Bruce n Philly wrote:
So.... if this is how LR denoise works, can you just denoise as you import? If you are out shooting high ISOs, for example, and you know you are going to have noise, well then it may make sense to do just that. Experienced shooters kinda know what they will need given experience no?
Possible?
Peace
Bruce in Philly
Why would you denoise every image? Surely you won’t process every image you take.
Actually I still think it may be a bug. The algorithms may not be applying sharpening but different levels look different in Enhance window. How are we supposed to judge how much NR to apply? I'll post this at Adobe but think for now zero out sharpening and
everything else. Easy with a preset. I have one to put everything back.
Zenon Char wrote:
Actually I still think it may be a bug. The algorithms may not be applying sharpening but different levels look different in Enhance window. How are we supposed to judge how much NR to apply?
that is what NR preview window is for... so that you can judge the result of combination of NR that is applied before sharpening in ACR/LR with sharpening parameters
Zenon Char wrote:
Adobe is already working on getting rid of the DNG. Maybe one day it will be part of the engine.
they are working since ~Feb 2019 ( since first "enhanced" feature appeared publicly - Enhance Details ... and if we count not public beta testing and internal development then probably for ~5 years already since 2018 at least ) and nowhere there yet... so dream on ... features that will make it in real-time UI are features the can be done in sub-second time on most computers... Ai-NR is not that for a while
Zenon Char wrote:
They recommend to Denoise first as editing later edits can affect results.
and very-very visibly affect = for example applying auto geometry correction = https://i.postimg.cc/7ZnBfy6k/bugaga.gif ... you don't want to do edits on non NR'd file and then apply Ai-NR as the last step and export w/o thinkin and checking what might go wrong ... consider this iteration of the feature as a public beta test - CC subscribers pay Adobe to be able to test for bugs instead of Adobe paying to hire normal testers in-house ...
exdeejjjaaaa wrote:
that is what NR preview window is for... so that you can judge the result of combination of NR that is applied before sharpening in ACR/LR with sharpening parameters
exdeejjjaaaa wrote:
and very-very visibly affect = for example applying auto geometry correction = https://i.postimg.cc/7ZnBfy6k/bugaga.gif ... you don't want to do edits on non NR'd file and then apply Ai-NR as the last step and export w/o thinkin and checking what might go wrong ... consider this iteration of the feature as a public beta test - CC subscribers pay Adobe to be able to test for bugs instead of Adobe paying to hire normal testers in-house ...
exdeejjjaaaa wrote:
and very-very visibly affect = for example applying auto geometry correction = https://i.postimg.cc/7ZnBfy6k/bugaga.gif ... you don't want to do edits on non NR'd file and then apply Ai-NR as the last step and export w/o thinkin and checking what might go wrong ... consider this iteration of the feature as a public beta test - CC subscribers pay Adobe to be able to test for bugs instead of Adobe paying to hire normal testers in-house ...
Yes I read about what happens when you apply Auto before Denoise. I think here of at the Lightroom Queens site. Can’t remember. Too many threads. Not much of a beta test. I know people were beta testing it before the release. I think this first release is spectacular. They new DNG’s would be slow. I’ll take slow over nothing. My only query was what you see in the enhance window. Like said I’ll test it out with various combinations.
Zenon Char wrote:
I think this first release is spectacular.
they managed to repeat what others ( like DxO ) were doing for a while - so there is nothing spectacular in that - and with all the $$$ they have at their disposal they still have childish bugs... please don't try to tell that this kind of bug is not clear for anybody who actually tries to test software on raw files before doing a public release
so we wish them success to eventually deliver something that works w/o in-your-face-bugs
that is like DxO PL does - they also have a preview window so that you can actually evaluate how DeepPRIME XD works combined w/ other adjustments ... or if you want to go NR first route in DxO PL then you double down - you export to DNG with only NR applied (+ optics corrections) to DxO PL itself and continue w/ other adjustments with that DNG in DxO PL6 again ... almost like ACR/LR when you apply Ai-NR first and then go to that DNG to work with it
exdeejjjaaaa wrote:
they managed to repeat what others ( like DxO ) were doing for a while - so there is nothing spectacular in that - and with all the $$$ they have at their disposal they still have childish bugs... please don't try to tell that this kind of bug is not clear for anybody who actually tries to test software on raw files before doing a public release
so we wish them success to eventually deliver something that works w/o in-your-face-bugs
It is because it is better.
Hey RoamingScott. You said you were monitoring new FM members that are now DPreview refugees. I have no issues with constructive debates that add value to all software out there. exdeejjjaaaa joined in 2014, has a whopping 355 posts and the recent posts are bashing Adobe. I may be wrong but it seems odd.
exdeejjjaaaa wrote:
that is like DxO PL does - they also have a preview window so that you can actually evaluate how DeepPRIME XD works combined w/ other adjustments ... or if you want to go NR first route in DxO PL then you double down - you export to DNG with only NR applied (+ optics corrections) to DxO PL itself and continue w/ other adjustments with that DNG in DxO PL6 again ... almost like ACR/LR when you apply Ai-NR first and then go to that DNG to work with it
Cross posting this from the Nikon board thread on this tool.
My older GTX 1070 (ITX sized) crunches through Z6 (24mp) files in 40-45s with 20-28% utilization while the CPU (Ryzen 5800) sits around 1-5% in the background, and RAM utilization is 10-12GB. Of course newer RTX or AMD cards are faster but I bought this while avoiding the crypto rushes and the price was decent (around $215 at the time) and it's still a great heavy lifter for export times.
So far I think the Adobe tool is semi decent but also GIGO. Well exposed images taken with higher ISO see some improvement (although not very visible at 8x10 display size on my monitor).
Images like the below, I'm seeing it smear/make up textures that don't exist and existing noise reduction tools are greatly preferred. I've seen it do different texture takes for both running prior to and after adjustments.
The lower image is a crop from the lower 1/4 - 1/3 of the image. This was shot very underexposed for foreground to correctly expose the sky, Venus, and the light of the building. Knowing I could push the foreground with a modern sensor, my final image (not displayed due to family inclusion) is exposure +0.09 but shadows pushed +74 with a very modest bump in luminance and color noise reduction. That image isn't perfect, but it's exactly what I was looking for.
How about AMD GPUs? Anyone with a modern AMD card and AMD CPU?
There is an advantage to those of us with AMD CPUs to use AMD GPUs... AMD wrote their code to take advantage of AMD GPUs in what they call "smart access memory".
When I built my super machine with the AMD Ryzen 9 5950X CPU, I could not get a good graphics card due to the crazy bit coin issues and others at the time... scarcity and stupid costs... so I purchased a used GTX980 Ti SC for $320 to get me by knowing I would upgrade when the market stabilized. This GTX card is still pretty fast on the PassMark rankings but it does not contain the innovations that appeared in the RTX cards. Before LR release Desnoise AI, I was leaning towards an AMD card due to the synergies AMD built into their fabric... but now... I dunno.
So... What about LR Denoise AI on the latest AMD GPUs?
More info from this thread. Check out the responses from this post.
I guess I'm not done yet. Sorry. So is this still a bug? The algorithms may not be applying sharpening during the process but different levels look different in the Enhance window. How are we supposed to judge how much NR to apply? For now I think I will zero everything out so I can see the state of the unsharpened file.
3rd file sent to Denoise with sharpening set to 0, saved back to LrC and then I set the sharpening to 50. You can see it looks cleaner than the 2nd file.
I can only conclude if you send a file to Denoise with any amount of sharpening trying to decide on the amount to apply can be deceiving.
Zenon Char wrote:
More info from this thread. Check out the responses from this post.
I guess I'm not done yet. Sorry. So is this still a bug? The algorithms may not be applying sharpening during the process but different levels look different in the Enhance window. How are we supposed to judge how much NR to apply? For now I think I will zero everything out so I can see the state of the unsharpened file.
I don't think it's a bug at all. They state that the DeNoise includes their "Raw Details" algorithm, which is essentially a type of sharpening baked into the Bayer (or Fuji X-Trans) filter demosaicing process. Because it can also carry over any adjustments you've already done to the file, if you pre-sharpen it will leave that in place but it does appear to apply the sharpening to the file before doing the other steps. I think that's intentional on their part, although I can see it being confusing in some way.
Personally I find that I have now changed my workflow--I am turning off the default sharpening as part of my import preset, then apply the AI Denoise, and then using masks to only selectively sharpen the image. Vastly superior results that the recent mask and DeNoise updates have now opened up!
instead of Adobe paying to hire normal testers in-house ... 
