chrism Posted November 2, 2006 Share #1 Posted November 2, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have tried some different noise reduction tricks on a (ahem!) certain ISO 2500 file and posted up the (large) resulting JPGs at this site. I am a rank amateur at this kind of thing, but I was very pleased with one of the results. I would still be happy to take any guidance on whether there are better ways, though. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 2, 2006 Posted November 2, 2006 Hi chrism, Take a look here Noise Reduction. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
grober Posted November 2, 2006 Share #2 Posted November 2, 2006 The M8 prayer: "Dear Lord: Thank you for the gnomes that manufactured and (hopefully) shipped the M8 you meant for me to enjoy every time I shoot pictures with it over the next __ years. Now please allow me to spend more time actually using it than hunched over a keyboard tweaking countless bits and bytes. Thanks too for the sun you hang in the sky everyday for those of us who still like to dance in its warmth and sometimes capture pleasingly arranged photons berneath it. Sincerely, Grober" (Hey Chris, Holy Bit Bucket! Thanks for posting the examples and VERY HELPFUL commentary. God preserve us from all the hours of boring computer time that may be necessary to properly employ this new Solms creation. If the shooting hours surpass the tweaking hours, that's a good start in my book. Results may vary, etc., etc.) -g Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
newyorkone Posted November 2, 2006 Share #3 Posted November 2, 2006 Thanks Chris... My fav, C1 noise removed. Noise looks very film-like. Will be great for B&W conversions. Worst, Noise Ninja...sucks big time! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Larbalestier Posted November 2, 2006 Share #4 Posted November 2, 2006 This is interesting Chris and thanks for taking the time to post this. I prefer the Noiseware version - did you try a version with Neat Image? Colour images are harder to "read" for me as i work in B/W but i will consider the Noiseware plug-in as a possible purchase for the M8 DNG files once i get delivery of it. Some current projects will demand 400 minimum ISO and more likely 600 -1200 even @F1.4 so i'm very curious to see how the M8 performs alongside my film M's..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgeoffrion Posted November 2, 2006 Share #5 Posted November 2, 2006 I have tried some different noise reduction tricks on a (ahem!) certain ISO 2500 file and posted up the (large) resulting JPGs at this site.I am a rank amateur at this kind of thing, but I was very pleased with one of the results. I would still be happy to take any guidance on whether there are better ways, though. Chris First and foremost, trying to remove noise from "an image on the web" is TOTALLY different than trying to remove noise from "ones' camera". If you are looking for optimum results (removing noise without softening the image), you should create a noise profile for the camera using a target and the raw converter you intend to use. You create this profile by shooting a target similar to a MacBeth chart and profile it at the different ISO and WB and save them. You then apply the noise profile to the image. This will give you optimum results. On the other hand, if you are removing noise from "an image on the web", you typically would profile the noise in this particular image. Because this image would not necessarily contain all the noise information required by the noise reducing software, the noise reduction would be less than optimum -- and downright poor in some instances where there is very little area that is out of focus. Lastly, as I've mentioned before, the amount of details in the Leica DNG fools the noise software into thinking their is a lot more noise than there is (the software confuses micro contrast with noise), resulting in poor noise reduction. I've tested the raw converters at several occasions and the best one is by far Noise Ninja. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted November 2, 2006 Author Share #6 Posted November 2, 2006 Lastly, as I've mentioned before, the amount of details in the Leica DNG fools the noise software into thinking their is a lot more noise than there is (the software confuses micro contrast with noise), resulting in poor noise reduction. I've tested the raw converters at several occasions and the best one is by far Noise Ninja. This is what I'm trying to get at. If there is the problem you suggest with too much detail/microcontrast, might it not be the case that one noise reducer (I don't think you meant to say raw converter) would cope better than another? I did also try the demo NeatImage plug-in, but this only does a 1024x1024 corner of the image - the preview looked very much like the Noiseware results though. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Maio Posted November 2, 2006 Share #7 Posted November 2, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) You create this profile by shooting a target similar to a MacBeth chart and profile it at the different ISO and WB and save them. You then apply the noise profile to the image. This will give you optimum results. . Is this the IT8 target? I've seen it mentioned, but never explored getting one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSmelik Posted November 2, 2006 Share #8 Posted November 2, 2006 I have no clue how the M8 will react to noise reducing activities but when shooting in very low light at 1600 or higher with my other digitals I set all picture variables (saturation, contrast, etc) to a minimum and later post process them back to the required values, this seems to work very well for me, the GR-D is even absolutely useable at 1600 by using these settings. It seems to help the DLux-3 as well, but not as goos as the GRD. I have an automated sequence in CS2 which will bring the pictures back to required with a minimum of keyboard/mouse activity. I find Neat Image helpfull, personally use Noise Ninja, but I hate the time involved, but for certain shots I will go to the effort. When looking for details, cropped out from the original to much Neat image or noise Ninja will destruct the image value, a combination of settings which you must try out first in order to get the right settings combined with a minimum of noise reduction programs is the way to go. It does however need quite some experimantation, but it's well worth it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgeoffrion Posted November 2, 2006 Share #9 Posted November 2, 2006 This is what I'm trying to get at. If there is the problem you suggest with too much detail/microcontrast, might it not be the case that one noise reducer (I don't think you meant to say raw converter) would cope better than another? I did also try the demo NeatImage plug-in, but this only does a 1024x1024 corner of the image - the preview looked very much like the Noiseware results though. Chris Yes, I did mean noise reduce and not raw converter (I should stop drinking this early in the am). Yes, it's my experience that denoising an DMR image using the image to create a profile typically results in suboptimal performance since the detail is mistaken for noise by the software. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgeoffrion Posted November 2, 2006 Share #10 Posted November 2, 2006 Is this the IT8 target? I've seen it mentioned, but never explored getting one. You can probably get away with shooting a MacBeth or IT8 target. However, if you go to the Noise Ninja: The gold standard for image noise reduction web site, you should be able to find the recommended noise target (which is different than either). I would recommend shooting it slightly out of focus when creating the profile so that the details is remove and noise becomes more obvious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kamilsukun Posted November 3, 2006 Share #11 Posted November 3, 2006 Christopher, Thanks for sample images. Very helpul. I prefer C1. Regards, Kamil Sukun Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kamilsukun Posted November 3, 2006 Share #12 Posted November 3, 2006 I have two questions. 1. I wonder if anyone tried CaptureNX's noise reduction. I normally use Noise Ninja but the results of Capture NX are seemed to be worth considering. 2. Using a separate noise reduction software should the noise reduction funciton of Adobe Raw converter omitted. Mine is pre set for %25. Regards, Kamil Sukun Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.