RAW conversion bug with Noise Reduction

Hello,
I have found a serious bug in the RAW conversion when noise reduction is applied. When converting from two types of Canon RAW files (a CRW from a Powershot G6 and a CR2 from a 20d) I found that if you apply Noise Reduction to a RAW file on very low settings (the default setting in the NR function will produce this reliably) single-pixel lines appear at regular intervals throughout the image. Here is an example:
You can see several lines in this image:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/140/3821480263171e76604b.jpg
A 100% detail of which is here:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/179/382148021af6586d27eo.jpg
Has anyone else had this problem? Can someone from the Aperture dev team fix this?
-Steve G

Well I find this filter is quite good in 'masking' block artifact that codec like xvid, or other low compression codec have. I only apply it if I find the block artifact is too much and I find this filter is less offending to my eyes than the block artifact.
In manual it said that if you have noisy video and want to lower the size then you can use this filter. It also blur the video a bit. But I suspect it is more than blur as I try gaussian blur in time line and the result is not as good. You can see the result as well. There is the tab between source and target and you can compare the result by togling between source and target tab.
BTW, anyone with 1 core, dual, or quad core, can you tried to encode with it? Just cancel it after few minutes as I want to see what is your processor utilization with this filter on. Also you can see how long does it take to process this video from the 'estimation time left'.

Similar Messages

Weird Banding with Noise Reduction Filter

Working on a night shot of a building and processed through ACR7.2 and forgot to reduce the noise - and opened in Photoshop. Went to Filter/Reduce Noise and immediately get wierd banding in the window blinds. This banding is there regardless of the noise reduction settings and could not get it to go away - See attached screen shot of before and after applying the filter. So I went back and opened the file again in ACR7.2 and applied the Noise Reduction there and bingo, noise level dropped and looked good with no banding. Looks like the Noise Reduction capabilities in ACR7.2 are way better than the Noise Reduction filter - but surely the banding should not be there; especially if images do not get processed through Camera RAW.
Running latest version of Photoshop CS6 (latest patches applied), Windows 7 x64 16GB RAM, Intel 4000 with latest drivers installed. Camera file was ACR2 from Canon 5DMKII imported as a DNG file - then opened in ACR 7.2
Before Image Opened in Photoshop before applying the Noise Reduction Filter
After Image in Photoshop after applying the Noise Redcution Filter
Seems like a bug to me
By the way, the screen captures are from the image viewed at 100%
Mike

The aliasing effect you're showing is obvious, but are you saying the noise reduction operation also changed the color of the image?
I didn't think so. Your "before" image appears several steps removed from your "after" image.
It would be best if you'd capture a "before" image of your entire display just before and just after applying the filter that causes the aliasing pattern, and also specifically describe or screenshot the exact parameters being provided to the filter causing the problem as well.
In general, if you're getting aliasing introduced into high detail / high frequency parts of your images, you might find it advantageous to work at a higher pixel count - i.e., change the output size in Camera Raw so that you're opening images at an upsampled resolution. That's the only way I work, and I find it advantageous to have more pixels representing the image while editing in a lot of ways.
-Noel

Microfon problems s400 with noise reduction

Hello people,
have a problem with the microfon sound.
This recording is either noisy (without HD driver and with HD drivers without noise reduction) or it is distorted (with HD drivers and noise reduction).
Drivers I've tried from the Lenovo page and also from Realtek already.
here are a few tests
Noise: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1182020/test% 20HD% 20with% 20the%% 20treiber 20nachhallred.wma
distortion: https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1182020/test% 20with% 20HD% 20treiber% 20with% 20rauschunterdr% C3% BCckung.wma
in the device manager for microphone stands for the version: 6.2.9200.16384 Microsoft.
Use Windows 8 Pro which I installed by myself.
Would be grateful for suggestions, I can not skype otherwise.
greeting

Dark areas have less bits to encode their values so a single bit of noise is a higher proportion of the total value.
For the basis of the default processing, to match the human eye’s response to dark and light, darker areas are brightened more than bright areas, using a non-linear gamma curve. This magnifies the noise in darker areas.
If you boost the brightness of dark areas using Shadows or Clarity, you are making that noise even more visible. Think of brightening as digitally increasing the ISO.
Adobe’s noise-reduction is calibrated to the original photo’s ISO setting, not how much you have digitally increased the ISO by brightening it, so if you have magnified the noise by extreme processing, you may be beyond what maxing out the NR sliders are calibrated to remove.
Exporting sharpening will sharpen any remaining noise.
Are you using the Mask slider in sharpen to keep from sharpening the noise grain in the Detail section? Use the Alt key while moving the mask slider to determine the optimal Mask level for a particular photo, where you can’t to have the edges indicated but not the wide areas of little detail.
It’s hard to guess what you’re seeing without seeing a screenshot.

Photos with noise reduction filters applied shows too much noise in preview mode

The Noise Reduction filters do an impressive job in Lightroom, but the preview of photos when zoomed out is sometimes poor.
This becomes especially visible on photos with a high amount of noise reduction applied.
When zooming in to 1:1 I see that the noise reduction works as it should. Also when exporting the images the noise is removed as it should.
I wish the non-zoomed preview inside Lightroom was able to show the image with the noise reduction applied more correctly than in version 3.4.
I'm using Lightroom 3.4 64-bit in Windows 7.
See samples of image with heavy noise reduction applied in 1:1 screen shot, and then a unzoomed screen shot of the same part of the image. As you can see the unzoomed preview contains much more noise than the zoomed image does.

I've had to encode with no noise reduction which is a shame, but have to get this DVD done.
Any ideas for the next one?
Thanks
Mark

Bug in Noise Reduction in Lr 5.2

When I zoom in on an image, and then make adjustments to Luminenescence, the changes don't appear unless I zoom out then zoom back in. This hasn't been an issue/problem in the past.

Thanks for the tip. I did try that but it didn't work. But, the problem was solved when I re-calibrated my monitor. I have a Huey Pro calibrating system hooked up but had disconnected it and forgot to plug it back in again. After going through the Huey process everything was fine. Again, thanks for taking the time to try and help me out. It was a real puzzle.
Jerry Casper
Swarnima <[email protected]> wrote:
=============
Hi,
It seems you have some screen resolution problems in your system. You can try upgrading your graphic drivers and change the screen resolution to 1024x768

Any chance Photoshop itself will get Camera Raw's noise reduction and sharpening?

I would love to have the noise reduction and sharpening from ACR 6 in Photoshop itself for JPEG, TIFF, and PSD files. Yes, I know I can open those files in ACR, apply noise reduction and sharpening, and then have it then open the files to Photoshop. But it would be so nice if we could do that without having to go through Camera Raw.

Matt Howell wrote:
Yes, I am absolutely saying that the noise reduction and sharpening of ACR 6 is vastly superior to any filters in Photoshop CS5.
For those who only work only with RAW files this is a non-issue, but I sometimes prefer to use TIFF files generated by CANON DPP software or occasionally even JPEG's straight out of Canon DSLR's. Going through ACR just for noise reduction causes unnecessary color space conversions, as well as just a needlessly complex workflow.
Perhaps you should ask Canon to make DPP noise reduction better. I also do not think is a good idea to get too aggressive with noise reduction and sharpening when you first bring a image into Photoshop unless you only use the image single use for a particular output device. Your better off working with a somewhat soft image till you ready for output and then sharpen for the output devive being used. If you use strong sharpening and NR up front sharpeing again for your output device may produce unwanted sharpening and NR artifacts... There are several third party noise reduction and sharpening plug-ins that are better then Adobe Photoshop built in ones. Noise reduction has to be balanced too much will loose detail masking detail is important. ACR noise reduction provides masking adjustments and works well. Third party plug-ins offer offer advanced masking features also. Photoshop noise reduction filter has a basic preserve detail slider which I presumes does some kind of masking but this is not as good at ACR masking and third paty masking. You can of course add you own masking before using photoshop noise reduction filter. Sharpening also needs masking for sarpening will sharpen noise as well as detail.
IMO your better off with third party plug-ins that are designed to be the best. They keep getting better there is no clear winner for all images. I'm been satisfied with NeatImage and I have only had to pay for two upgrades. I had to pay for the addition the 32 bit plugin then and for the addition a 64 bit plugin. All other updates to NeatImage has been free of charge even the lates version 7 of the 64 bit plugin was no charge for me.

RAW conversion with Aperture

Has anyone compared the quality of RAW conversion of Aperture vs. Nikon Capture as well as other converters?
I really like the quality of nikon capture and would not want to purchase aperture unless the conversion was at least equivalent.
Thanks for any input.
mark
G4 17" Laptop Mac OS X (10.4.3)

I've compared Aperture's conversion side by side with Adobe Camera Raw's. My method was to do some conversions with Camera Raw and save the result along with the RAW file. Then, in the Apple Store, I performed the conversions using Aperture.
The results from Aperture are not good. They look okay at reduced size, but if you look more closely, the de-mosaicing Aperture performs is quite bad. On some images it is only "somewhat" worse than Camera Raw; on others it is so bad as to be unusable. Shadow detail suffers the most, but highlights are not immune. Some images showed color fringing that was not present in the Camera Raw conversion, even with all chromatic aberration adjustments set to zero in Camera Raw.
I ignored differences in color and tonal rendering because I did not have enough time with Aperture to learn to get the best results out of it in terms of color. It takes a while to figure out how to get good color out of a RAW converter.
In no case was Aperture as good as Adobe Camera Raw in terms of image quality. The difference was immediately obvious at 100% magnification.
I would not use Aperture for RAW conversion.
EDIT: I forgot to mention, in case it matters, my camera is a Nikon D2X.

Noise reduction visible only in Develop area.

My Lightroom 5.4 for mac has a bug in noise reduction. The noise reduction is visible only in the develop area, and while switching to library it disappear. This affects also exported files and published files like flicker's one. I work with raw files taken with my nikon D5100. Is there any way to fix this bug?

Are you viewing these at 1:1 / 100% Zoom or smaller? Can we see screenshots of what you’re seeing at 1:1 zoom? Are you apply Export sharpening? Are you resizing smaller? Flickr does add its own sharpening, I believe.

In-camera noise reduction

This question is directed to the technically knowledgeable out there and has to do with in-camera noise reduction settings. Although I'm shooting with a 1D4, I would guess the same would apply to all models. In a nutshell, is in-camera noise reduction (assuming it's enabled) applied to RAW files or just to JPEGs? If it's applied to RAW files (which is all I shoot), have any of you shot RAW with noise reduction disabled, and if so, how were the results? I tried to do a search here on this topic but was unable to find any information. Thanks.

hsbn wrote:
No, with all due respects, it is Long Exposure NR. Why would it make it worst with High ISO if it is "High ISO Noise Reduction".
6D Manual page: 128 - 129
5D Mark III manual page 144-145
"Images taken at ISO 1600 or higher may look grainier with the [Enable] setting than with the [Disable] and [Auto] setting"
With Auto setting, camera will not do LENR if the ISO is higher than 1600.
I've tested this and it's give many kind of artifact with high ISO from time to time. Others it just gives more noise.
Hi,
- Great to know, thanks! It's very surprising indeed.
LENR is supposed to remove hot pixels and noise due to long exposure. It's (sadly) surprising the in-cameras LENR may be worse than in post...
We'll take a review about it , since shooting long exposure at higher than ISO 1600 is not uncommon for astro photography.
I think 5D Mark 2 didn't have this "problem". Will check that too.
- The manual tells that in-camera High ISO NR applied is lower at high ISO than the NR that can be applied in post, not "worse", sorry, my mistake.
Thanks once again.
EDIT: The User manual of 5D Mark 2 doesn't tell anything about this matter. The manual of 7D does, as well as 6D and 5D3 as you mentioned.
Since I used to work with 5D2 I didn't realize the 5D3 could be different. Or at least the manual of 5D2 doesn't say the final result of LENR at 1600 or higher could be worse. Good thing to keep in mind.
Sitll doesn't understand why the result "may" be worse, the 5D3 has enormous computing potential with the Digic 5+
This seems to only affect if LENR is set to "ON" / "Enabled", not to "Auto". Very likely a more agressive NR is applied in such case.
We'll carry some test indeed.
EDIT 2:
In just brief tests with the 5D Mark 3 we found some inconsistency on the results between setting Long Exposure NR to "OFF", "Auto" & "On".
We set High ISO NR, Peripheral Illumination Correction and Chromatic Aberrations to OFF, to see only the effect of LENR in JPG (not RAW yet).
This camera (5D3) applies High ISO NR even when you set it to OFF (very noticeable in video mode).
At ISO 6400 we didn't see a hot /stuck pixel (even when LENR set to "OFF") that appears at ISO 3200 when setting LENR to OFF or Auto. Of course "ON" deletes all hot /stuck pixels, but also increaed grain.
We all already know that the more the sensor heats up (shooting and shooting long exposure stills - or using Live View for stills or video), the more noise we'll get in the pictures (and video).
So far we couldn't get a "rule". Sometimes the "Auto" works better than "ON", it seems it depends on the selected ISO value and how hot is the sensor too.
I pesonally don't understand WHY the LENR delivers more grainy images when set to "ON", if the NR is more agressive the grain should be finer than in "OFF" or "Auto", so it doesn't make sense...
We'll test the 5D Mark 2 to compare with 5D3 in this regard
HD Cam Team
Group of photographers and filmmakers using Canon cameras for serious purposes.
www.hdcamteam.com | www.twitter.com/HDCamTeam | www.facebook.com/HDCamTeam

Lightroom 3.6 DNG and Noise Reduction Problem

Hello,
I did a search and couldn't find this issue listed. I convert my Nikon D90 raw files to DNG. Never seem to have a problem with that except that the display(s) seldom shows the results of applying Noise Reduction (Color or Luminance). If my display is at Fit or Fill I don't see the results of what I am doing. If I zoom in to 1:1 or more, then I can see the results. All works fine if I am using a jpg file, it is just the DNG files that do this. If I want to see the entire picture with Noise Reduction applied I have to switch to the Library Module. Then when I go back to the Develop module the main display goes back to not showing the Noise Reduction, but the secondary display is ok until I apply another effect then boom, back to Noise Reduction not displaying. All of the other changes I make work just fine. It is just the Noise Reduction that causes the problem. This is really a killer when I am working on photos. This problem existsed before 3.6. Does anyone else have this problem? FYI - When I switch to the Library Module it takes a few seconds before the secondary display shows the photo with the Noise Reduction applied.
I have a quad core 2.4ghz with 8gig of ram and Windows 7 Pro 64bit OS. Plenty of CPU and memory available.
Thanks,
Harold

LR is designed this way to improve speed. I think it varies, somewhat, with how high the ISO is where higher ISOs show NR more.
I find this annoying, too, and which there was a setting to allow LR to compute the NR at lower resolutions if one chooses, instead of Adobe choosing things for us.

Finepix s9000/9500 raw conversion

Hi all,
I use both softwares:
- Finepix Viewer 3.3.9 with his Raw File Converter LE 4.0.1f2 and
- Adobe Camera Raw 3.7 in Photoshop CS2
to convert Raw shots under Mac Os 10.3.9 (I can't upgrade to CS3 and AdobeCameraRaw 4.x)
Altough
Adobe Camera Raw 3.7 offers a lot of settings (white balance, exposure, sharpness, luminance, colour etc)
I can't get better results than Finepix Viewer Raw File Converter LE in noise reduction!
So I'm obliged to use Finepix Viewer Raw File Converter with 400, 800, 1600 ASA shots.
Any idea about? Hints, links, tricks are welcome
Thanks
Mario

You won't...you need to process and do it in NN. Camera Raw 4 has improved noise reduction and sharpening but if you stick with 3.7, then doing it after processing is really the only choice.

"noise reduction" not applied to exported photos

I've always used iPhoto to slightly modify my photos, before exporting and sharing or uploading to Flickr.
But, since yesterday, the exported photos do not include my "Reduce Noise" modifications. When I export them, they include the color, retouch and so on, but they look as they were BEFORE I applied the "Reduce Noise" filter.
When I look at them in the browser, they appear WITHOUT noise reduction.
When I press space to see them zoomed, they appear WITHOUT noise reduction.
When I double-clic to switch to edit mode, they appear WITH noise reduction.
And when I export them (either by dragging and dropping to the desktop or an application, using the export function or opening in an external editor), they appear WITHOUT noise reduction.
I have tried to delete the preferences of iPhoto, but the behaviour of iPhoto remains the same.
This applies to all the photos I've tried it onto. And this never happened before yesterday.
I didn't install anything new, I have no plug-ins or things like that. I've repaired the permissions, even restarted and zapped the PRAM. The only thing I've done recently is install Aperture with the 30 days trial offer. Could this be the origin of the problem?
iPhoto is an important tool for me and has always worked perfectly. I hope someone will help me solve what is a big problem for me.

I sent to the trash the iPhoto preferences I could find and launched it again
This time, I got the same behaviour, but also got console messages, as follows:
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BilateralFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS /BilateralFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter.plugin/Cont ents/MacOS/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter.plugin/Cont ents/MacOS/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter.plugin/Cont ents/MacOS/BlackAndWhitePointsFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhiteFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/BlackAndWhiteFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhiteFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/BlackAndWhiteFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/BlackAndWhiteFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/BlackAndWhiteFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SepiaFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/Sep iaFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SepiaFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/Sep iaFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SepiaFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/Sep iaFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SaturationFilter.plugin/Contents/MacO S/SaturationFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SaturationFilter.plugin/Contents/MacO S/SaturationFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/SaturationFilter.plugin/Contents/MacO S/SaturationFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/ColorCorrectionFilter.plugin/Contents /MacOS/ColorCorrectionFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/ColorCorrectionFilter.plugin/Contents /MacOS/ColorCorrectionFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/ColorCorrectionFilter.plugin/Contents /MacOS/ColorCorrectionFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/LightingFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/ LightingFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/LightingFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/ LightingFilter.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/LightingFilter.plugin/Contents/MacOS/ LightingFilter and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter01.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter01. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter01.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter01.
*18/05/08 00:51:17 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter01.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter01 and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter05.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter05. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter05.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter05.
*18/05/08 00:51:18 [0x0-0xa1ba1b].com.apple.iPhoto[54170]* objc[54170]: Class PlugInLoader is implemented in both /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/EffectsFilter05.plugin/Contents/MacOS /EffectsFilter05 and /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/RemoveBlemishFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/RemoveBlemishFilter. Using implementation from /Applications/iPhoto.app/Contents/PlugIns/RemoveBlemishFilter.plugin/Contents/M acOS/RemoveBlemishFilter.

Noise Reduction output Issue

Every time I apply noise reduction in LR3 Beta 2 the adjustments appear in the preview window in LR but as soon as I export as jpeg the processing dissapear. It only happens with noise reduction - all other processing stays on the image. Any Help?

I do notice a difference between the image quality in the Library vs. Develop and noticed that shortly after i had posted the most recent response. I am just a little confused by your post when you say that the effects are only displayed on a 1:1 or higher scale. When i apply any form of NR the previewer - even at FIT - still shows adjustments happening. Is it simply rendering what it thinks may be adjusting or can it not comprehend the larger scale so it just smooths out some details?
And even at that, if i am able to achieve a desired effect in the previewer of Develop - shouldn't Lightroom be able to export that image that is it showing me? I am confident that i am able to reproduce the desired look in photoshop - basically through some smoothing - but the ability to create that in LR would save a lot of time.
I digress i am not very confident in my use of Lightroom as i have only been using it for a brief time - switching primarily from aperture i find lightroom a lot easier and more efficent.

Noise reduction makes robotic voice

I have been using Noise Reduction feature on "Audition" with no problems. When I have upgraded to "Adobe Soundbooth" I have an issue with this feature. When I turn it on I hear robotic echo of the voice no matter what the parameters are, even if the slider of parameters is on the 0 point (no noise reduction at all). Furthermore, it makes no difference if I am doing it with noise reduction profile or not.

I tried using noise reduction for old recordings namely background hiss...then I discovered the audio effects work better for this...called "remove hiss" and also in the simple effects "Parametric" called "Under a blanket"

Noise reduction, Clarity and Masking Vs Sharpness

Maybe I have been using too much noise reduction and clarity for bird photos. Some people on dpReview recommend no noise reduction and now I am inclined to believe them. Recently I tried using little to no noise reduction, little to no Clarity, lots of sharpening and about 40% masking.This gives the bird good feather detail and anything with less detail has little noise and better bokeh. In low detail areas it looks to me like masking reduces the noise caused by Sharpening but it has less affect on the noise increased by Clarity. Is this true? If it is, in bird photography is Clarity best used sparingly and selectively like on there heads?
Another reason for asking all this is I once read that even a little masking degrades sharpness but now I doubt that. Maybe LR has improved that through the years.
Thanks,
Doug

Indeed luminance noise reduction (and to some extent color noise reduction) has a tendency to wipe out fine feather detail.
I recommend:
* lowered noise reduction, and if you do use it, crank the nr.detail slider way up - this will help maintain fine feather detail and is superior to sharpening detail for maintaining feather detail otherwise lost due to noise reduction.
* lowered sharpening detail, to keep noise down, and reduce the "need" for noise reduction.
* and sharpen masking to taste..
Also note: local sharpening at exactly -50 masks all global sharpening, and so can be used in conjunction with noise reduction to smooth the bokeh areas.
And of course you can add sharpening and/or clarity locally too.
I realize I didn't answer your exact question perfectly as asked, but I'm not sure what else to say, so..
Have fun,
Rob

RAW conversion bug with Noise Reduction

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for