Denoise options.... which is best?

[PKM-UK]

As others noted, noise reduction and sharpening can be subjective and very dependent on personal preferences. In this case, while Topaz seemed to remove more noise from their faces, I didn't really like the feel of it (something about the blue player's left eye is strange to me and the skin seems "pasty"; again, very personal preference) and I liked the LR NR better. Prior to LR having Denoise AI, I started using DxO DeepPrime after seeing suggestions and feedback on DPreview, especially from a certain person on this forum (Thanks Phil). But once the Denoise AI came out I find myself using DxO PL5 very little and I'm "living" primarily in LR Classic again

Hi Don, My pleasure...

As a general comment to the thread -

Typically, any raw files which need geometric correction, or with an ISO =>4000 get sent off to DxO (and receive DeepPRIME/ XD), the rest are dealt with in Lr. Denoise AI/ Sharpen AI/ Photo AI are used as needed but usually for extreme noise issues (2nd run - often with masking), motion blur, or face recovery.

If I have some spare time I'll sometimes do a NR comparison, but it always ends up - DxO first and Topaz/ Adobe vying for second. (All can do a great job).

Frequently, when I'm in a creative mode, I'll use DxO Nik Collection/ FilmPack and Topaz Studio 2 to reintroduce grain and lens/ camera anomalies...

Phil

 

[Only RF]

Noise in our images is sort of a subjective thing, how much is too much is really something for the person taking the picture to decide. And now we have some great ways to decrease noise through Ai.

Here are 3 examples:

1. no noise adjustment, only typical edits in LR
2. Processed a TIFF copy in Topaz Photo Ai after LR adjustments
3. Processed a duplicate DNG in Lightroom Denoise AI with LR adjustments

Both denoise options did a decent job but Photo Ai sharpened a bit more, the eyes on the girl in the blue jersey seem to stand out a bit, not sure I like that. And LR Denoise Ai seemed to remove the slight green cast to the shadows which I think is an improvement.

By the way, the camera ISO was at 16000 in order for me to shoot at 1/1000 sec. at f/4 exposure. It's an older gym with fluorescent lighting that isn't as bright as newer gyms with LED lights. Also the floors in most older gyms get quite an odd color, probably the polyurethane varnish yellowing over time and that tends to give a yellow cast. I try to correct for the wall behind of find something white to balance on.

Shot with my R7 and RF 24-105 f/4 lens. I have found from experience that I like to shoot in the Manual mode so I can set the shutter speed and f/ stop (generally as above but in a brighter gym I can increase shutter speed a bit). I also set the ISO after doing a few test shots during the players warmup. Why not let the ISO be on automatic? I find it gets false readings as the players move around, if the background behind the player I am following get darker or lighter it changes the ISO but the light on the player is the same so I just chose an ISO based on the location.

By the way, the girl in the red jersey is my granddaughter, Emily who is a high school freshman this year.

I have a question about exposure. Was it underexposed and was it raised a few stops? The pre denoised file has that black grain pattern that at times I've called a dirty appearance. I've seen it before and can't quite figure out what that is. I've posted examples of R5 and R7 files here at 16,000 and 20,000 and with no noise reduction of any kind do not have that black grainy pattern look before applying Adobe Denoise AI. Final denoised files looked silky smooth.

In Topaz does the original file look like that? If you open that file in DPP and turn NR off does it look like that? Maybe that is what it does look like but just seems off to me. If properly exposed it should not look that noisy. Exposure plays a far bigger role than ISO.

I've see that before and I'm trying to understand what that is. It was why I mentioned Adobe Denoise AI should do better. As I'm writing this I just remembered I posted a 40,000 file here that I took with my R. I also posted examples of my 7D from 2009 at 12,800 that did not look like that.

Would it be possible to get a the RAW file?

 

[Only RF]

Here is my R7 ISO 20,000 file.

Original

• Canon EOS R7
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM
• 500.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/5000 sec
• ISO 20000

Cropped with everything at zero including manual sharpening.

• Canon EOS R7
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM
• 500.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/5000 sec
• ISO 20000

After Applying Adobe Denoise AI.

• Canon EOS R7
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM
• 500.0 mm
• ƒ/7.1
• 1/5000 sec
• ISO 20000

With the above image I applied my post AI preset and appleid Auto. No Manual NR applied either.

 

[Chris Summers]

Would it be possible to get a the RAW file?

Here is a jpg copy of the .dng file before processing. Yes a bit underexposed, the exposure varies as the players mover around the court. Those old school gyms don't have the most even lighting.

 

[Only RF]

Here is a jpg copy of the .dng file before processing. Yes a bit underexposed, the exposure varies as the players mover around the court. Those old school gyms don't have the most even lighting.

Ahhh. Thanks

 

[Only RF]

Still trying to understand this. Here is a ISO 32000 file not with not too great of an exposure. Ran it through Adobe Denoise AI at 60, hit Auto and added about ⅓ stop exposure. I typically will do much more in the Detail panel for sharpening and sometimes a NR if a little more is needed. I'll add Texture and Clarity.

Original

• Canon EOS R7
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM + EXTENDER RF1.4x
• 700.0 mm
• ƒ/10
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 32000

Denoise AI

• Canon EOS R7
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM + EXTENDER RF1.4x
• 700.0 mm
• ƒ/10
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 32000

 

[Only RF]

Here I messed around a little with it. I created a background masked and wiped out all the noise. Did a little subject sharpening.

• Canon EOS R7
• RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM + EXTENDER RF1.4x
• 700.0 mm
• ƒ/10
• 1/500 sec
• ISO 32000

 

[Only RF]

Here is a 5 stop underexposure with the R7.

Rescue of a flash failure -- RAW, Post Processing & Printing in photography-on-the.net forums

Rescue of a flash failure in RAW, Post Processing & Printing

photography-on-the.net

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

I’ve had some very recent issues with noise reduction. I have the full Topaz suite and Luminar Neo with their Noiseless AI extension.

I ran an entire album of photos through Topaz DeNoise AI and it placed ugly red artifacts throughout the photos. I set it to autopilot and it definitely did not deliver. I sent those same images (the original .CR3) Through Photo AI 2 with a little supervision, sharpening, face recovery, turned off, and the results were good. Very clear images. I notice that Topaz when left unsupervised really over does the sharpening. I’ve also noticed that with patterns, like on a shirt, the screen (MacBook Pro 2023) will show weird patterns, almost a moire, after denoising. When those images are exported as a DNG file that pattern isn’t present and the images look good. It’s just hard to not waste a bunch of time trying to remove that pattern until you realize it’s just a bug in the way the program displays the image prior to export. My second issue with Topaz is the file size it creates. When I export images as a DNG for further correcting and editing in Luminar Neo the files sizes are a consistent 144 MB. That’s huge. Makes processing the photos in Neo take a lot longer than the normal 35 MB .CR3 files.

As for Luminar Neo Denosie AI, I think it’s pretty darn good. Since the updates it accurately diagnoses the amount of noise reduction to apply, you can batch edit and they all look good with no artifacting that I’ve seen, and the workflow is smoother. (I’ll set the denosie to LOW, batch the album, and then go back through to see if any of the photos need medium or high. I find low tends to work for everything.)

Going forward I’m only going to use Topaz for really noisy images that Luminar Neo can’t denoise. With an R6M2 that’s not a lot of images. Topaz gets a lot of work from my Pentax K50, which doesn’t produce the sharpest images.

 

[Kerro]

Best of the best is the DxO Deep Prime XD IMHO.

I agree. All my files go through DX0 Deep Prime Pure Raw 2 before anything else. It pretty well does itself. I dont worry about the file sizes being over 100mb sometimes as they go back to normal by the time LR and PS have finished with them.