[bymy141]

I've installed version 5 and Fusion Express to integrate in with my Lightroom 3.
I'm sorry to see that I think I can get more or less the same results with the LR 3 new noise reduction, when playing with the settings.
It does not make enough difference to me to pay the extra $$'s

- Bert

[abmj]

To add another data point - For me, the greatest improvement from v.4 to v.5 is in speed. There are some feature improvements but I often just use the presets. In that case, the speed bump is very welcome.

[wildman]

John,
I've been watching your DeNoise posts with interest.

Thought I'd give it a try with a single candle to see what I could do. Really dark. Had to turn on the lights to focus. Tried many combinations and this is the best I could do.

I shot in raw (DNG) with a K20 at 6400. Passed it through Silkypix Pro using whatever I thought would improve the pic including it's noise reduction features. Than passed it on to my editor as an uncompressed Tiff file. Then I made a light final pass through DeNoise 5. Finally posted here as a compressed JPG.

I use a DualCore AMD Athlon II X2 250, 3000 MHz with 4gb of ram and have not found DeNoise to be particularly slow. Typically about 45-60 sec to process a file using the presets.

The results here are not stunning but that probably reflects my shortcomings as much as the software.

Thanks for all the DeNoise posts,
wildman

[JohnBee]

With your permission I'd like to make a few suggestions with regards to workflow.

One of the biggest attributes I've found with regards to final output was with that of base image definition. Where final IQ is entirely dependent on the definition(or grain as I like to call it) of the base file. With this in mind, I usually start by assessing what options I might take to improve and achieve the highest quality base file at the pre-post-processing stage of things.

One example of this might look like the following:

Post process RAW and carrying out all RAW adjustments while eliminating any and all grain altering adjustments(sharpening, tonal and distortion corrections etc etc). The objective here being to preserve and/or promote the absolute, most neutral image grain possible. However all shadow and highlight adjustments would best be carried out in RAW prior to export(since photoshop does not access RAW data).

One other factor that I consider important with respect to high ISO processing is the use of Adobe's latest chroma NR engine. And though I keep mentioning Denoise in most of my samples, I also think it's well worth mentioning that I couldn't achieve near any of these results with Denoise alone(less ACR6 or LR3). Therefore the two are synonymous with respects to the quality of my own experiences.

And finally if there was one other "big issue" worth talking about(with regards to Denoise), it would be the creation and use of presets(can't stress this enough), since the software is quite demanding(slow) and the last thing us older system users need, is to wait minutes at a time while trying to tweak our way through images.

Beyond this, I think that end results really come down to targeting and addressing the various noise types within a scene. My usual approach is to break it down into the following three sections:

1. Deep or heavy shadow regions.
2. Moderate or midtone areas(skin and average tonal regions)
3. Highlight and details(hair, eyes, lips etc etc)

I usually keep a few variations of these in preset form within Denoise, which I then try out(quick and dirty) to see how they look. In most cases, I can complete an image in less than 5 using presets. Though sometimes(if I need to adjust things or go out of bounds), it can take a little longer. But for the most part, the presets are what I use.

And lets not forget the power of masking too. If you use a graphics tablet, then you may already know how versatile this can be(pressure sensitive), as we mask in NR and details between layers in an image. Which can of course be done with a mouse(plenty of people do it), but... it's always more convenient with a pen if you have one.


And finally... don't forget to wash those files with GordonBee's TingeRemoval tool I know Denoise does banding and tinge(black level) correction, but both of these don't seem mature enough to replace the legacy methods(GordonB and Dfine debanding) just yet imo.

Hope this helps...

---

Last edited by JohnBee; 08-08-2010 at 12:33 AM.

[Winder]

I have to agree on the new ACR/LR3. I am not an experienced Silkypix user, but LR3 has taken it to another level. Since switching to LR3 it rare I have a reason to send an image to DeNoise, but when I do have one that is beyond LR3 DeNoise can often save it.

[JohnBee]

The results here are not stunning but that probably reflects my shortcomings as much as the software.

Oh and I almost forgot...

One "really" helpful thing that I discovered during my own trials was to take both a low ISO image along with my high ISO one. This gave me a reference point from which to work from. Because many times, I found myself fighting through what I thought were either artifact or distortions, only to find that I had misinterpreted the scene information.

So having a low ISO copy really helped me fine-tune my presets to get as much detail as possible.

Also.. on the issue of LR3/ACR6 and Denoise, I use Denoise exclusively for Luma NR. All Chroma NR is done through LR or ACR6. Which made a huge difference in detail preservation and final IQ.

[wildman]

Ok tried again. But this time I tried it on a subject I'm more familiar with and can evaluate what it's supposed to look like. A single candle in the middle of the night does not cut it.

I am wondering if an ISO of 6400 may be beyond what is practical on the K20. Some shots at 6400 can be recovered but if you have many it's a lot of work and time to work with them. Of course there is always those few times when 6400 may be the only way.

This one was at 3200 and I found it much easier to get decent results with this file. Taken in very low light deep in the woods. I did no sharpening until after DeNoise as you suggested. Full frame.

---

Last edited by wildman; 08-27-2010 at 03:17 AM.

[JohnBee]

Ok tried again. But this time I tried it on a subject I'm more familiar with and can evaluate what it's supposed to look like. A single candle in the middle of the night does not cut it.

I am wondering if an ISO of 6400 may be beyond what is practical on the K20. Some shots at 6400 can be recovered but if you have many it's a lot of work and time to work with them. Of course there is always those few times when 6400 may be the only way.

This one was at 3200 and I found it much easier to get decent results with this file. Taken in very low light deep in the woods. I did no sharpening until after DeNoise as you suggested. Full frame.

Wow! excellent work. Looks as good as it would at nominal ISO from what I can see... There's nothing wrong with moving slowly into higher sensitivities as you get familiar with the files btw. I think shooting play's just as big a role in your final output as PP does, so it would make sense to ease into it.

One other setting I've discovered to be helpful was turning off Extended Dynamic Range in the camera, which seemed to really help reduce noise in the files.

But great job on that file btw. looks excellent

[mysticcowboy]

I upgraded to DeNoise 5 the day I got the announcement. It is noticeably faster. I wasn't using version 4 because it was so slow. I have Nic's NR plugin, too. Following a workflow similar to JohnBee's I processed a couple hundred images shot at 3200 ISO. This is typical. It could use more sharpening, but the image is clean enough to handle that.

[Jasvox]

Will Topaz Denoise only work with the CS products? I am using Gimp and can not seem to get Topaz Denoise to be recognized. I guess LR wont see it either?

Jason

[JohnBee]

I upgraded to DeNoise 5 the day I got the announcement. It is noticeably faster. I wasn't using version 4 because it was so slow. I have Nic's NR plugin, too. Following a workflow similar to JohnBee's I processed a couple hundred images shot at 3200 ISO. This is typical. It could use more sharpening, but the image is clean enough to handle that.

Looks amazing! Are those amazonian women?

Will Topaz Denoise only work with the CS products? I am using Gimp and can not seem to get Topaz Denoise to be recognized. I guess LR wont see it either?

The product details show the following:

• Compatible with Adobe Photoshop 7-CS5 (32-bit and 64-bit), Adobe Photoshop Elements 1-8, or another editor that supports Photoshop plug-ins. These include Irfanview, PaintShop Pro, etc.
• Compatible with Lightroom with free download.

Though I never tried it with anything other than Photoshop. tbh. I think Denoise should develop stand-alone version.

[mysticcowboy]

Those are island spirits. The pic is from our local theater company's production of Shakespeare's The Tempast. This was shot in the shade a half hour before sunset. PhilB has been pushing me to use higher ISOs and I've been pleased with the results.

[Derridale]

Will Topaz Denoise only work with the CS products? I am using Gimp and can not seem to get Topaz Denoise to be recognized. I guess LR wont see it either?

It is compatible with Aperture via Topaz's Fusion Express. This acts as an external editor when installed as the default external editor in Aperture (although it's a pain to go the round trip, and to replace Photoshop as default editor). I don't know if you could try the same thing with the Gimp?

See here: http://www.topazlabs.com/fusion/

Aperture does over 95% of what I need to do, including using Topaz, Nik, and Noise Ninja plugins, needing only to flip out to Photoshop on the oddoccasion for pixel tweaking. Noise Ninja though seems to give results that, to my eye at least, are better than Topaz or Nik's denoisers. And Noise Ninja has been updated to 64-bit, and works directly within the program (Aperture) and NOT requiring a flip-out round trip (which Topaz does).

So of all the denoisers that I have, Noise Ninja is the one I use. I use Topaz's other modules for their intended purposes, but the denoiser doesn't get used (I got the whole Topaz package, so Denoiser just came as part of it).

[stefanlindmark]

Will Topaz Denoise only work with the CS products? I am using Gimp and can not seem to get Topaz Denoise to be recognized. I guess LR wont see it either?

Jason

This is what you need to run Denoise as a Photoshop plugin in GIMP:
Tor Lillqvist--PSPI: Running Photoshop plug-ins in GIMP