Noise Removal - What's your method?

[Busted Knuckles]

Other than the star scapes and even then not really - I have not done much if any Noise Reduction. Indeed I am perhaps lazy in that regard of fiddling much in post - take out a wire or two, pull up a shadow, but noise reduction, selectively blurring pieces and parts not so much if any really.

I will have to fiddle around a bit more. Particularly in the selective blur/focus/key light/etc techniques.

There are a number of tips here that I am going to try. I used to use DPP faithfully but got a way from it and used ACR instead. Now when I go into the new version of DPP, I'm clueless ...maybe I'll have to study up! I'm also a few versions behind in DxO and I would love to get DeNoise but it is a tad pricey! MY GTG (Greater Than Gatsby) photoshop action works pretty good when noise isn't too bad to begin with and you only need it at around 40% but I have a few bird pics I recently took and the noise is pretty high. When I use the action it just makes everything look bad when I push it to 100%.

So sad to throw otherwise good shots away because the noise is awful!

[Joel Eade]

This one would normally go in the birds thread but it is an example of "noise reduction" using DPP4 for RAW conversion

This was shot with the 7MKII + 100-400mm Version II + 1.4 TC @ 420mm and ISO 2500 which (I think most would agree) is quite high for the 7DII

The Luminance noise reduction slider was set at 6.0 and the Chrominance noise reduction slider at 5.0

These are not heavy settings by any means. I used no additional post processing in PP, no other sharpening or noise reduction, nothing.

There is noise if you pixel peep but for web presentation it is not a factor. For a large print it well could be.

[jrw]

One thing that I do that is considered new and novel, heresy for some, in print workshops is to view the image at print size, typically 33%, after editing and resizing has been done. In smaller prints noise dissappears all on its own and it is possible to gauge the amount of sharpening to apply for the media type. One interesting side effect of more megapixels has been the growing need to soften massively reduced image sizes for online social media. Sometimes I forget and the images appear overly sharpened when in fact none had been applied.

Topaz does offer healthy discounts periodically. Up to 50% off can be had at times, Black Friday springs to mind. Think I received an email recently about 40% discount on now. Not sure of expiry date though.

[Dave Throgmartin]

I apply a light amount of NR when necessary in Lightroom.

Dave

[HDNitehawk]

I like DPP4 because of the way it renders color....to my eye it looks more true and requires less adjustment.

Also the luminance and chrominance noise reduction feature uses algorithms specially designed for Canon cameras. Using just a small amount of these at the initial step is often all that is needed. If I find more noise reduction is required in post it is usually minimal and is much easier to deal with having used a small amount of noise reduction in the initial conversion.

I always shoot RAW just due to the fact that the image will respond better to the wide array of processing techniques available and it can be saved to be reprocessed later if new/better software becomes available.

To my own detriment, I have yet to really delve into LightRoom. I know I should but just have not made the effort yet.

What format do you convert to when you take the pic into PS?

Honestly for your birds and landscape I am not sure you would see a benefit from LR, you already have a technique that is proven. It is evident in your body of work.

One thing I do like about LR is that it seems to handle shadows and highlights better. It seems more intuitive.

[Joel Eade]

What format do you convert to when you take the pic into PS?

16 bit TIFF .... thanks for the kind words!

[ddt0725]

That is a wonderful photo, Joel! You would never think it had even the slightest noise issue. I have some that are much higher ISO and think I am going to start taking my favs and stashing them into a folder named "Noise" and when I see a plug-in on sale I'l purchase it and try it out on some of these. You all know I'm a texture freak so I may be able to salvage a few that way too. I have been also applying a painterly effect to some. Using either one of those methods, it either makes it look noisy or mucky ...on purpose!

[HDNitehawk]

Why not try some of the programs for yourself. LR does a free trial, I am not sure what all is involved in signing up. DxO has done a free trial in the past, I didn't check if they have one now. Topaz has a free trial also.

[Joel Eade]

That is a wonderful photo, Joel! You would never think it had even the slightest noise issue. I have some that are much higher ISO and think I am going to start taking my favs and stashing them into a folder named "Noise" and when I see a plug-in on sale I'l purchase it and try it out on some of these. You all know I'm a texture freak so I may be able to salvage a few that way too. I have been also applying a painterly effect to some. Using either one of those methods, it either makes it look noisy or mucky ...on purpose!

Using your art abilities on those kind of images is an excellent idea because noise really doesn't matter then. I would suggest you get the trial version of Neat Image Pro.

[Jayson]

Try nik noise software. It's free.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk