 is not good at 3200 and up. Sure it is, if you use proper photographic technique which may include consideration of light, exposure and possibly adjusting the contrast when processing the image. This is nothing new, photographers have been working like this for decades, I sure have. 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/256150-seeking-advice-m-p-3200-iso-files-managing-noise/?do=findComment&comment=2982937'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 4, 2016 Share #12 Posted February 4, 2016 To me all these products do a good job, however ACR and Photoshop are quite adequate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erudolph Posted February 4, 2016 Share #13 Posted February 4, 2016 To me all these products do a good job, however ACR and Photoshop are quite adequate. +1. Yes, they do. After reading this thread I did a casual comparison between Nik Dfine 2, Neat Image, and Noiseware and found all do similarly good jobs. That said, Nik Dfine 2 has a setting for removing banding and the other two don't, and so they weren't as good at removing it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted February 4, 2016 Share #14 Posted February 4, 2016 I have slowly started "accepting" M240's ISO 3200 files. Earlier I tried to remove noise in LR but now I simply leave the noise/sharpening sliders all the way to left at 0. Now I like the small grain of ISO 3200. If the photograph is properly exposed then any attempt to reduce the noise affects rest of the picture negatively. Of course if you have underexposed then lifting shadows will bring out more noise. still, noise doesn't bother me as much as banding does. My solution for banding is to crush the shadows so that it is not visible in the print. Note that you see lot more noise/banding on a monitor than in the print (which has less dynamic range). IMHO attempts to reduce noise should be made with consideration to final output. My 2 cents. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Black Posted February 4, 2016 Share #15 Posted February 4, 2016 +1. Yes, they do. After reading this thread I did a casual comparison between Nik Dfine 2, Neat Image, and Noiseware and found all do similarly good jobs. That said, Nik Dfine 2 has a setting for removing banding and the other two don't, and so they weren't as good at removing it. NIK's "de-banding" option is what makes the plug-in worth it. If looking for general noise reduction, NIK does okay, but nothing special in my opinion. The M9 had banding at high ISO, the M-240 does - even my A7II does. I get alot of value out of the debanding feature. I've used the de-banding even on base ISO shots that have been edited (ie - boosted shadows, levels edits, curves, saturation, etc) and it's interesting to see what it cleaned up on a supposedly "clean" image. I didn't notice the banding in the edited image, but after running the debanding and comparing the results, there was a definite improvement. Why do this (on a base ISO image)? If it's a small cropped image, say 10 MP, and has undergone moderate editing and planning to print on 24" printer, those "bands" become noticeable. So cleaning them up (even on a base ISO file) can help with the print quality (when extrapolating upwards). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Lowe Posted February 5, 2016 Share #16 Posted February 5, 2016 Another option is to add some artificial grain to help the NR break up the distinguishable patterns of the banding. And if the worst banding is constrained to a certain area of the photo, you can always try cropping. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.