Noise reduction radius past 2.0?

I was originally going to ask if it was possible to set the NR radius past 2.0 but I found after a little playing that, while the slider only goes to 2.0, you can click the number and drag it to 4.0.
Unfortunately, I still have an unsatisfactory amount of sensor/low light noise (from a Canon SD600 @ IS400). Are there strategies other than noise reduction to help correct this? (like gaussian blur followed by unsharp mask or something?)
Since I don't have PS for Mac yet, I hoping for an Aperture only solution at this point.
Thanks!
-Miles

I am having the same problem plus I get an "Uncaught Exception" error when I try to use it and then it crashes.

Similar Messages

LR4 Feature request: Add local noise reduction

Hello,
I wish to apply noise reduction localy. On the backgroud apply a lot of and in forgroud (where the object/personn ist) a little.
See this example.
The current local noise reduction ist NOT the same as the one in the detail panel. It is a lof f less efficient.
Thanks

martin-s wrote:
...I had no idea there was a cut-off point...
The only people who know about it are the one's who hang out on this forum .
martin-s wrote:
I use negative sharpness combined with negative clarity and/or contrast for blur effects. It's not unusual that I stack multiple brushes when -100 isn't enough
Thanks for the tip. My problem with blurring in Lr is that the blurred region ends up "too clean" (the rest of the photo has at least a bit of noise in it). I have dealt with it in the past by applying grain to the blurred region using an external editor - but that takes a lot of the fun out of doing the blur in Lightroom.
Rob

Noise reduction vs de-noise?

Can someone explain to me the difference between these noise reductions? The former (immediately below) is located in RAW Fine Tuning and seems to do quite a bit of noise reduction.
The latter (below), is its own adjustment and I fine does virtually nothing.

I fully agree, Kirby.
The latter (below), is its own adjustment and I fine does virtually nothing.
John, You are probably seeing no effect because of the very high value of the "Edge Detail" slider you have set. Try, if using a lower edge detail value will help.
The noise reduction does essentially do a kind of smoothing by analysing the image within the area described by the radius setting. This will blur the image if the radius value is high. The "Edge Detail" prevents smoothing out the edges. If your image has areas with a lot of texture, a high value for "Edge Detail" will prevent any smoothing at all, because textured areas have edges everywhere.
For example: two sections from Canon EOS MK II RAW images:
Left: Edge Detail= 4.0, Radius=4.0; Right: Left: Edge Detail= 0.0, Radius=4.0;
With a high edge detail value (left) only the homogeneous regions (the hull of the ship) has been smoothed by noise removal, but the textured regions not. The image is still sharp, but the sea surface is still noisy.
With a low edge detail value (left) noise reduction has been applied everywhere, also across strong edgest. The image is looking blurred.
The setting for "edge detail" is your choice between scylla and charybdis - set it high enough to get the noise removal you want, but low enough, to prevent the strong edges from being blurred. I usually apply it selectively to the shadows, and only, if the signal to noise ratio is very poor.

Noise reduction and sharpening in LR4

Am I the only one that feels that the LR4 NR is inferior to that of LR3? I swear the only slider that does anything is the luminance and it is not as precise or powerful as LR3. The detail and contrast slders don't seem to do anything?? And as for the sharpening, the radius and detail seem to not do much as compared to LR3. Is it just that it is slower than LR3? I just feel as if I can't dial in things as precise. I am using RC1 with 5D3 files. Should I go for RC2? I heard is was even slower. Thanks

As far as I know, nothing was changed in the sharpening and noise redution between LR 3 and LR4, so I think you are "seeing things" that aren't there...and yes, PV 2012 takes more processing than PV 2010 but the image detail (sharpening and noise reduction) should be the same...

Noise Reduction tool not effective

Hard as I try, I can't see any effect in using the Noise Reduction tool. I've tried it on photos from both compact cameras, as JPGs, and also Raw images from my DSLR. I've tried some images with visible digital noise (low light, long exposure shots), but whatever I do with the sliders, it makes no visible difference to the noise level.
Am I missing a trick, or does this tool just not work very well?
Cheers.

I just tried that, but switching the tool off and on made no difference here. I did find I could type a larger number into the 'Radius' box, which takes it up to 4.00 (it goes to 2.00 on the slider). That did make a visible difference, although it just made the entire image blurry. Adjusting the edge detail only beings out the noise again.
It appears to me that this adjuster is not much more than a simple Gaussian blur with some sharpening. The effects are similar at least. Indeed, I just tried adjusting the same image in Graphic Converter (from a fresh Raw file copy), and it is very similar to using a straight Gaussian blur (radius 4 did the job in GC too), and then apply some sharpening.
The only time I've found Gaussian blur to work well is if you can switch into Lab colour mode, and apply the blur to the different channels.

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.

EARS ALMOST BLOWN OUT by Noise Reduction window

OK, I'm exaggerating a little here, but what just happened with STP could have caused some quite serious hearing damage, had I had the headphone volume turned a little higher.
Was listening to my mono 48khz 32-bit audio file for fine-tune detail... I set the noise print on a quiet section of noise, then opened the Reduce Noise window.
Now, I should say here that each time I played the mono audio it would play through both channels evenly, and show up in the master as bouncing around -20dB.
When I hit play in the Reduce Noise window, the left channel was playing at normal level, and the right channel began playing in my headphones at +6dB, causing my ears to ring for the past 5 minutes!!
Here are the settings I had in the Reduce noise window when this happened:
Noise Reduction: -60dB
Reduction: 100%
Tone control: middle
*anything I've done wrong here?*
I have had lots of issues with the stability of this application in the past, but this, to me, is completely unacceptable! I realize this is a discussion board and not a customer complaint board, however I would like to remind users who may check here frequently to be cautious when using this software that you don't damage your equipment or your precious ears!

Yes, this is very much a known issue. See the following posts:
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=9034765
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=8646103
I was very close to losing my hearing last Christmas when I experienced this "feature" for the first time. I really do hope no one actually gets his/her ears blown because of this bug. It's been a known issue for at least a year, and still no word or fix from Apple. Please remember to leave a note at Apple's feedback area; this forum is not the best place to write bug reports: http://www.apple.com/feedback/soundtrackpro.html
HeiLei

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.

Noise reduction not applying to beginning of clip

There's a bug in Premiere Pro which results in the hiss reduction or certain audio effects not being applied to the first 2-3 seconds of audio when exporting.
After looking this up on the Adobe forums I found other people with the same issue, and they were advised to edit the audio in Audition and reimport into Premiere Pro. I am having the same problem in Audition however.
I capture my noise profile, apply the adaptive noise reduction (or dehiss or whatever) and the audio sounds fine in the program. But when I export the first 2-3 seconds have the original hiss and you can then hear the effect kick in.
Can anyone help?! I offered to start doing video for my work and this is driving me up the wall.

Adaptive Noise Reduction is just that - adaptive. It identifies sources of dynamic noise over time, then reduces them.
If your clips don't have a few seconds before the in-point with which to apply the algorithm, you can often just copy/paste a few seconds at the beginning of your recording, run the effect, then delete that section. Dropping a marker after you paste the selection (while it's still selected) will make it simple to select that range again for deletion.
Otherwise, you might want to try the more manual NR tools. You'll have more control over what's identified as noise and how drastically it's reduced, and can make several light passes for better results.

The noise reduction in Audition stopped working.

For the past while the noise reduction feature in Audition stopped working. The adaptive one still works and its nearly as good but I OFTEN need to be able to sample the noise and filter it out and it simply does nothing now. You cant hear any difference when you play it and if you apply it anyway the file is unchanged. Need help urgently.
Thanks!

Thanks. The live chat guy after verifying me and all that stuff told me he was photoshop only and I had to call support. Is there a link where I can just download Audition and reinstall it or how can I do it? Any help appreciated a great deal.

Vocal Irregularity after applying Noise Reduction

In this new project I followed Bob Howes instruction:
‘Set the FFT size (on the advanced menu) to 2048 and grab a noise print from a gap of "silence". Select the entire filed and do reduction by 7 or 8 dB and 15%ish reduction. Set the FFT size to the next one up, get a new noise print and do another pass with the same low settings. Keep going, upping the FFT size each time.’
This new project I started out first with a Hard Limit. Then I followed Bob's advise with managing by steps the FFT size.
Sample One is a piece of the original.
Sample Two is the results of the effects.
It sounds as though the speed of the vocals did changed - though one can listen to the vocal their conversation sounds - unnatural.
After removing noise is there another approach to redeem the vocals of those speaking?
Thanks!
Original Sample One
HardLimit - Noise Reduction Sample Two
Your video has been published at http://youtu.be/K63D5QNGb_I
Your video will be live at: http://youtu.be/uOtLUYiZyQc

Yes, you have very much overdone the Noise Reduction!
First, I'm not sure why you would need to first apply a "Hard Limit".
Second, are you sure you followed Bob's advice exactly, i.e taking a new noise sample and changing the FFT size on each pass? Are you sure you set everything exactly correct on that first pass?

Is there a way to apply noise reduction based on ISO value?

I shoot a lot of sports using auto ISO which means I get hundreds of images from a day with a variety of different ISO values, including all sorts of intermediate values (like ISO 280, for example). There are times when I'd like to apply LR noise reduction across the whole batch of images, but I'd like to apply it based on the ISO value of the image. For example at ISO 1250 and above, I want a particular NR Luminance value. From 640 to 1250, I want a different value. From 400-640, a different value. I know you can define some things at import time based on ISO, but that doesn't seem practical when the ISO value can be nearly anything as it would take hundreds of import profiles.
So, any ideas how to apply NR based on the ISO across a batch of images?

jfriend0 wrote:
How do "defaults" interact with a preset applied upon import? I shoot RAW and apply a preset upon import for every import I do. If I apply a preset upon import will it override the "default" anyway? If that's the case, then defaults are of no use to me.
Yes - Lightroom presets are absolute, but unlike the default settings, presets don't have to specify all the settings. If a preset setting is specified, it will blindly overwrite the previous setting, if not specified then the previous value will remain unaltered.
DevAdjust supports relative presets: final-value = present-value +/- relative-preset-value
Rob

Why does PhotoShop CC 2014 crash my Windows 7 Professional 64-bit PC every time I try to use Sharpen/Blur Reduction and also Noise Reduction ??!!!???

Hi Adobe
You a have a really wonderful PhotoShop CC product. It's really great, and I know new versions such as 2014 have their teething problems.
But I am getting really sick of my Windows 7 Professional 64-bit PC being crashed whenever I try to use PhotoShop CC 2014 Sharpen / Blur Reduction and also Noise Reduction.
This happens both with JPG's and PSD's.
Please sort your **** out and get some patches out to address this quickly !!
Chris Tattersall

Chris,
It doesn't crash for everyone. A person could be forgiven for saying, in return, "Please sort out your **** system problems".
Trust me when I say many, many problems are caused by the computer system setup not being up to the needs of this cutting-edge graphics software. Photoshop is heavily dependent on the GPU, and GPU drivers are notorious for having bugs (they're primarily written to run games).
However, that being said, recent driver releases from both ATI and nVidia do actually work pretty well with Photoshop CC 2014.
What video card do you have?
What display driver version are you running?
If you're unsure how to tell these things, go into Photoshop, choose Help - System Info, copy the data, and post it here.
-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 works in preview but doesn't apply to file

I have a file that I would like to apply noise reduction to. So in the tasks menu I click Clean Up Audio, then under Noise I click Noise... From there I can play with the Noise settings and get it to clean up nicely. But when I hit OK, it doesn't apply the noise reduction. It seems to be doing something to the audio because the waveform changes.. just not reducing the noise as previewed. Anybody know why it wouldn't be applying the effect? Other audio editing options seem to work just fine.

It is a 16 bit 44.1 kHz mono sound effect.. it is noisy and sounds like it could have been 8 bit at some point in its life cycle.

Noise reduction radius past 2.0?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for