Missing noise reduction feature in iMac 2012, Do you all know if that feature was available in previous iMacs??

I have been having some issues in my iMac 2012, with the noise reduction feature. I have a MBP retina display that in system preferences has the noise reduction feature. However, in the new iMac 2012, I don't see that feature. Plus, I have been having issues with facetime, people that I call are telling me that they hear feedback whenever I talk to them. Does any of you know if the new iMac is supposed to have the noise reduction feature?

I was trying to find the "use ambient noise reduction" option in my new iMac, but in the new iMac I don't have that option. I was wondering if in previous iMacs versions had the "use ambient noise reduction" option available because I have an issue with facetime, people that I am calling are telling me that they hear feedback or static sound and they can't hear me well. I believe that with the "noise reduction" option, that problem will be solved. However, in my iMac, I don't have that option only in my MacBook pro. The reason that I am asking if in previous iMacs versions had that option is because I believe that there might be a bug that Apple needs to fix in order to have that option available in iMac.

Similar Messages

Capture NX level noise reduction in Aperture - how close can you get?

Searching the forum for NX, it seems most posters agree that Capture NX noise reduction beats Aperture.
But let's assume that I really want to use Aperture instead for my D300 NEF files - because of Aperture's better UI, catalogue abilities and all that.
Does anyone have any easy guide with steps to take in Aperture to best do noise reduction? Can one get even remotely close to what NX can achieve?
Or should one resign and use both applications in parallel?

The noise reduction facility in Aperture is basic at best. If you can be patient, we're assured that very soon there's to be a Noise Ninja plug-in for Aperture. This will do a much better job I would expect.

Downloaded Adobe design suit web premium in 2012 and lost all information on that purchase because Apple wiped my mac clean...What do I do?

So I brought my Mac book pro retina to Apple to fix a glitch. The Technician called me and told me to come back it up before he does anything else. So I go pick it up and bring it home to find out the whole computer had be factory reset. I was pissed cuz why should I have bothered to pick it up if he already wiped the memory he told me to come back up. So i bring it back and complain to them but they obviously can't bring back that information once it's been factory reset. I also can't sue them for their f-up cuz you sign a stupid piece of paper that says if they f-up and lose any memory that its your fault for not backing it up. Anyways this poses a huge problem for me because I have now lost all my Adobe programs. I download the suit online instead of getting a disk because this mac has no cd port and at the time I didn't have an external one. Not sure what email I used to buy the program with either....I also don't think posting this in a forum will help either but adobe only gave me that option as a form of help....it doesn't help if i need to directly talk to someone in their company. I really don't wanna have to buy the program over again cuz who has the money to buy a several hundred dollar program twice? I know I don't.
I'm guessing I have to call their customer service, but does anyone else have any ideas?

if you have access to your serial number, download the installation files and install.
if you registered your software with adobe, or you purchased and downloaded from adobe, check your account for the serial number: https://www.adobe.com/account.html
otherwise, contact adobe support and see if they can help you with your serial number, https://helpx.adobe.com/contact.html
Downloads available:
Suites and Programs: CC 2014 | CC | CS6 | CS5.5 | CS5 | CS4 | CS3
Acrobat: XI, X | 9,8 | 9 standard
Premiere Elements: 12 | 11, 10 | 9, 8, 7
Photoshop Elements: 12 | 11, 10 | 9,8,7
Lightroom: 5.6| 5 | 4 | 3
Captivate: 8 | 7 | 6 | 5
Contribute: CS5 | CS4, CS3
Download and installation help for Adobe links
Download and installation help for Prodesigntools links are listed on most linked pages. They are critical; especially steps 1, 2 and 3. If you click a link that does not have those steps listed, open a second window using the Lightroom 3 link to see those 'Important Instructions'.

How do PS CS3 Noise Reduction Filters compare with dedicated third-party plug-ins?

Am I missing something by not installing a dedicated Noise Reduction application into my PS CS3? Can Neat Image, Noise Ninja, Noiseware Pro, etc. do something that the PS CS3 Noise Filters can't do? Do these third-party aplications do it better?
Since I like flashless photography, and I generally carry with me small-sensor compacts when I travel, I'm frequently confronted with the problem of digital noise. I've always wondered how the third-party noise reduction applications perform in comparison with the Photoshop Noise Filters. I hope someone in this Forum has been able to acquire direct experience on this topic and will be kind enough to share this experience with us.
Kindest Regards,
Conrad

Conrad,
ACR 4.3 has better NR (noise reduction) than previous versions and can handle NR in most normal situations. However, available light photography with a small pixel sensor may require more NR and the specialized plugins such as Noise Ninja, NeatImage, and NoiseWare Pro can do a better job. I have all three and they do an excellent job, but I currently use NoiseWare most of the time.
Here is a demonstration of NoiseWare vs ACR NR, using 100% crops of an image taken with the Nikon D200, 1/320 sec at f/2.8. The image is reasonably sharp at normal viewing conditions, but has quite a lot of luminance noise. It was rendered with ACR and the settings were exposure +0.85, brightness +60. One thing you learn early in this type of shooting is to expose to the right to reduce noise, but this may conflict with stopping action and reducing camera shake. More exposure would have helped this image, and one should try to avoid exposures requiring this amount of positive exposure adjustment.
The results are shown below, followed by some discussion. Other comments are welcome. Color noise is not prominent in this image and I left color NR at its default.
ACR, No sharpening, no NR
ACR, Luminance NR 53, no sharpening
ACR, No NR, No sharpening, NoiseWare default, no sharpening
Noise reduction and sharpening are antagonistic processes. It is important that NR is applied before sharpening--you don't want to sharpen noise. Following NR there is an inevitable loss of detail, and some sharpening is necessary to restore the detail, but this also brings back the noise. One can use masks and blend if sliders in Photoshop in both NR and sharpening to mitigate some of these effects, and Bruce Fraser discusses the details in his excellent book on sharpening.
If you use an add on such as NoiseWare, you should turn off luminance sharpening in ACR. In doing so, you lose all those nifty sharpening features that have recently been added to ACR. I leave color NR at the default. It has a minimal effect on detail.
In adjusting the NR in ACR at 100% viewing, I estimated that a luminance setting of +53 was optimal. Beyond that, blotchy artifacts appear in the image.
For NoiseWarePro, I used the default settings with no sharpening. The NR effect is dramatic, but detail is lost and some sharpening is needed. This could be applied in NoiseWare or in Photoshop, perhaps with a plugin such as PhotoKit Sharpener. Personally, I have found that PK does not work well with this type of image because it bring back noise and produces artifacts.
In all of these examples, sharpening is needed following the NR. One could try to use surface masks to keep sharpening in Photoshop with the unsharp mask away from the edges. However, I find it is difficult to get a good surface mask, and I don't take the trouble.
For now, I use the sharpening built into NoiseWare. I don't know how it works internally, but it does have a slider for detail protection, and you can play with this to get the best result. It would be best to have the robust NR of the add ons built into ACR much like NoiseNinja is built into Bibble Pro. However, this is an ACR forum and I would expect that ACR is the preferred raw converter of those who frequent this forum.
After expending this much effort on the post, I hope to get some helpful feedback.

PV2010 Color Noise Reduction Robs Dark Tones

No pun intended.
I thought at first it was the raw-conversion/de-mosaicing, but its turned out to be the color noise reduction.
Here is a the latest example of a picture that looks better in PV2003 than PV2010 no matter what I do, because of loss of clarity / contrast / dark-tones resulting from the new Color Noise Reduction algorithm. Note: This loss can not be restored using clarity or contrast sliders.
This probably ought to be a feature request: A slider that controls the coarser aspects of color noise reduction (color waves or clarity/contrast) versus the most localized aspects (color specs). In this instance, just getting rid of the specs without trying to reduce the waves might leave the dark tones(?) - Something like that. In any case, there is room to improve color noise reduction so that it leaves the dark tones / contrast / clarity in certain cases like this.
(Its a 100% crop of a section of a fish under water)
PV2003:
PV2010:
The difference is striking when viewing the whole photo from afar...
PS - I just discovered that minimizing noise reduction will maintain the dark tones better - I've therefore added down-throttling of color noise reduction to my PV2003 -> PV2010 practice.
Rob

dorin_nicolaescu wrote:
Luminosity Contrast slider also helps maintain some darker tones.
Indeed it do.
And, last but maybe (or maybe not) least, one can cheat a bit at the end and add some grain, to give the illusion of greater detail / texture. So, if you really want to preserve full detail when converting high ISO shots from PV2003 to PV2010, you need to:
1. Crank up the luminance noise reduction detail slider pretty darn high (if not all the way up).
2. Crank up the luminance noise reduction contrast slider pretty darn high (if not all the way up).
3. Minimize color noise reduction amount.
4. Crank up the color noise reduction detail slider fairly darn high (not all the way up! - color artefacts - bleh).
5. Maybe add a touch of grain (pretty darn low).
(I've left out the luminance NR amount slider and sharpening because they are the more obvious ones).
I'm guessing I'm not the first person to fall into the trap of trying to recover detail lost by noise reduction by decreasing luminance noise reduction amount and increasing sharpening detail (and maybe amount too), and winding up right back where you started - too much noise. The detail/contrast sliders of the noise reduction controls really work a lot better for that, and minimizing color noise reduction is also a hot tip for you detail junkies.
I hope I'm not the last person on this forum to realize what is now seeming sort of obvious to me, whilst everyone has a good laugh...
(I had previous just left color noise reduction and detail, plus luminance NR contrast at their defaults (I discovered the importance of the lum.NR detail slider long ago...) - but not anymore. It has helped me to articulate all this - hope it helps somebody else too..........
Rob

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 techniques

I took some action photos on a dark overcast day so I had to use high iso.
There is quite a bit of noise in my photos.
what is the best way to moderate the noise???? not sure how to use the noise reduction tools in LR
Is there a good plug in that will simplify noise reduction?
thanks for the discussion
diana

Diana-
In Develop Mode, zoom out to 1:1, and then go to the section for noise reduction. This is a subject about which books could be written ( and have!), but do use the sliders to bring it down till it starts to look off.... that'll probably print fine.

Inconsistency in the Preview with Color Noise Reduction

Adobe guys: You have a bad variable access, bad pointer, or something in Camera Raw with regard to Color Noise Reduction...
If I have color noise reduction turned off (set to 0), I see this:
And in fact it converts to just what shows in the preview:
If I bump the Color noise reduction slider up to 1 with the Color Detail slider at 100, I get this wonderful DeBayer smoothing in the preview:
But alas, this is what comes out in the conversion:
The smoothing shown DOES in fact match if one sets the Color Detal slider to 50 at the middle of the scale:
This is just an annoyance, but it does take some trial and error to see what you really want the Color Detail slider set to.
By the way, I notice that the jaggies come and go seemingly randomly when the Color Detail slider is at 100 and I move the Color slider. I suspect you're reading the wrong or random location for Color Detail, or maybe have an overflow/underflow condition somehow.
Object oriented programming - fraught with gotchas.
-Noel

What you are seeing is a limitation of the diagonal/curve behavior of the current demosaic method on colored boundaries, combined with the (preview-quality) color noise reduction with specific settings. It is the demosaic strategy that is at fault here (and is why you see these results in the final exported result).

Noise reduction on track1 using noise print from track2

I have an audio track from a video project that was recorded on track1 that has a lot of interference from the wirelss mic that was so strong that it crossed over to the idle track2. Track1 has the voice and interference intermixed. Track2 just has the interference. How can I take a noise print from track2 and use it to reduce the corresponding noise on track1? Any ideas?

Bristol87 wrote:
In addition, to make the process more challenging, I am unable to get the audio in the edit frame to play at the same gain as in the multi-track frame. In edit mode I seem to be at a 0db gain whereas the multi-track is playing at over 12 to 20db.
I am also unclear how to get the changes back to Final Cut. When I go to File to save it I do not see a Save option that would transfer the edited audio back to the Final Cut Project.
For the additional items you mention:
1. In your multi-track project, check your volume envelopes on the track, and check the level on your submix and master. To do this, click the the disclosure triangle just left of the track name. You'll see in purple the envelopes section, which is like keyframes in FCP.
2. You have to export a mix to send it back to FCP. Go to File -> Export, save the master mix with a file name, and most likely as an aiff file, then in the dropdown "After Export" choose "Send to Final Cut Pro Sequence."
For your noise reduction questions - applying noise reduction is for broadband, sustained noise, like an air conditioner or a hum. Are you trying to apply the same noise reduction to several files because they have the same type of background noise? I generally just save my settings, but set a new noise print for each file. I'll give you a quick step by step:
Select a bit in the file where there's JUST noise. Then go to Process -> Noise Reduction -> Set Noise Print. Then select the entire file, and go to Process -> Noise Reduction -> Reduce Noise. When the noise reduction window comes up, you just need to listen and play with the settings until you're satisfied with how it sounds. As a starting point, take a look at the level of the noise alone, and use that as the threshold. Usually 100% noise reduction doesn't sound good, but you just have to use some trial and error. Too much sounds worse than too little, in my opinion. When satisfied, apply it and save the preset.
Hope this helps!
Matthew

Adaptive noise reduction filter only applying to parts of a clip

MAC 10.9.4
3.5 Ghz 6-core
16GB ram
AUDITION CC
PREMIERE CC 2014
This is happening over and over to me, along multiple projects and multiple clips.
I apply Adaptive Noise Reduction, and tweak the properties. It sounds great but then when I 'apply', the filter is only applied to about 50% of the clip.....meaning it sounds great when tweaking the filter, but after when it is actually applied, only parts of it will apply.
IE, If I have a 15 second and apply noise reduction.......It sill sounds while tweaking parameters. Then after I hit apply, seconds 1 - 4 will sounds great (filter applied) seconds 5-9 will sound awful like no filter has been applied, and seconds 9-11 will sounds great again, and 12-15 will sounds awful again.
There is def something wrong here., This never used to happen in CS6, ever. Only when switching to CC.

Hi,
I have little use for/of the adaptive version of the noise reduction filters only because I want it ALL cleaner, so here is what I suggest: I left a very-detailed posting about "batch processing" in which I outlined using the the process version in the Waveform Editor. Give that post a read Re: How Do You Apply Process Effects To Multiple Clips In A Multi-Track?
Let me know if you need more help.
-CS

I've upgraded to yosemite, and it tells me that safari doesn't support the community toolbar?? How do I get that feature back?

I've upgraded to yosemite, and safari tells me it doesn't support "community toolbar". How can I get this feature back?

The "community toolbar" is part of the adware Conduit. You don't want that feature back!
See: http://www.thesafemac.com/arg-conduit/

A DVD (mpg file only) comes up on my MacBook and Dell PC but not my iMac. Aren't all Macs alike?

A DVD (mpg file only) comes up on my MacBook and Dell PC but not my iMac. Aren't all Macs alike? I was told by a couple of experts to copy the file on my MacBook and then send it to my iMac. But shouldn't my iMac show it now if my little Mac does?

Zap the PRAM and Reset the SMC, then pop in the DVD again.

Will iMessage be Available on the iMac?

i am interested to know if iMessage will be available on the iMac.

Well now you can chat Iphone/touch's imessage with Mac's "message"~~
http://www.apple.com/ca/macosx/mountain-lion/messages-beta/
still a BETA though...

Feature request: local noise reduction...

I love the local corrections in LR2, and I'm using especially the local sharpening feature a lot. But I'm really missing a local noise correction feature (at least for luminance noise). It's such a shame to be able to do about any correction that I need inside Lightroom, but still having to make a round trip to an external noise editor to remove local noise. Especially since doing noise reduction as the last step doesn't seem to be very efficient at all.
Local noise reduction would make this already great program so much better (at least, to me).
Richard

>My understanding is that sharpening does not add noise, but emphasizes the noise that's already there, making it appear from being insignificant to noticeable.
We're being overly semantic here of course, but it just depends on how you define it. If you define noise as for example the root-mean square deviation from the "real" image (a very common definition but it ignores the noise's spectral distribution), than absolutely sharpening a noisy image adds more noise. Sharpening operates as a high frequency amplifier, amplifying edges that are just noise instead of real edges, so it basically amplifies the noise that is there, leading to an increase in apparent noisiness. The same is true for clarity. Clarity is basically a sharpening operation at a very high radius. If your source image is noisy (especially if it has a lot of low-frequency noise - i.e. "grain"), it will also amplify it. Conversely, negative sharpening results in reducing high frequency noise. as it is just a small radius blur effectively.
>Moreover, sharpening in LR develop is considered capture sharpening, where the small loss in sharpness form the RAW format is regained.
The sharpening brush is different as it is meant to be a creative sharpener. It definitely amplifies noise if you push it. And even so, using Develop's capture sharpening, it is indeed possible to amplify (=add) the noise using the capture sharpening if you use the controls wrong. The capture sharpening has the superb mask generator that can be used to protect areas that are not edges, limiting its tendency to amplify noisiness. However, it will amplify noise near edges, sometimes making them appear as if you have a waterpainting. This is also an example of amplifying noise. Remember, even if these tools are meant to do a certain thing, it doesn't mean they cannot be made to do something else.
>To just regain lost RAW sharpness at the expense of noise would seem almost like defeating its own purpose.
Sharpness and noise go hand in hand. There are smarter and less smart algorithms but fundamentally, sharpening always amplifies noise, and noise reduction always reduces sharpness. As I said some algorithms are better and limit the effect, but the bottom line is that there really is no way around this.
>Or, is it more correct to say that applying -ve clarity/sharpening will make the noise "Appear" less obvious, but not actually get rid of it.
Appear less obvious is exactly the same as reducing it. Your eye is very good in judging noisyness as it is very good at recognizing patterns and so you can easily see what is noise and what isn't. If an image appears less noisy, it is less noisy. Computers are not that smart yet and if you call a tool clarity, it does not magically know how to not amplify noise or how to not reduce noise when using it negative. Same with sharpening.
Conclusion: negative sharpness & negative clarity == noise reduction. They are just not as good as some dedicated noise reduction algorithms as they are not primarily coded to do noise reduction. They do have that effect however.

Noise reduction feature

Hi,
I am working with Soundtrack Pro 1.1 and was wondering about the noise reduction feature. Is it useful? I shot a feature film that contains a lot of unwanted background noise like moving cars, chain saws and so forth. Will this built-in feature be able to bring some of the audio up to spec?
Chris

It is good for removing consistent, perpetual background noise. This means room noise from an air conditioner, and other kinds of consistent ambience. It doesn't help much with things that happen in the background at certain times, but not throughout, such as cars and bird chirps.
For things like cars and incidental background noises that are not perpetual, carefull EQ, Compression and Adaptive Limiting and Noise Gating are your best option. And, of course using your sound levels on the offending tracks helps.
The best way to deal with them is with careful mic positioning in the first place. Shotgun mics help with this as well as the use of lav mics. The closer your mic is to the person, the louder they will be in relation to the other noise in the room (which includes the person's echo off the walls).

Missing noise reduction feature in iMac 2012, Do you all know if that feature was available in previous iMacs??

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for