Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The best in noise reduction?

Options
  • 24-10-2009 7:36pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,763 ✭✭✭


    I photographed a wedding banquet at a venue last night who did not permit flash photography. The images I came home with were adequately lit, sharp, focused and captured the subjects wonderfully. But...but there is a hazy miasma caused by shooting at ISO 3200. I'm a little out of my league in recovering this image as I do almost all of my conventional shooting in full daylight and at ISO 100-500. Here's a sample image, along with the raw file if anyone wants to take a crack at it (click through the photo):

    noise.jpg


Comments

  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    For me Topaz is the best noise reduction software, I will have a go and post it up.

    Not too bad and most of the noise wont print either..


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,131 ✭✭✭oshead


    A video light might have been acceptable for them. Anyway, heres Noiseware Pro using the high Noise setting. I also added a bit of range using Shadow/Highlight in PS. I didn't sharpen it.

    93971.jpg


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 10,686 Mod ✭✭✭✭melekalikimaka


    i use noise ninja...find its good but softens a tad


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,826 ✭✭✭Anouilh


    This blog gives some useful comparisons:

    http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com/2008/10/noise-reduction-face-off-neat-image.html

    I have used the stand-alone freeware version of Neat Image with success. If you hit the tags added to this thread, you will find another thread that discusses noise and grain.

    Neat Image can make a photo very syrupy looking, but with practice it is good.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,681 ✭✭✭DaireQuinlan


    Anouilh wrote: »
    This blog gives some useful comparisons:

    http://kimletkeman.blogspot.com/2008/10/noise-reduction-face-off-neat-image.html

    I have used the stand-alone freeware version of Neat Image with success. If you hit the tags added to this thread, you will find another thread that discusses noise and grain.

    Neat Image can make a photo very syrupy looking, but with practice it is good.

    Yeah ditto, I've used NeatImage aswell, the freeware version allows you to do everything except save to 16bit, you can save out full quality JPGs though. It allows complete control over the noise reduction in terms of the channels you want to apply it to, the differing reduction on the various different amplitudes of noise etc etc. Never used any other tool so can't really compare. And yes, it can certainly reduce your images to plasticky looking crap, but only if you want it to, and you can mess around to your hearts content with the preview to try out different settings.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    Checked the exif on the shot and it says ISO 1250 and 1/25th?

    First one is taking it straight from camera raw and using topaz exposure comp and topaz de noise
    D16AF40954784E7F8542161E4F1C6324-800.jpg

    Second one is using a bit of brightening in camera raw and then guy gowans retouch actions and topaz de noise
    462207350A21425BB1D64EF554D3FB7F-800.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,150 ✭✭✭kumate_champ07


    I'd maybe use noise ninja and use the brush tool to being back detail/noise in the hair

    Right now I mostly use the noise reduction in lightroom, I dont use much if any at iso 1600 for web pics. but printing is a diff story

    I prefer having noise and detail rather than no noise and smudged detail


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    I use a preset in topaz for a customer of mine and all the shots are taken at ISO 1600-3200 and using a 5d come out clean as a whistle


  • Registered Users Posts: 340 ✭✭Fireman


    This is my attempt!!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,067 ✭✭✭AnimalRights


    I think Fireman's is best simply because there is not as much detail lost, the cellulite is still in the Woman's leg on the left, although she'd probably prefer the other attempts. :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 98 ✭✭houseoffun14


    Noiseware Pro, excellent software when used correctly.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 10,257 Mod ✭✭✭✭Borderfox


    the shot looks around 1 to 2 stops under and if the exif is correct shot borderline on the handheld limit, for me I would have had the primes out long before this. Just my two cents.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,763 ✭✭✭Fenster


    oshead wrote: »
    A video light might have been acceptable for them. Anyway, heres Noiseware Pro using the high Noise setting. I also added a bit of range using Shadow/Highlight in PS. I didn't sharpen it.

    93971.jpg

    Our of all the finishes I've seen, the work by Noiseware Pro seems the best by far. I will definitely give the program a gander, thank you everyone!


Advertisement