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

Similar Messages

  • Color Noise reduction with BxW

    Just wanted to share what I have seen so far with this:
    I sometimes use extreme HSL shifts with BxW images to achieve the tonal separation that I am looking for. This can lead to splotchyness, if taken toooo far. I just installed 1.4.1 and tried the color noise reduction filter for this (it was my most desired feature in the 1.4 update)
    As of 5 minutes of playing with it I can say it works. It is not perfect, and it does cause a very slight softening of detail (very slight) But it definitely does help to remove a good bit of the aforementioned splotches.

    Maybe this is snobbish, if so I apologize. I know that topics go off base sometimes...but this conversation has nothing to do with the topic I started. It should really have been it's own topic (for more than one reason. Maybe others need the info about slide shows, but would not look at this due to it's title).
    Except for being about noise reduction it has nothing to do with what I wanted to hear other users comment on: The use of the color noise reduction slider with BxW images in 1.4.1
    Again sorry if this is rude of me. I don't belong to too many forums and really don't know what the proper etiquette is here.

  • 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). 

  • Recovery connected to noise reduction rendering

    Just noticed when I crank the recovery slider up (ACR 4.4 Profile), Lightroom stops rendering fit view with color noise reduction applied when I get to 55 in the develop module. i.e. at recovery of 55 and greater, no color noise reduction is applied, 54 and below, color noise reduction is applied.
    Not sure what to say about it - just an interesting observation for the hyper-inquisitive...
    R

    Yeah, it does tend to dull a photo, however with ACR 4.4 (a linear profile) it can be cranked all the way to 100 without screwing up the hues, and I often crank it all the way up as a test and then lower to taste... - that's when I noticed the unexpected connection with the color noise reduction.
    PS - I sometimes use recovery to recover highlights (and dim the light tones as side effect), then use the tone curve to brighten the light tones back up.
    Summary:
    - With ACR 4.4, I feel free to use recovery 0-100 - often in conjunction with the tone curve to compensate for side-effect repression of non-highlight tones. With non-linear profiles, I strive for highlight-recovery=0 in most photos, due to unfavorable hue shifting.
    - For some reason, Highlight Recovery amount is affecting Lightroom's decision about whether to render color NR in the fit view.
    Cheers,
    Rob

  • How do I remove color noise?

    I have an image saved as a psd file with a high amount of color noise resulting from shooting at a film speed of 800. I have created a layer for a face in the image and a layer for the inverse (the remainder of the image). Can I reduce this noise using a tool in PSE7? I have tried the color noise reduction filter on each layer, but it seems to have no effect despite my playing with the adjustment sliders. The ultimate print of this image will be about 16"x24".

    Thanks for this solution... exactly what I am searching for...
    many thanks again, cheers

  • Noise reduction adjustments

    The blue skies are often noisy, and look ugly, while some details of the image may also be noisy, but in an irrelevant way. How about making it possible to adjust noise reduction based on color? After all, LR already has lots of great color based modification possibilities, why not also one for noise reduction? Also, I guess it'd be nice to have different noise reduction strength modifiers for shadows/midtones/highlights, maybe even a "noise reduction curve"?

    Personally, I like the total control aspect of Neat Image. It allows you to make a mask based on (I think) 10 levels of luminosity and per RGB color channel. Then it allows you to adjust noise based on frequency, and color/luminosity.
    I realize this amount of control over noise may be toooo much to ask for in LR. But I would like some of it. As this approach to noise control is the most effective!
    For example:
    Allow adjustable masking in the Shadows/midtones/highlights based on rgb data. Then allow luminous and color noise reduction. This level of control I think would do well in LR

  • Noise reduction, Clarity and Masking Vs Sharpness

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

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

  • Very different color noise between develop module and library

    There is a marked difference in the appearance of an image when viewed in the library versus the develop module. The color noise in the library module is very bad, while in the develop module, the noise reduction is doing a pretty good job. This is strictly a view problem, because if I export from the library, the proper color noise reduction is applied and it appears as it does in the develop module. This is not the first time that I have found this problem between the two modules. Any idea why this is happening? And, is there a fix in the works? It makes it hard to view images in the library.
    If I boost the color noise reduction up to 100, the library image starts to look ok, but that doesn't account for the huge difference at lower settings.
    There is also a dramatic slow down in the develop module when trying to make any of these changes in noise reduction and more, and also in side-by-side when trying to scroll around in the image to compare areas. Things really crawl. There is a definite two or three second delay before things respond. I have 8gigs in this mac pro, which worked beautifully with LR 3.6

    And, is there a fix in the works?
    Try rendering 1:1 previews for noisy images.

  • LR 2.5 / Sony A700 / Noise Reduction

    i there,
    I have tested LR 2.5 with Sony raw files (>= ISO 1600).
    My experience is, that
    - there are improvements in color noise reduction ( no more color spots)
    - but another problem is still unsolved:
    The Sony "Image Data Converter SR" has a much better noise handling comparing to LR (YES, i made a new import to LR).
    The problem is, that in areas of "nearly the same color", i.e. in black shadows,  LR is producing ugly structures, which are missing in the sony converter.
    Any experiences from other A700 users?
    Best regards

    It would be easier to comment if you posted a screen capture and attached it to your forum message so people can comment based on what they see.
    I am not famliiar with Sony's software, but Lightroom is non-destructive and so has to do all of it's processing on the fly every time you make an adjustment to the image so it will never do as good as software that takes seconds per image to reduce noise using sophisticated algorithms that only run once and then the changes are baked into the image.
    Sony's software is likely tuned for the particular camera's noise-characteristics which is something LR will be, because it supports 100s of cameras and doesn't do something different from one to the next.
    That said, my general complaint is that LR doesn't allow enough sharpening or noise-reductoin...the sliders need to be allowed to go much higher for particular situations.
    I have Photoshop and use NoiseNinja or NoiseWare plug-ins as a post-processing step if NR is really important, but tend to get ok results with most things wtihout resorting to Photoshop.

  • How to separately control color and luminescence noise reduction?

    Most of the time a little bit of Chroma noise reduction is all I need. I don't want to degrade the sharpness by applying luminescence blur unless I have to. Lightroom 3 has separate sliders. Is there a way to do this in Aperture 3?

    What code do you already have for changing the color and the number of elements?  Whatever it is you need to somehow tie that to being able to control it with a slider.  Would this be one slider to control both properties, or a different slider dedicated to each?

  • Noise reduction only on shadows

    Would be great if we had noise reduction adjustable only on shadows in camera raw & LR ?

    Yes. But it would be better if we had an easy way to select only shadows, so we could then apply any changes to them (noise reduction, color, tone, ... ).
    Ditto for highlights, and all the dark blue stuff, and all the ... stuff.
    Nik software supports this via U-points, and I hope Adobe invents a similiar auto-masking technology that blows U-points out of the water .
    Cheers,
    Rob

  • 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).

  • 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!

  • Video Noise Reduction Plugins (Neat Video, Natress, Etc.)

    We are doing some finishing on a short documentary film and some shots (HVX-200 in a dark, poorly lit, blue-starved, turkey barn) need a small amount of noise reduction to maintain the overall look of the film.
    We tested a demo of Neat Video's noise reduction plugin and feel the quality is acceptable. But I am curious if there are any other suggested alternatives. The only other plugin than interests me is the Natress Smart Denoise which works as a Color plugin and would be even more appropriate for our workflow.
    Are there any other options we should be checking out?
    Thanks!

    We are doing some finishing on a short documentary film and some shots (HVX-200 in a dark, poorly lit, blue-starved, turkey barn) need a small amount of noise reduction to maintain the overall look of the film.
    We tested a demo of Neat Video's noise reduction plugin and feel the quality is acceptable. But I am curious if there are any other suggested alternatives. The only other plugin than interests me is the Natress Smart Denoise which works as a Color plugin and would be even more appropriate for our workflow.
    Are there any other options we should be checking out?
    Thanks!

  • 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

Maybe you are looking for

  • Multiple rows in post parameters

    I am using the XSQL servlet programmatically. The xsql page being processed attempts to include the request parameters using the tag <xsql:include-request-params />. I have found that when I pass in a dictionary of parameters with multiple values for

  • UTF-8 encoding and BOM

    I'm reading in a file that's encoded in UTF-8 and begins with the byte-order mark of EF BB BF. I'm curious to know why a byte-order mark is needed for something encoded in UTF-8, because aren't BOMs only used to figure out endianness, which isn't an

  • Mac OS 10.4.10

    I have an old macbook bought more than 2 years ago, it's working perfectly fine. I'll be replacing my HDD with a bigger capacity. Unfortunately, I lost my mac OS X 10.4 cd installer. Can I directly install a XP pro OS or I need first to load my OS X

  • OBIEE 11.1.1.5 and OBIEE 11.1.1.6 Installation on same system.

    Hi All, Is it possible to have OBIEE 11.1.1.5 and 11.1.1.6 on same system? I know this is not practical and kind of unrecommended thing to do. But we have an OBIEE 11.1.1.5 instance installed on a server. And we don't want to deinstall it. Rather, if

  • Synchronize input and output tasks to start at the same sample point [C++ NI_DAQmx Base]

    I'm trying to initiate the analog input and output streams to start reliably at the same sample. I've tried triggering the output from the start of the input using the following code [NI-DAQmx Base 2.1 under Mac OS X with an M-Series multifunction bo