Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: CANON DPP , APPLE APERTURE and Noise Reduction

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    desenzano on garda lake (ITALY)

    CANON DPP , APPLE APERTURE and Noise Reduction

    I need some help to better understand an issue I am not able to solve on my own. I recently added to my 60D a Canon S-100, a camera with decent low light performances for the sensor size, so I now have to manage low light pictures at say 2000-3200 ISO , Raw, from a small sensor.

    I was not particularly impressed by the changes I can make with Aperture ( it seems to me both Noise reduction and Raw fine introduce little changes to the visible noise ( maybe I don't use them properly) , so I tried DPP and the feeling is that the changes are dramatically more effective in reducing NR, at the price of details, of course.

    So my question is, am I using Aperture in the wrong way, or is Aperture "weak" in managing NR , or is Canon software more effective because they know better the way the Raw is taken with their sensor ??

    Would you suggest I keep using Aperture to manage my Library and use other tools to create better photos ?


  2. #2
    Senior Member neuroanatomist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Boston, MA

    CANON DPP , APPLE APERTURE and Noise Reduction

    Personally, I use DxO Optics Pro for RAW conversions, and use Aperture only for library management.

  3. #3
    Senior Member FastGass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Beautiful Ferndale Washington.

    I use DxO and it has the best noise reduction I know of and the best IQ. There are other programs that are pretty good to but DxO has the edge.

    Amateurs worry about gear, pros about the pay, masters about the light, and I just take pictures!

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Ottawa, ON
    I may be among the few, but I found DxO to be too slow to be usable (I have an early slow version of Core2 Quad), and it did a horrible job of downsizing images. Apparently it does well on the RAW conversion, and you can use something else to down-scale the results. Between the speed, the price, and not being a single-program solution I chose to look elsewhere. I'd recommend a trial to see how you like it. Others seem happy with it, and it may have improved since I tried it, or your computer may be more powerful.

    Adobe Camera RAW does a better job of removing noise than DPP, so Photoshop, Photoshop Elements, or Lightroom are other options to try. They've all got 30 day trials. Elements gives you limited RAW conversion options (ie: you can't paint in areas to expose differently, or isolate changes to certain colors, etc), and limited support (don't expect to use a new camera without buying a new version of Elements). Lightroom gives you lots of RAW conversion options, but pretty much no post-conversion editing options, which may make it not a single program solution. Again, I find myself in the minority preferring the RAW limitation of Elements over the editing limitations of Lightroom.

    Lastly, is Corel AfterShot Pro (formerly Bibble Labs). I don't like it's default noise reduction... it leaves more a lot more chroma noise than DPP, and I already find DPP unacceptable on high-ISO shots. If you have a noise ninja registration key you can unlock better noise handling in AfterShot, but I've never seen it in action, so I can't comment on it's effectiveness.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts