A simple and really hard question at the same time: how do you deal with noise on post-processing?
I usually apply the denoise tool of ACDSee Pro 8 (the tool that I use the most), it does a great job! but sometimes, mostly on HDR pics, it's really really hard to remove noise without destroying the details. For example, I removed few noise from this HDR as removing a bit more of it would destroy lot of detail.
Any tip or ideas on how you do that? I need advices :) And maybe other people can find that useful :)
(I so want to respond by saying "i cover my ears" ;p)
i am terrible at dealing with noise... mostly i just use the noise reduction tool in LR, and bump it up to around 60... although i often forgot... i don't do HDR, so i don't run into the issues you do...
DxO OpticsPro (at least release 10, might now be higher) is considered one of the best editors for noise. They claim that they directly examine and manipulate the sensor data, pixel-by-pixel in the raw file, rather than apply global "smoothing" algorithms which basically just "blur" away the noise into the surrounding pixels. They claim that their expertise in the DxOMark part of their business (industry standard independent sensor evaluations) give them a unique advantage over all other competitors. On certain images the DxO procedures work spectacularly. Their sample images might make you an immediate convert. On others, I have found little (or no) improvement over Adobe Camera Raw/Lightroom, which I use consistently after a brief foray into the 30 day free trial of DxO OpticsPro.
For HDR processing of multiple exposure-bracketed images, most "experts" advise trying to remove noise in the source images first. The HDR Merge tool can have an impact as to the noise remaining on the composite image, but I don't have much experience with the options out there. Perhaps others here do.
If you are applying tone mapping on a single image rather than merging exposure brackets, recovering the shadow details especially, your results will vary depending on how well your camera records the "hidden" detail in shadows. There is only so much detail recorded and trying to force it will just generate those random "noise-like" pixels. Here you are at the mercy of the "dynamic range" of your camera (the ability to record detail especially at the bottom).
For the image you provide, I don't find any remaining noise troublesome, and the detail is good.
You are shooting with a full-frame camera (the 6D) with a pretty good "sports" DxOMark score (ISO 2300+) but only an average "landscape" score (12.1 EV), so your HDR results for bracketed images (where you basically use the exposed values) will always be significantly better than "detail recovery" efforts. One thing you can do for single shot processing is to "expose to the right" (ETTR is the acronym) when shooting, overexposing by a stop (or more) to force more shadow detail to be recorded. If you are using the camera's metering, dial in +1 exposure compensation. You then, of course, might have to map the highlights down even more than usual.
Hope that helps a little? There is no magic elixir that will "fix" all the noise once the shots are taken. Shooting ETTR can significantly help you though if you are in the "single shot" recovery space.
Like Frank, I remove noise as the first step of my editing workfklow. I like Topaz Denoise, for serious removal, but LR is OK for use on average noise. HDR will have "additive" effect of any existing noise from each of the shots used. http://farbspiel-photo.com/original/three-noise-reduction-rules
Noise can add as much to a picture, as subtract from it. On a recent one day course with the incomparable Mr Scott Kelby, he made a lot of people in the audience gasp by saying that we are all way too concerned about noise. He also said that it is usually only photographers who are overly concerned about it. He showed an example of a photograph of the Eiffel Tower, containing so much noise that it would make every noise reduction program struggle. He asked the audience "How many of you like this photograph?" and nearly everyone put up a hand - it was a rather spectacular shot. "So as photographers would you say 'but it is way too noisy so I don't like it any more'?" and the audience stopped and thought about it. Then he told us that the general public had voted it number one in a recent photographic competition. Obviously Joe public likes what it sees and doesn't give a hoot about noise. It made me think long and hard about noise reduction. Now, I try to reduce noise in camera (e.g. longer exposure at a lower ISO, larger aperture at lower ISO or combinations of both) and accept what noise I get as part of the photograph.
Having said that, if you want to get rid of noise, I can thoroughly recommend DxO Optics Pro and I still find it better than Adobe Camera Raw (but only just in the case of the latest version of ACR)
@northy that way isn't bad at all, then noise disappears completely :P hahaha
@frankhymus DxO optics...ugh, I used to trust that software and their analitics until they showed in their ranks that the iPhone 5 camera was far better than the Nokia 808 Pureview, something that anyone that knows about cameras (mobile cameras) or optics know that is impossible, and with tons of proofs in their hands keep saying that, so on that moment I stopped trusting them.
Appart from that I've just read some analysis about the noise removal tool and looks like the rest, I mean, nothing too special or powerful, I found NoiseNinja better than topaz denoise in some situations, and the opposite in others... really hard to find the great combination.
About HDR what I do is remove noise before the proccess, but always appear noise, it's impossible to avoid it. What drives me crzy it's that in some shots, as the one on the top, I used a low ISO (1600 for the 6D is almost nothing) and it gave me a lot of noise in some parts, example: https://www.flickr.com/photos/petaqui/20759853156/
Check there the original size as in Flickr you can see the original one, check check the faces and coat...it's huge how much noise it contains... local contrast creates noise from nowhere hahaha
I didn't know that the ETTR way was a good one for that, I though that recovering overexposed areas is more difficult than the dark ones..where, I though and I think that haha but I'll try. Dani Diamond, a great portrait photographer always say that he take shots underexposed becaue it's easier to add light and recover detail than the opposite way.
Great explanation by the way!! Thank you so much =)
@ltodd cool link!! Thanks!! i'll try some of those things.
@creampuff DO you have that shot? I'm curious about it now haha well, that's true, sometimes is a part that we can't live without and we have to add that noise into our final shots, as that grain add textures, detail...character! I found really interesting that experience.
Any of you use ACDSee? I found that maybe I'm the nly one that uses that software, and can't understand why as I think is pretty good, maybe I'm wrong and I'm missing the art of using lightroom (I have it and use it sometimes also)
@petaqui I don't have the picture to hand but if I can find the notes from the seminar, I'm sure that there is a copy of that shot (although it might be in B&W and low quality!)
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
i am terrible at dealing with noise... mostly i just use the noise reduction tool in LR, and bump it up to around 60... although i often forgot... i don't do HDR, so i don't run into the issues you do...
For HDR processing of multiple exposure-bracketed images, most "experts" advise trying to remove noise in the source images first. The HDR Merge tool can have an impact as to the noise remaining on the composite image, but I don't have much experience with the options out there. Perhaps others here do.
If you are applying tone mapping on a single image rather than merging exposure brackets, recovering the shadow details especially, your results will vary depending on how well your camera records the "hidden" detail in shadows. There is only so much detail recorded and trying to force it will just generate those random "noise-like" pixels. Here you are at the mercy of the "dynamic range" of your camera (the ability to record detail especially at the bottom).
For the image you provide, I don't find any remaining noise troublesome, and the detail is good.
You are shooting with a full-frame camera (the 6D) with a pretty good "sports" DxOMark score (ISO 2300+) but only an average "landscape" score (12.1 EV), so your HDR results for bracketed images (where you basically use the exposed values) will always be significantly better than "detail recovery" efforts. One thing you can do for single shot processing is to "expose to the right" (ETTR is the acronym) when shooting, overexposing by a stop (or more) to force more shadow detail to be recorded. If you are using the camera's metering, dial in +1 exposure compensation. You then, of course, might have to map the highlights down even more than usual.
Hope that helps a little? There is no magic elixir that will "fix" all the noise once the shots are taken. Shooting ETTR can significantly help you though if you are in the "single shot" recovery space.
Having said that, if you want to get rid of noise, I can thoroughly recommend DxO Optics Pro and I still find it better than Adobe Camera Raw (but only just in the case of the latest version of ACR)
@frankhymus DxO optics...ugh, I used to trust that software and their analitics until they showed in their ranks that the iPhone 5 camera was far better than the Nokia 808 Pureview, something that anyone that knows about cameras (mobile cameras) or optics know that is impossible, and with tons of proofs in their hands keep saying that, so on that moment I stopped trusting them.
Appart from that I've just read some analysis about the noise removal tool and looks like the rest, I mean, nothing too special or powerful, I found NoiseNinja better than topaz denoise in some situations, and the opposite in others... really hard to find the great combination.
About HDR what I do is remove noise before the proccess, but always appear noise, it's impossible to avoid it. What drives me crzy it's that in some shots, as the one on the top, I used a low ISO (1600 for the 6D is almost nothing) and it gave me a lot of noise in some parts, example: https://www.flickr.com/photos/petaqui/20759853156/
Check there the original size as in Flickr you can see the original one, check check the faces and coat...it's huge how much noise it contains... local contrast creates noise from nowhere hahaha
I didn't know that the ETTR way was a good one for that, I though that recovering overexposed areas is more difficult than the dark ones..where, I though and I think that haha but I'll try. Dani Diamond, a great portrait photographer always say that he take shots underexposed becaue it's easier to add light and recover detail than the opposite way.
Great explanation by the way!! Thank you so much =)
@ltodd cool link!! Thanks!! i'll try some of those things.
@creampuff DO you have that shot? I'm curious about it now haha well, that's true, sometimes is a part that we can't live without and we have to add that noise into our final shots, as that grain add textures, detail...character! I found really interesting that experience.
Any of you use ACDSee? I found that maybe I'm the nly one that uses that software, and can't understand why as I think is pretty good, maybe I'm wrong and I'm missing the art of using lightroom (I have it and use it sometimes also)
- https://scottkelby.exposure.co/for-the-love-of-paris
- http://scottkelby.com/back-from-a-week-in-paris-and-a-new-photo-series-emerges/
I have to say that I love your avatar :P hahaha