How far do you push the "luminance noise" to the right?I'm using Raw files for couples of months ago and I saw that at a value higher than "2" for "luminance noise" ,a lot of detail is lost.Better choises for RAW conversion?(Maybe Capture One 5.0 ,Lightroom,or something else?)Thank you in advance for your opinions!!!!!
I love DPP for basic RAW conversion and minor tweaks but I don't use luminance NR at all. Maybe if I'm in hurry I might use a 1 or 2 but certainly no more than that! DPP is a great converter...it's quick, easy & gives (IMO) a better TIFF to use in Photoshop but luminance NR is not one of it's virtues.
gabimaster wrote:
This means that you are using other software for more elaborate work with RAW files!Can you name it?
When I do luminance NR, I usually do it in Photoshop in a series of small steps and/or with a mask (probably 3 incremental NR steps). Sometimes I will take it into Noise Ninja but I don't worry about noise too much. I print images and luminance noise is alot less noticable in print (as opposed to viewing 100%-400% crops on a computer ).
I'm more annoyed by the chroma noise than the luminance noise but like Omar, I hardly ever do any NR in DPP and when I do, it's mostly 1 and never more than 2.
I like using Nik Software's Dfine 2.0 plugin for PS. It allows me to do NR selectively where the noise is very obvious.
Thank you,OMAR,I own two more than decent bodies(a 30 D and a 40D),but after being a Jpeg user for 4 years,in the last 5 months I started using Raw mor and more;I saw some positive posts about the new CAPTURE ONE 5.0 PRO, and about DFINE ,and I was hoping that someone with more experience with these programes will share his results.
DPP noise reduction is reasonably good, possbily as good or better than that in any other RAW converter. That being said, none of the RAW converters I have used do a particularly good job here.
You can always obtain better results using more sophisticated techniques in Photoshop. For high-value images, I use Photoshop with a dedicated NR plug-in, such as Neat Image or Noise Ninja. Both those tools use noise profiles (noise prints) sampled from the image to achieve good luminance NR without destroying too much detail (particularly if you back off from the default settings). You can also mask the highlights and midtones in Photoshop and apply stronger NR to just the shadows.
But DPP NR is actually pretty good when you are not so picky. The best reason to use the NR in DPP, in my opinion, is to match the rendering of in-camera JPEGs. You do this by setting DPP NR tool preferences to "apply camera settings". I have High ISO NR in my cameras set to 'Low' and I use DPP this way when I need quick conversions of high ISO files that are "pretty good" (for family, friends, etc.).
You can also leave the chroma NR slider set so that it works this way, but then select all your thumgnails in the browser and just dial back the luminance NR to whatever value you like (0, 1 or 2 to preserve the most detail). You can do this as a batch for all images rather than individually adjust each one. This works best if you work on batches of images shot at the same ISO speed.
I don't use NR much at all, but I did notice recently that on the newer versions of DPP the sliders are at a 'suggested' position based on the image, I am guessing calculated by the ISO used and perhaps the histo. Point being, I start there, and do not usually have to go much further unless the exposure was incorrect on the original.
In my experience you are much better off using other NR software. I use Neat Image and like it a lot. I keep trying the NR in DPP with each new revision of the software, but I really haven't seen much of an improvement in it at all.
helimat wrote:
I don't use NR much at all, but I did notice recently that on the newer versions of DPP the sliders are at a 'suggested' position based on the image, I am guessing calculated by the ISO used and perhaps the histo.
The NR settings in DPP are based on the camera's ISO setting and the camera's "high ISO noise reduction" setting. I gathered the following data from the 7D at ISO 3200:
I didn't gather any other information at the time from the 7D. Interestingly, the same type of settings are used on the 5D2, but with considerably different values. At ISO 3200:
Low: Lum - 5; chrom - 6
The old 5D seems to be permanently set at Lum - 2; chrom - 0 regardless of ISO setting.
I wish that I could plug Noiseware into DPP. Just a few days of playing with the community edition showed me that it is a superior noise reduction program, but as far as I know, it only works with JPG and TIF images. Perhaps if I had a paid-for version, I'd have more compatibility.
Tom_W wrote:
The NR settings in DPP are based on the camera's ISO setting and the camera's "high ISO noise reduction" setting. I gathered the following data from the 7D at ISO 3200:
I didn't gather any other information at the time from the 7D. Interestingly, the same type of settings are used on the 5D2, but with considerably different values. At ISO 3200:
Low: Lum - 5; chrom - 6
The old 5D seems to be permanently set at Lum - 2; chrom - 0 regardless of ISO setting.
I wish that I could plug Noiseware into DPP. Just a few days of playing with the community edition showed me that it is a superior noise reduction program, but as far as I know, it only works with JPG and TIF images. Perhaps if I had a paid-for version, I'd have more compatibility....Show more →
Never tried Noiseware, having read your statement, I went, downloaded the trial, and gave a few TIFFS a run thru....gotta say I was very surpised at the results.
I have used Noise Ninja and Capture One in the past, and while yes the noise is gone, so was fine detail. I used Noiseware and it seems that it can pull most all of the grain, but manages not to effect even the single stray strands of hair. They were left untouched. I was quite shocked.
This may actually be a purchase coming. C1 IMO seemed to be heavy on NR and sharpened to make up, but when viewing close, you could see the fine details looked like clay at that point...so I abandoned C1. NN ddi the same, but worse.
This program actually seems to know where to pull noise and where to leave alone.
Cool. I have 14 more days to see if this thing will be a new tool for me.
).
