How do you reduce noise?

[df]

When I bought this product I did so with the thought that Noise Ninja was the industry leader and that it was a good deal. I even bought the stand alone version of Noise Ninja to upgrade the ASP version. I'd like the noise to be eliminated/reduced/handled to the extent that it's usable for plugging into Photomatix for HDR without having to turn on the noise reduction in Photomatix (faster work flow). It would be great if noise reduction could be done automatically. This is the only purpose that I have for ASP at this time. Not that the tools aren't great, but I do have things to get done and a deadline to do them with and I'm just wanting to learn one thing at a time.

Canon 40D .cr2 files
Canon XTi (400D) .cr2 files
Canon 1D(mark nuthin) RAW files (which are named Tiff but are actual RAW files and not Tiffs)
3000+ raw files to go through.

Thanks

[Tadjio]

I know this is an ASP forum but are you aware of all the Noise Reduction facilities in the latest DPP?
If you have things to get done and a deadline to do them with...

More generally, I am interested in the answer to your question and in particular how DPP compares with PSP DCNR, NN Standard & Registered in ASP and plug-ins like WaveletDenoise.

[df]

I know this is an ASP forum but are you aware of all the Noise Reduction facilities in the latest DPP?
If you have things to get done and a deadline to do them with...

More generally, I am interested in the answer to your question and in particular how DPP compares with PSP DCNR, NN Standard & Registered in ASP and plug-ins like WaveletDenoise.

Yes, I'm well aware of DPP and PSP's noise reduction capabilities. But I was hopeful that ASP would do a better job faster. DPP's RAW conversion engine runs at low priority in the background, so if I'm running Photomatix at the same time Photomatix takes priority. If I get bored and surf the web FireFox takes priority, etc... ASP was touted as creating files in record speed according to the almost hour long webinar video online, I figured it was worth a shot. PSP of course is slower than DPP with RAW files, and the results are less than desirable.

[DocBrown]

I was a Neat Image user long before Bibble 5 introduced the basic version of NN, so I have never had a need to buy the full version of NN. I have tried it though. None of the noise reduction software, built in or otherwise seems to deal with all noise effectively. Some shots just can't be cleaned up as well as others. Hopefully you don't have to do too many HDR shots! As you get used to ASP, try using layers along with the Bez plugin. You might find that in many cases you don't need to do HDR. Unless of course you're going for that very stylized over processed look that seem to be all the rage these days.

[Tadjio]

I know this is an ASP forum but are you aware of all the Noise Reduction facilities in the latest DPP?
If you have things to get done and a deadline to do them with...

More generally, I am interested in the answer to your question and in particular how DPP compares with PSP DCNR, NN Standard & Registered in ASP and plug-ins like WaveletDenoise.

Yes, I'm well aware of DPP and PSP's noise reduction capabilities. But I was hopeful that ASP would do a better job faster. DPP's RAW conversion engine runs at low priority in the background, so if I'm running Photomatix at the same time Photomatix takes priority. If I get bored and surf the web FireFox takes priority, etc... ASP was touted as creating files in record speed according to the almost hour long webinar video online, I figured it was worth a shot. PSP of course is slower than DPP with RAW files, and the results are less than desirable.

I wasn't thinking of the speed of processing but rather the speed of getting your job done, given you are familiar with DPP.
DPP allows setting of Luminance and Chromatic noise reduction (with a preview) and can be applied with 'Recipes' (Presets).
I would never recommend PSP for RAW files but DCNR is excellent on TIFFs. To describe it would take a whole chapter!

[darKing]

When I bought this product I did so with the thought that Noise Ninja was the industry leader and that it was a good deal. I even bought the stand alone version of Noise Ninja to upgrade the ASP version. I'd like the noise to be eliminated/reduced/handled to the extent that it's usable for plugging into Photomatix for HDR without having to turn on the noise reduction in Photomatix (faster work flow). It would be great if noise reduction could be done automatically. This is the only purpose that I have for ASP at this time. Not that the tools aren't great, but I do have things to get done and a deadline to do them with and I'm just wanting to learn one thing at a time.

Canon 40D .cr2 files
Canon XTi (400D) .cr2 files
Canon 1D(mark nuthin) RAW files (which are named Tiff but are actual RAW files and not Tiffs)
3000+ raw files to go through.

Thanks

You may want to provide one or two example RAWs? I can give it a shot and try what I can do with it. Maybe the Noise reduction just can't deliver what you desire, or maybe you just havent figured out the "right" way.
However, I also had real trouble with HDR and the noise that is visible, when you stack 3-4-5 (noisy) images together. For non HDR work I think NN does a nice Job. But again, maybe I'm not as demanding as you for NR.
I would prefer some 40D files, as I also have one here.

[df]

When I bought this product I did so with the thought that Noise Ninja was the industry leader and that it was a good deal. I even bought the stand alone version of Noise Ninja to upgrade the ASP version. I'd like the noise to be eliminated/reduced/handled to the extent that it's usable for plugging into Photomatix for HDR without having to turn on the noise reduction in Photomatix (faster work flow). It would be great if noise reduction could be done automatically. This is the only purpose that I have for ASP at this time. Not that the tools aren't great, but I do have things to get done and a deadline to do them with and I'm just wanting to learn one thing at a time.

Canon 40D .cr2 files
Canon XTi (400D) .cr2 files
Canon 1D(mark nuthin) RAW files (which are named Tiff but are actual RAW files and not Tiffs)
3000+ raw files to go through.

Thanks

You may want to provide one or two example RAWs? I can give it a shot and try what I can do with it. Maybe the Noise reduction just can't deliver what you desire, or maybe you just havent figured out the "right" way.
However, I also had real trouble with HDR and the noise that is visible, when you stack 3-4-5 (noisy) images together. For non HDR work I think NN does a nice Job. But again, maybe I'm not as demanding as you for NR.
I would prefer some 40D files, as I also have one here.

In anticipation of said request I uploaded a set of .CR2s from my 40D and a set of Tif from my 1D.
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=EE069BE3 ... 8EF7E!1364
When you get to the skydrive you can download the whole set by clicking Download Folder on the right. Or you can click on each one to download. The ones starting with EAAD are the 1D files, the others are the 40D.

I have not processed these yet and have no preconception as to how much noise removal needs to be done since I haven't even really looked at them. I'm providing them as an average example of the files I shoot.

[brucet]

Are you trying to cover noise reduction with just one click?

If so I'm not so sure you will be happy with any 'one click' solution.

A photo with lots of detail in the foreground and noise in the sky will suffer by a 'one click' approach. Sure you will fix the noise in the sky but you'll destroy your detailed foreground.

I do a lot of HDR work. (Photomatix). I have detailed objects on plain backgrounds. For me it's either using two photos/layers and treating each with the appropriate noise reduction. In Bibble 5 I could set NN at 10 and get a moderate result. Now I find ASP requires only 2 to get the same result. So something has changed. But my point is that each photo has to be treated on a case by case basis and an area by area basis.

On my site you'll see many examples of backgrounds/skys that are treated differently to that of the foreground. Even various selections that are isolated to treat problem noise areas.

http://cre8ivephotography.com/


Regards

[derouyag]

Did you register Noise Ninja inside of ASP? You don't say specifically in your post.

Help\Register Noise Ninja...

[df]

Did you register Noise Ninja inside of ASP? You don't say specifically in your post.

Help\Register Noise Ninja...

Actually I went to do that and the activation code was already present in ASP. I did use NN outside ASP before trying it.

[df]

Brucet, thanks for the reply. Great work by the way. Currently I just use the noise reduction feature in Photomatix. It usually produces great results. But that slows Photomatix down. I'm not shooting anything that's hyper reality, but rather real estate listings that need to look as close to reality as possible. If each and every file would need my intervention then this is of no use to me on a RAW file level. Maybe for the files that Photomatix creates to take care of problem shots but not for the multitude of shots going into it. Think 300 individual shots per house, to make 25 HDRs, to get 15-20 keepers. Process, corrected for color, corrected for tilt and lens distortion, cropped to two different crops per final image at two different sizes per output. All in under 24 hours.
Here's my website http://www.ferrelphotography.com/Real_Estate.html

Currently I feed RAWs directly into Photomatix to produce Tiffs.
Feed Tiffs into PSP for all corrections to produce Jpegs.
Use DPP to crop and resize Jpegs for final delivery as it's easier than PSP.

Yes, I was hoping for a one click solution for noise. If I could eliminate noise at the start Photomatix would run faster. I was under the impression that NN had my camera profiled already and it would just apply a generic (albeit not perfect) adjustment. I also want to do lens corrections but as none of the lenses I use are "calibrated" I'll have to tackle that later. One thing at a time, if this program can't be used in that way then I need to rethink things.

[brucet]

I've found that RAWs into Photomatix weren't as good as tiffs. (That's also a Photomatix recommendation).

Here's what I would suggest trying.
In ASP keep the defaults. Drop NN to 2 and keep Sharpening at 100, although you may find 200 better. Save as a 16 bit tif.
In Photomatix process as a default Tonemap. Save as 16 bit tif.
Open in PSP. x4 if you have it would be better. Levels and use the default/auto. Fill Light/Clarity if you have x4. (Worth the price of x4 alone). A touch of curves to help contrast. Then One Step Noise Removal. Then USM set at 2,150,5. Then save as a jpeg.

Another trick I sometimes find helpful is to do the USM first at the above settings. Then do a one step noise removal and then repeat the USM. Sounds a bit crazy but you can get a very smooth result but you may lose some of your details.

Regards

[afx]

I
In ASP keep the defaults. Drop NN to 2 and keep Sharpening at 100, although you may find 200 better.

I suggest staying away from AS sharpening if you have NN registered and only use the USM in there. You have to be quite careful not to introduce silly artifacts when using both methods (that can be effective, but needs special care)

I would start off with NN registered at Luma 4, Chroma 8, Smooth 4 on both and turn off turbo mode. No AS sharpening. Mix them and do final Noise reduction and sharpening later on.
Instead of NN you could also use Wavelet Denoias with Luma 5/5 and Chroma 20/5

But... I don't do HDR, so I do not know how the NR in the initial file will affect the outcome once they are combined.

cheers
afx

[afx]

Yes, I was hoping for a one click solution for noise.

Not one click, but fine one setting that works in this setup and then copy that to the rest of the files...

I was under the impression that NN had my camera profiled already and it would just apply a generic (albeit not perfect) adjustment.

Yes, that is the starting point. But depending on image content and personal preference that still needs adjustment. You might favor smoothness or detail...

cheers
afx

[df]

I suggest staying away from AS sharpening if you have NN registered and only use the USM in there. You have to be quite careful not to introduce silly artifacts when using both methods (that can be effective, but needs special care)

From what I've seen from processing in DPP first I have to agree with you on that.

I would start off with NN registered at Luma 4, Chroma 8, Smooth 4 on both and turn off turbo mode. No AS sharpening. Mix them and do final Noise reduction and sharpening later on.
Instead of NN you could also use Wavelet Denoias with Luma 5/5 and Chroma 20/5

Ah, some good solid *try these* numbers to see what it looks like. I'll give it a go.

But... I don't do HDR, so I do not know how the NR in the initial file will affect the outcome once they are combined.

cheers
afx

The basic premise will be that the part of the image that is properly exposed will take priority over the other exposures. Example. If the sky is properly exposed with the -2 file, then whatever noise that's present in the sky will also be in the final product. But the noise in the foreground that's underexposed in that file will have much less effect since the +1 file has that properly exposed.

With all that said, I don't need the noise in the shadows taken care of, but the noise in the long exposures does seem to crop up from time to time.