What are the implications of using STRONG noise reduction?

NicholasN · 05-28-2008, 09:40 PM

Could someone explain to me the implications of using higher amounds of on-camera noise reduction? For instance if I use the strongest setting on my K20D what are the drawbacks of doing so?

Kind Regards

Nick

**Canada_Rockies** · 05-28-2008, 10:10 PM

Originally posted by NicholasN

Could someone explain to me the implications of using higher amounds of on-camera noise reduction? For instance if I use the strongest setting on my K20D what are the drawbacks of doing so?

Kind Regards

Nick

Noise reduction blurs out the noise, so you lose some detail. Try the same shot at various settings, then pixel peep on your big monitor to see what your maximum useful setting is.

spyglass · 05-28-2008, 11:57 PM

Speed could be worth considering. The camera will take longer to create the final image and get it onto your memory card. I talked with a sport photographer at our Lacrosse tournament last weekend (his company takes a ton of shots of each game, they create a folder for each team, separated the photos into individual games for each team, printed as contact sheets, allowing proud parents to select shots of their kids). Even with a fast lens the photographer had the ISO cranked to 3200 (they can not use a flash and the arena lighting is challanging). I asked him if he was worried about noise at that level, I also asked him if he was using noise reduction within the camera. He smiled and said that noise was not a problem with the software he used. He said that he stopped using the camera nosie reduction feature because it was too slow and he missed too many shots waiting. For most us this would probably not be a problem, but..... something to try and test.
As far as detail loss, I would assume that it would be similar to Photoshops healing brush (using a small sized brush). If so, it should not be very detectable if you dive deep into pixel infinity and beyond, beyond, beyond, beyond....

lbam · 05-29-2008, 04:49 AM

Isn't this where "noise ninja" comes in? (if you can afford it).

vievetrick · 05-29-2008, 05:24 AM

Okay Spyglass share his secret? What software did he use?

Gooshin · 05-29-2008, 07:05 AM

Originally posted by NicholasN

Could someone explain to me the implications of using higher amounds of on-camera noise reduction? For instance if I use the strongest setting on my K20D what are the drawbacks of doing so?

Kind Regards

Nick

the more noise reduction you do, the more blurred the image becomes

ftpaddict · 05-29-2008, 07:53 AM

I use NeatImage, and so far it has worked wonders for me.

I always keep noise reduction off on my camera (K100D). In-camera noise reduction is useless.

Geekybiker · 05-29-2008, 01:11 PM

Noise reduction, like many things (sharpening, contrast, white balance) is something best done in post on your PC. You'll get better results and not lose unrecoverable data. Of course this all assumes you shoot raw.

What you lose is fine detail. NR is generally good a preserving large high contrast detail. Pixel peep some hair and you'll see the difference.

NicholasN · 05-29-2008, 02:44 PM

Does it use the NR at fastshutter speeds also? In other words is it affecting all my shots?

cputeq · 05-30-2008, 03:56 AM

Originally posted by NicholasN

Does it use the NR at fastshutter speeds also? In other words is it affecting all my shots?

If the K20D works like my K200D, then it depends on which noise reduction you're using, as there are two types.

There is noise reduction from slow shutter speeds and noise reduction in high ISO settings. If you're using strong reduction in high ISO, then it doesn't matter how fast your shutter is .... if your ISO is 800+ (I think) then it's going to automatically use NR.

----------------------------------

Personally I use Noise Ninja and it works awesomely, especially as a Photoshop plugin because it uses some Photoshop filters at the same time to not lose detail like one would imagine....I've actually gained detail at the same time I used Noise ninja on some shots! (NR + USM = Good).

I was a bit hesitant buying the "pro" version, as $80 is not cheap just for a plugin or small standalone program, but now that I actually have it, it's invaluable. Well worth the money and it is a nice improvement to some of my shots.

I've also done very limited testing with the K200Ds noise reduction and it does pretty good. I posted some images a while back at another forum (or maybe it was here?) comparing different ISO ratings, etc. but I think I'm going to redo the testing, as I was in very bad conditions before.

05-28-2008, 09:40 PM	#1
NicholasN Inactive Account Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 301	What are the implications of using STRONG noise reduction? Could someone explain to me the implications of using higher amounds of on-camera noise reduction? For instance if I use the strongest setting on my K20D what are the drawbacks of doing so? Kind Regards Nick

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Noise Reduction in K-x	wed7	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	09-26-2010 12:11 AM
Noise reduction?	PHOTOCOP	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	17	04-10-2010 04:49 AM
Noise reduction	richardsmith	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	4	10-26-2009 06:01 PM
Do you do noise reduction?	alehel	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	39	04-12-2009 05:14 AM
Noise reduction on or off?	mikeatnite	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	01-28-2007 04:10 AM

05-28-2008, 10:10 PM	#2
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by NicholasN Could someone explain to me the implications of using higher amounds of on-camera noise reduction? For instance if I use the strongest setting on my K20D what are the drawbacks of doing so? Kind Regards Nick Noise reduction blurs out the noise, so you lose some detail. Try the same shot at various settings, then pixel peep on your big monitor to see what your maximum useful setting is.

05-28-2008, 11:57 PM	#3
spyglass Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: British Columbia, Canada Posts: 747	Speed could be worth considering. The camera will take longer to create the final image and get it onto your memory card. I talked with a sport photographer at our Lacrosse tournament last weekend (his company takes a ton of shots of each game, they create a folder for each team, separated the photos into individual games for each team, printed as contact sheets, allowing proud parents to select shots of their kids). Even with a fast lens the photographer had the ISO cranked to 3200 (they can not use a flash and the arena lighting is challanging). I asked him if he was worried about noise at that level, I also asked him if he was using noise reduction within the camera. He smiled and said that noise was not a problem with the software he used. He said that he stopped using the camera nosie reduction feature because it was too slow and he missed too many shots waiting. For most us this would probably not be a problem, but..... something to try and test. As far as detail loss, I would assume that it would be similar to Photoshops healing brush (using a small sized brush). If so, it should not be very detectable if you dive deep into pixel infinity and beyond, beyond, beyond, beyond....

05-29-2008, 04:49 AM	#4
lbam Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery Posts: 442	Isn't this where "noise ninja" comes in? (if you can afford it).

05-29-2008, 05:24 AM	#5
vievetrick Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Easthampton - Massachusetts - USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,183	Okay Spyglass share his secret? What software did he use?

05-29-2008, 07:05 AM	#6
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	Originally posted by NicholasN Could someone explain to me the implications of using higher amounds of on-camera noise reduction? For instance if I use the strongest setting on my K20D what are the drawbacks of doing so? Kind Regards Nick the more noise reduction you do, the more blurred the image becomes

05-29-2008, 07:53 AM	#7
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	I use NeatImage, and so far it has worked wonders for me. I always keep noise reduction off on my camera (K100D). In-camera noise reduction is useless.

05-29-2008, 01:11 PM	#8
Geekybiker Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Chicagoland Posts: 337	Noise reduction, like many things (sharpening, contrast, white balance) is something best done in post on your PC. You'll get better results and not lose unrecoverable data. Of course this all assumes you shoot raw. What you lose is fine detail. NR is generally good a preserving large high contrast detail. Pixel peep some hair and you'll see the difference.

05-29-2008, 02:44 PM	#9
NicholasN Inactive Account Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Posts: 301 Original Poster	Does it use the NR at fastshutter speeds also? In other words is it affecting all my shots?

05-30-2008, 03:56 AM	#10
cputeq Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 464	Originally posted by NicholasN Does it use the NR at fastshutter speeds also? In other words is it affecting all my shots? If the K20D works like my K200D, then it depends on which noise reduction you're using, as there are two types. There is noise reduction from slow shutter speeds and noise reduction in high ISO settings. If you're using strong reduction in high ISO, then it doesn't matter how fast your shutter is .... if your ISO is 800+ (I think) then it's going to automatically use NR. ---------------------------------- Personally I use Noise Ninja and it works awesomely, especially as a Photoshop plugin because it uses some Photoshop filters at the same time to not lose detail like one would imagine....I've actually gained detail at the same time I used Noise ninja on some shots! (NR + USM = Good). I was a bit hesitant buying the "pro" version, as $80 is not cheap just for a plugin or small standalone program, but now that I actually have it, it's invaluable. Well worth the money and it is a nice improvement to some of my shots. I've also done very limited testing with the K200Ds noise reduction and it does pretty good. I posted some images a while back at another forum (or maybe it was here?) comparing different ISO ratings, etc. but I think I'm going to redo the testing, as I was in very bad conditions before.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search