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).

Similar Messages

NOISE reduction for Vocal Track?

Hi,
I'm wondering whether will you use the Noise Reduction for Vocal Tracks?
Why i question it?because, most of the Home Recording Studio doesn't have a Proper Room Treatment, So might make the Room Noise recorded into the Vocal track...For that,will you use the Noise Reduction to solve the Noises?
appreciate to the helpful thread you've provide

but if the noise is... a sound that has been recorded in the same track with the
voice... you cannot do anything
Sure you can.
if the room is not separate are there is a ambient noise recorderd such as Phones
rings or Child crying
RX can deal with this too.
you can also try to silence every free space between the vocal parts...
because the sockets of breath voice will be certainly compromised
Not a problem with noise print removal. We're only removing/reducing the noise print, not any wanted signal.

Very neat algorithm for noise reduction for high ISO

I thought of this algorithm for the suppression of parasitic points occurring at high ISO
ISO 6400
before
http://i053.radikal.ru/1009/26/ba1c56f4837b.jpg
after
http://s56.radikal.ru/i153/1009/73/ffcdcd185821.jpg
Operation for photoshop, but for the Russian version and the English version must rename the layers ...
http://rapidshare.com/files/417172652/Noise15.atn
P.S.
Maybe it will help you to further improve noise reduction algorithms

Hi travojed !
Thank you for your message
I came to the conclusion that the high level "Median" (or "Dust&Scratches") destroys parts in this algorithm.
And it seemed to me that the best result (when the contours remain sharp) will be if, instead of a "median" using the Topaz Denoize (Raw-moderate), because Topaz protects the sharp contours in this algorithm.
Example (at full resolution - copy the address into a separate window)
(RAW 6400)
before
http://s57.radikal.ru/i157/1009/73/ec1fbac57a83.jpg
after
http://s43.radikal.ru/i101/1009/fd/c30219adfc74.jpg
P.S.
I do not recommend using a constant value "Threshold" because at different values of the ISO get different noises
travojed If you give me your example of a noisy image, I can see how best to remove the noise

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.

Noise reduction in binary images

I am new to labVIEW.
I want to do niose reduction in binary images. Is this possible using LabVIEW IMAQ tools?
Thanks in Advance
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Best to attack some before going to binary and once in binary there is a binary filter that can filter on many different conditions such as area. Check out the visions concepts manual from NI, it is a great resource for imaq functionality. you might also post an image here or in the vision forums.
Paul Falkenstein
Coleman Technologies Inc.
CLA, CPI, AIA-Vision
Labview 4.0- 2013, RT, Vision, FPGA

Noise Reduction for Premiere CC 2014

Before the new release, I have used Neat Video for noise reduction. Unfortunately, this plug-in is not working well with CC 2014. The only native plug-in I saw was to create noise, not reduce it. Does CC 2014 have a noise reduction tool?

The Mercury Engine can use OpenCL in Radeon cards. That being said, the R9 M290X is not in the list of currently supported cards, and therefore the Mercury Engine should default to Software Only.
Adobe won't add the R9 M290X to the list of supported cards until they can fully test it. So hopefully they will add it in a future update (*fingers crossed*).
Until then, you may be better off with a maxed out 27" iMac which has the GeForce GTX 775M, which is supported. It will no doubt perform better, and yes it will be like a hot knife through butter.

Noise reduction for VHS source

I am trying to edit video clips captured from VHS tapes made years ago. I wonder what is the best practice, or a quick and easy way to de-noise the video, particularly the wave-like video stripes at the bottom of the screen.
Thanks!

Paddy,
I am not a big fan of Scaling Up, but with the VHS material, that I have worked with, the adjustment was about what you needed, and worked fine. With Motion>Position, one can effectively "crop" the noise out, at about 1/2 of the Scale, as one is Scaling the total vertical (and horizontal), so with a nudge down, to the top of the VHS Frame, the noise is "cut off."
Good luck, and glad that it worked.
Hunt
PS - with overscan on a TV (even newer HD units still have a bit), more of that noise will likely be cut off, except for broadcast monitors.

Lightroom 5.5 support for 32bit images from merging HDR in Photoshop CC 2014?

Why is it I can create a 32bit HDR image and make adjustments in ACR, but when I save it, Lightroom can't read it? Aren't they basically running the same engine? Is there a work around?

Which file format do you saving your 32bit HDR image?
From LR 4.1, Lightroom can read 32-bit floating-point images in TIFF and DNG file formats.

Help please: Action for arbitrary image rotation: 300 different files, each at a different angle

Hi everyone,
I have some 300 images, all handheld shots done in an on-location studio set. They all need varying amounts of image rotation since they're handheld. There's a beaded curtain in the background, so manually I use the ruler tool, draw a line along a strand of beads, and then image/rotate/arbitrary.
I need to create an action that will (1) do the arbitrary rotation and then (2) save and close the file.
However, when I record this, the value of the rotation of the sample file I'm working is what gets recorded (not surprising). In other words, if image A needs 0.28 degrees of rotation, that's not what I want for image B which might need -0.15 degrees instead. The action recorded 0.28.
Is there a way to create an action that will simply rotate according to the ruler once I've drawn it?
Thanks!
Jerry

True - and I am a keyboard shortcut dude. But got it working (I was impressed that using the mouse to unclick the last step in the history worked...), and things are doing what I needed.
And I'm hoping that my suggestion of the last-step undo will make CS5 on par with CS6 in this one small aspect, and perhaps help someone else...
Many thanks to you!!!
BTW - all in the FWIW - you can see what our work as photographers looks like here:
http://www.jerryandloisphotography.com.
If you are at all into music/rock 'n roll, you'll probably have fun on our music/stage gallery. Groups like YES, Heart, Thomas Dolby, etc. use a bit of our work - just a bit of fun...
Again - thanks and best wishes,
Jerry

Local noise reduction too weak

I often need to add a touch of additional noise reduction to some image areas such as the sky and use to apply the adjustment brush (can't say how much Lightroom lacks a layers feature). In some cases, even increasing the noise lever to 100% will still not give me enough noise reduction. I currently don't know any other way to get what I want than to escape to Photoshop with its masks, layers and filters. I'd prefer to stay in Lightroom for noise reduction, is there something I could try or would the developers need to make the effect of the slider stronger?
Andreas

Andreas: the solution is simple, even if it isn't intuitive. Just click on the "new" button next to the adjustment brush to start a new adjustment in a new location. Now start painting in another location in the sky. (Don't get to close to the original pin you started with your you'll reselect it and continue that adjustment.) Now you can paint 100% noise reduction over the sky a second time for a total of 200%. If that's still not enough, lather, rinse and repeat.
I first learned about this technique from Matt Kloskowski's Lightroom Killer Tips blog. Here's a video he created that shows this technique in action: http://lightroomkillertips.com/2010/video-stacking-multiple-adjustment-brush-settings/
Brad

Noise Reduction Software

Does anyone have any strong preferences for a 3rd-party noise reduction app? I have several images taken at ISO 1600 with way too much noise. I know that I can download trial versions of several apps & try them. But I thought I would inquire from those of you that have experience in this area. Thank you.

I have been a part time pro photographer for about 25 years with a lot of amateur clicking before that. I used Photoshop from version 3 to CS3. In the past few years I have moved exclusively to video. My needs for still photo editing have dropped a lot. I do pull out stills from videos on occasion, but I'm not doing anything very fancy to them.
I do still do noise reduction though. I do that in both my video editing app (Vegas Pro 9) and CS3. Well, I just upgraded to Windows 7 64 bit and Photoshop CS3 refuses to install. So, I just bought and installed PSE8. It works just fine in Win7-64.
I installed the exact same plugin from PictureCode to run Noise Ninja in PSE8. It works just the same as it did in CS3. It works very well too. Most of the reviews I've read over the years usually put Noise Ninja and Neat Image at the top. They both work well and better than the rest. Either should work well for you.
I never used Neat Image (other than a trial test) and liked Noise Ninja a tad better. (I found it easier to use.) However, I do use Neat Video with Vegas Pro. That's the same company's noise reduction for video editing. I'm very happy with it too.
Thanks,
Clyde
PS - The #1 tip in using any of these is to don't over do it. Things can start to look artificial very fast when these are cranked up too high. With really bad noise (like your 1600 iso pictures) you tend to want to get rid of all the noise. Doing so can often ruin what the picture is all about.

Disabling Sharpening and Noise Reduction

Hello. I have Lightroom 1.2. I have over a 1,000 images to process. How can I disable sharpening and noise reduction for all of them without having to click that little detail box for each of the images. I use Noiseware for noise reduction and Focalblade for sharpening. If there is something in a folder within Lightroom I can delete to remove sharpening forever, please let me know. Of course, I want to perform the other corrections in Lightroom as necessary. Thank you.
Francis

Jao, Thank you. I have asked this question elsewhere before. I have recieved replies, maybe I did not follow the directions properly, but they never worked. The sharpening would be disableduntil I went to make another correction. Then back to sharpening Lightroom would go. Your way, sharpening is disabled for all the images and stays that way. Thanks again.
Francis

Video noise reduction software?

Sorry... but I've asked this question in the Tiger OS forum about video noise reduction for iMovie HD 6 and/or QT files but haven't got far with it.
If anyone on this forum has any suggestions about what I could use to reduce visual noise - basically transferred film grain in digitisation, I'd really appreciate it
(better still a free software download or trial would be even more appreciated)?

I'm not aware of any free good denoiser.
Neat video has a trial, but I think it's either watermarked or limited to SD. But it is really good and the trial will give you an idea of what iyt can do and whether it's worth the outlay for your purposes.
Another option is Adobe After Effects. A bit of a learning curve, but they have a trial.
Good luck.
Russ

Better zoom method for viewing image

Why can't they have the same type system as in Elements or full ps? Control + or - to change size and smaller jumps in size. And keep the same style slider thingy in both develop and library modules.
And of course ability to separate panels on another monitor. Image size is EVERYTHING when you're trying to make adjustments.

Ctrl + and = (which has - on it also) zoom in and out through the 4 zoom levels visible in the Navigator. If you require the final zoom to be larger than the default 2:1, then select it from the dropdown and LR remembers this for the final zoom..
As to the difference between Quick Develop and Develop, Quick Develop does RELATIVE adjustments, which are there for quick settings. It's useful for brightening images which have different exposure settings for example, where doing the same in Develop would force them all to the same ABSOLUTE value. The idea is to use it to help get to the Pick files quickly before Developing these files. There's no sense in developing 1000 files when you ultimately will only bring 10-20 top quality ones out at the end.
As to image size, Try Tab and Shift TAB.

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

Noise reduction for 32bit images acting totally different

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for