ACR 6.2 noise reduction settings shown only after zoom in or pushing sliders

Hi!
I Believe its an operator error, but still, i need your help, either to correct the situation ou learn how to work around it!
Begining:
to properly adjust noisre reductions settings we have to zoom in to about 100%, however, when zoom to fit in screen... the changes dont apear... unless i slghtly slide one adjusting button, the image will show the the changes until i release the slider.
i have the "preview check" marked.
if i export the images to jpg or tiff they present the changes, but if i click "done" to keep only the raw files + xmp and open the files in bridge on full screen, it doesn´t show the noise reduction changes, and once again, if i zoom in, it magicly changes while still zooming in....
Can someone help? i would like to keep only the raw files, having them exported only when needed...
Thank you in advance for your patience and time!
Mikroben.

hi MadManChan2000!
Thank you for your reply!
here you have a screen shot from my "basic" ACR settings, and as you can see, the darker part of the facem presents some noise color and grain.
on this second screen shot, you can see how the image should be showing.... however, for the noise redution changes to appear when the image is in "fit in view" mode i have to push a slider from de "Basic" menu (in this case i was pushing the exposure).
You can pretty much see the diference!! this is how i wanted images to show.
in this next screen shot you can see my NR Settings.
Thank you for your patience!!
Have a great weekend!!
tzSantos

Similar Messages

Canon 5D2 ACR chroma/luminance noise reduction

Admitting to being somewhat lazy w/respect to experimentation, can anyone recommend chroma/luminance noise reduction settings in ACR for the 5D2, as a function of ISO?

Well, if we deal with the subject here at this level of details, then I need to add some points:
1. For the advanced digital photographer: if a lower ISO is enough for a correct exposure, but one is aiming at achieving "exposure to the right", then it is useful to turn up the ISO
i without reducing the exposure
in order to "get to the right edge".
2. Mitigating the above: the vast majority of cameras do not have true 1/3 stop ISO steps, i.e. there is no analog gain associated with the 1/3 steps; they are achieved by numeric manipulation of the nearest (lower or higher) full stop ISO result. For example from the Canons, only the 1Dxxx models support real 1/3 step ISOs.
There is no point of using these ISO steps with raw data.
3. Almost all cameras offer high ISOs, which are fake, i.e. numerical derivations of lower ISOs; in some cases they are
b not only
those characterized as "High", "Extention", etc. For example ISO 12800 and 25600 are marked as "high" with the Canon 5DMkII, but in reality already 6400 is fake.
There is no point of using these ISO steps with raw data (yes, I wrote this already).
4. The top
b useful
ISO is usually even lower. For example the graphs in http://www.panopeeper.com/Demo/Canon5DMkII_Noise.GIF show, that the loss from 1600 to 3200 with the 5DMkII is precisely one stop, i.e. there is no point to use ISO 3200 with raw data. Some other cameras can not utilize even lower ISO settings in raw (the usefulness of those settings is when recording JPEG in-camera).
Using those ineffective ISO steps causes cutting off the one stop of the dynamic range with each ISO stop.
This is an ACR forum, thus these issues are off-topic, but so much can be perhaps tolerated.

Default Noise Reduction Settings

HI, i upgraded from Digital Photo Professional 3 to 4, and it looks like the "Default Noise Reduction Settings" have been removed from preferences. Is there any way to achieve a default luminance and chrominance settings of 0 in DPP4?
Thanks!

I don't think so. There is nothing in the manual about, and like you, I can't see a way in preferences.
John Hoffman
Conway, NH
1D Mark IV, Rebel T5i, Pixma PRO-100, MX472

Does LR store the in-camera Noise Reduction settings in it's Metadata?

I am trying to understand the impact of in-camera noise reduction on High ISO images. To do this I have taken a series of pictures with different in camera Noise Reduction settings. I have then imported them into LR. What I want to know is whether I can see the in-camera Noise Reduction settings in the metadata stored in LR?
Thanks

If it's proprietary to the camera maker, you won't see it in LR. Won't most of that in-camera stuff be stored in the MakerNotes? If so, you can see the sort of info via Exiftools - see an example here http://forums.adobe.com/message/6155513#6155513

Need help with the noise reduction settings

Hi,
After som experimenting I need some help with the settings for noise reduction.
I just edited and converted a few pictures from RAW (D200) til 8-bit TIFF. Opend the file up in photoshop and was shocked to see the amount of noise in the pictures. I then exported the RAW-files and did the same conversion in Capture One 3.7.3 - The result is a lot better regarding noise. In capture One I'm using the noise reduction step before "High".
Can you share your experience with the optimal settings for best noise removal ?
Thanks in advance,
fbrose

i use it once in a while, but i play around with the sliders in full screen mode and at 100% and then see what the sliders do. I don't have a definite procedure that I can suggest though.

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.

Poor quality noise reduction for Canon G10

I recently bought a Canon G10, and I am disappointed at the quality of RAW conversions done by ACR/LR at anything approaching a high ISO. The out-of-camera JPEGs show much superior noise reduction to what I can get from RAW files, no matter how I tweak the noise reduction settings.
At ISO 80-100 both look essentially identical.
At ISO200 JPEGs show less and tighter grain than I can manage with RAW (unless I nuke the details with luminance reduction), but both are still very good.
At ISO400 ACR/LR's RAW conversion starts to fall apart. Chroma NR in RAW is still handled well, the grain size in RAW is much larger than the camera's JPEGs. I need to apply a lot of luminance NR to reduce the RAW grain to match the JPEGs, and when I do that I lose a lot of detail. And even then, the larger grain isn't as attractive as the JPEG.
At ISO800 this problem is even worse. Big ugly blobs abound in the RAW conversion. The JPEGs don't look great, but they're very usable, especially if you're willing to dip the shadows a bit to hide the worst of the noise.
ISO1600 is interesting. The JPEGs don't look great; there's a healthy amount of noise, and NR kills a lot of fine details. But the image is usable for 4x6's or sometimes even an 8x10. But the RAW files are awful! Even cranking chroma NR to 100, there's color noise to be seen. And even with very careful use of luminance NR and sharpening I can't results that are anywhere close to JPEG's level of detail and noise.
I understand that P&S cameras like the G10 are very noisy by DSLR standards and so this might not be a focal point of ACR/LR development, but I'm surprised and disappointed that the JPEG engine in the G10 can do a better job handling noise than ACR/LR. I guess my hope is that ACR/LR will at some point offer improved NR so I can create photos using RAW that look as good as JPEGs straight out of the camera. As it is right now I'm in the unfortunate position of shooting JPEG at high ISO to get usable noise performance. My dilemma is whether to even bother shooting RAW+JPEG when this IQ might be the best I ever get from ACR/LR for the G10.
I suppose my favored solution would be to either implement or license NR technology that matches NeatImage/NoiseNinja/NoiseWare. That feature alone would be worthy of justifying a 3.0 version for me. :)

Jeff, I won't debate that the output from the G10 at ISO800+ is poor. It most certainly is! And I know that simply eliminating the scads of noise in a G10 high ISO shot won't restore the detail the noise killed in the first place. But with every other camera I've used with ACR and LR, the color noise slider eliminates all color noise at or before the "100" setting. So I was surprised when that wasn't possible with the G10.
I don't currently own a camera that puts out an image quite as noisy as the G10 at ISO1600, but what about the A900 at ISO6400?
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/AA900/AA900hLL6407XNR.HTM
Or the 50D at ISO12800?
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/E50D/E50DLL12807XNR.HTM
Both of those are horrifically noisy. Worse than the G10 at ISO1600, I'd say. But those cameras certainly aren't crap. They just offer ISO settings higher than some consider acceptable. But then again, some people consider anything higher than ISO200 on a 5D unacceptable, so it's obviously all relative. Point being, I would expect ACR to do the best job it could for any camera it supports, not just the best job it can do for only some of the cameras it supports.
In any case, I want ACR to be able to remove the color noise from my G10's images, just like it can with my other cameras. I know the images are sub-standard when measured against a DSLR, but at least to my eyes, even very noisy images can look decent in small prints so long as there aren't big color blobs all over the place.
As for the luminance noise, I'm happier to live with that. I'd be happy to eventually pay for a LR upgrade that gives me NR similar to what the high-end third-party apps do, because that feature would make each of my cameras geniunely more useful--and retroactively! But a simpler request it seems is to recalibrate what "100" means for the G10. At least then I could dispense with the JPEGs and still make an 8x10.

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

Is Lightroom really better for noise reduction than Adobe Camera Raw?

That's what I keep hearing from Lightroom users (who don't use Photoshop or barely touch it).
Which is better? or are they exactly the same? I'm not referring to a specific version, but I am personally using the latest Cloud versions of everything. I haven't tested it visually, I'm just now getting familiar with Lightroom.

Given the same version number, Lightroom and Camera Raw have the exact same sharpening and noise reduction. The only differences in ACR and LR are usability or UI aspects, the controls and rendering are the same.

Noise reduction for 32bit images acting totally different

The noise reduction behaves totally different when used for 32bit images in ACR.
It appears like it is applying some kind of strange blur or glow effect instead of working like expected from 8/16bit material.
Can anybody confirm this and is this intended behaviour?

Joe_Mulleta wrote:
The noise reduction behaves totally different when used for 32bit images in ACR.
How did you get your raws into HDR?
Did you use raw files in ACR? Did you set the sharpening and noise reduction to optimal parameters in ACR on the raw files BEFORE going into HDR Pro?
You should...I've found that it's important to optimize the raw files in ACR/LR before actually processing the raw files into HDR Pro...you need to realize that once the raw files are demosaiced, the best place to apply sharpening and noise reduction has been bypassed?
Yes, a 32-bit TIFF opened in ACR 7.1 will not have the same sharpening and noise reduction opportunities once the original raw files have been processed. I've found it's useful to apply all ACR image optimizations (including tone, color and sharpening/noise reduction) to the raw files BEFORE doing a conversion to HDR Pro...
And yes, the noise reduction settings in 32-bit in ACR 7.1 are _VERY_ tweaky (meaning you need to be very careful on the settings).

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

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.

Noise reduction not working on Lightroom 5.4 MAC

I have experienced that the noise reduction that I apply to my pictures is only visible in the develop area of the software. As I switch to library it disappear and the same happen if I export the picture in any kind of format.
I post a screenshot where you can see a sample picture with the desired noise reduction applied (on the right) and the same picture as it shows in the library area (on the left). Switching between this two areas (library and develop) results like a noise reduction toggle.
Dropbox - example.tiff
Is there a way to solve this bug?
Thank you.

Usually Develop-Fit view is crispier than Library or Export, when there has been enough noise-reduction added to an image to make it seem smooth, and people complain that sharpening is not being applied; however, in this situation through extreme noise-reduction settings, an artificial coarse texture has replaced the fine-grained noise which seems to manifest differently in Develop Fit view, and the complaint is that Library has no NR applied.
In more detail, there are two issues, here, both of the user's doing, not LR's:
1) A user-expectation that the Develop non-1:1 zoom is accurate regarding Detail settings. It is not. For years there has been an exclamation-point warning on the Detail settings section that says to view things only at 1:1. If a user doesn't see or ignores this warning then their expectation is wrong, as in this situation.
2) The Luminance Noise-Reduction Detail slider has been increased from the default of 50 to the maximum of 100. This has the effect of converting the fine-grain noise into a course angular texture, which is easily visible at reduced sizes except in the inaccurate Develop Fit view.
In the following side-by-side at 1:1 zoom, the lefthand panel is as per the user settings with the Lum-NR-Detail slider set to 100, while the righthand side has the Lum-NR-Detail slider set at the default of 50, with all other user settings remaining the same:
I would summarize what is occurring not as a bug but a different response of the inaccurate Develop-Fit rendering to a different coarseness of noise that is caused by an extreme setting of the Lum-NR-Detail slider. Since there is no resizing and no sharpening in the Export settings, I don't think the 1/3 bug has anything to do with anything.
It would be nice for the original poster (OP) to describe exactly what is wrong, after knowing that the Develop view is in accurate if not viewed at 1:1.

Adjustment brush with exposure setting cancels noise reduction

Hello,
I just noticed the following problem:
1) Camera Raw 6.5; Bridge CS5 (4.0.5.11); Mac OS X 10.6.8; Mac Pro 3,1; Dual Quad-Core Xeon; 8GB RAM.
2) Start with a noisy raw file (mine is from a Canon 5D II).
3) Apply Noise Reduction (Luminance:30; Lum Detail:75; Lum Contrast:0; Color:25; Color Detail:50).
4) Go to Adjustment Brush and set a non-zero Exposure value.
5) Apply brush to image and notice the Noise Reduction effects disappear (noise returns).
6) Click Clear All button to clear Adjustment Brush and Noise Reduction works again.
This seems to only happen with Adjustment Brushes with a non-zero Exposure value (applying brightness or other settings don't seem to produce the problem).
Anyone else seeing this?
Thanks!

Richard (and others),
Yes, very good idea to check that. The problem does indeed get applied to the full sized, opened image as well as to the display previews. After working with this more, I now notice that I was wrong to say that the entire noise reduction is cancelled - rather it "changes", sometimes subtly, sometimes more dramatically depending on what the noise reduction settings are set to. Further, how dramatic the "changes" appear depend greatly on the preview zoom (the changes are more subtle at 100%, but it can look like the noise reduction is completely turned off at 50% and 66%).
Now I realize that the noise reduction does not ordinarily display at all preview sizes (especially smaller ones), but this is different. At preview sizes where it does normally get applied, applying an adjustment brush with any non-zero exposure value (even just +0.05) can have the appearance that the NR is completely turned off for the whole image. Simply nudging the exposure value back to zero brings all the noise reduction back.
Also, to be clearer and avoid confusion for others, the change in noise I'm seeing is not localized to just the brushed spot. Obviously if one increases exposure, you'd expect to potentially see more noise. Instead, what I'm seeing happens to the entire image, even if I simply paint a single small brush dot, say in a far corner. Having the image change globally in response to painting a small spot with the adjustment brush cannot be a correct result. Further, this does not happen with any of the other adjustment brush settings like brightness, contrast or saturation. There must be something unique about the exposure setting that perhaps introduces a new step into the processing pipeline, and this step is affecting the entire image.
In any case, the problem only seems to be an issue in somewhat extreme cases and is less noticeable at 100% (and the finally opened image). It's more just annoying when previews are generated for viewing in Bridge, for example.
I suppose one alternative might be to rob a bank and go buy one of those new 1D X's. Then maybe I wouldn't have to worry about noise anymore.
Thanks for the responses!

Noise reduction won't display properly in LR 3.4.1 Develop Module

I encountered this issue first time last night - noise reduction will not show in "Fit" view of the Develop module for pictures that have a graduated filter applied as well. Having said this,
- The pictures display correctly in Library Loupe view (Fit and 100%)
- The pictures display correctly in Develop module when zooming in to 100%
- The pictures display correctly in Develop module when clicking in history on Luminance smoothing (first picture). Selecting the next step in the history, Add Graduated Filter, displays the picture without noise reduction (second picture - I tried on a virtual copy the other way round - first have a graduated filter and then apply noise reduction, but doesn't work either. Noise reduction just won't display in Develop module / Fit View once a graduated filter is applied as well.
Has anyone else seen this behaviour or, even better, found a solution? I already tried purging the raw cache, no success. Working on Windows 7 / 64bit.
Thanks,
Andreas

Jeff, I had difficulty understanding this same issue as presented at the link I posted above. With my low-noise Canon DSLR RAW images I simply couldn't see the onscreen rendering issues they were talking about. It even appeared this might be unique to Mac platforms and Windows 32 bit OS, since my Windows 7 64bit system didn't appear to have this issue.
Following suggestions to shoot a picture at -4 F stops and then increase exposure by +4 F stops in LR helped me get a better understanding:
http://forums.adobe.com/message/3857767#3857767
Granted this is an extreme shooting situation, but it helps demonstrate what happens when using exposure, fill and HSL sliders to increase exposure significantly (+2 to +4 EV) in specific areas of the image. Now you have noise that will be visible in smaller exported scaled images, perhaps even those sized for posting to the web.
The issue is at lower ISO settings (camera specific), view sizes less than 1:1 have no noise reduction applied (Mac & Windows) or sharpening applied (Mac & Windows 32). There appear to be platform differences in the way sharpening is applied, because on my Windows 7 64bit system sharpening is applied at all ISO and all view sizes including "fit" view, but noise reduction is only applied at higher ISO settings – the same as all others have described. I wanted to point this out since it is one of the reason I had difficulty duplicating what the OP was seeing.
We know sharpness and noise reduction settings interact with each other, so it is important to have both applied in the onscreen image to determine their affect. Using images with additive Exposure, Fill and HSL slider settings approaching +2 to +4 EV, there is simply no way to see accurate rendering without both noise reduction and sharpness applied at all view sizes, including “fit” view. This can occur with low ISO images, not just at some predetermined camera specific high ISO where noise becomes predominant.

ACR 6.2 noise reduction settings shown only after zoom in or pushing sliders

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for