Where to put noise reduction into workflow (PSE5)

If you notice noise in your photos, at what point in your post-processing editing do you use the noise reduction feature of PSE5.0. In the beginning after cropping? Or, later on after color correcting or lighting corrections? Or, somewhere in the middle?
Thanks for thoughts.
Peter F.

Peter,
I agree with Jim that the order may change but as a general practice if I need to adjust color I do it after any lighting (levels or shadows/highlight) changes since they usually change the color in my pictures. Most of the time I adjust saturation selectively particularly if sky and/or water are concerned. As a final step I apply various amounts of unsharp mask. From the 3 cameras I have owned (2 Olympus and the current Panasonic) I have never found a picture that couldn't be greatly improved either overall or selectively by LIGHT application of usm.
Being basically lazy I always give Auto Smart Fix a shot as a first try and either go from there or undo it. :)
Bob

Similar Messages

Where to put color correction into workflow

I am having fun going through some 1200 images from a 2 week trip in Montana, Wyoming... lots of blue and green and a few snow capped mountains. As I work through the several I would like to print big, where would you place color correction in the workflow.... I use levels (the sliders), highlights/shadows, and saturation mostly. And then color correction somewhere in here.
Thanks.

Peter,
I agree with Jim that the order may change but as a general practice if I need to adjust color I do it after any lighting (levels or shadows/highlight) changes since they usually change the color in my pictures. Most of the time I adjust saturation selectively particularly if sky and/or water are concerned. As a final step I apply various amounts of unsharp mask. From the 3 cameras I have owned (2 Olympus and the current Panasonic) I have never found a picture that couldn't be greatly improved either overall or selectively by LIGHT application of usm.
Being basically lazy I always give Auto Smart Fix a shot as a first try and either go from there or undo it. :)
Bob

Noise Reduction/ Integrating into FCP Workflow

Why does STP render out the entire masterclip when I'm processing only a few seconds of that for noise reduction?
So let's say I'm happy with STP rendering out that entire 20 minute masterclip of audio, then why doesn't STP/FCP then reflect the noise reduction on other clips in the FCP timeline taken from the same masterclip???

Bill-
You shouldn't be losing keywords just by virtue of running a batch in PS- double check the image's info after Export and before batch operation.
Next, make a PS action to do this. Then, from that have it make a droplet. Place droplet in LR folder for such, then make a custom Export preset in LR that calls in the droplet at the end of the choices. (Choose sRGB for your color space)

Lightroom, Photoshop, RAW Presharpening, Noise Reduction Workflow Help

I'm tying to determine a best practices route using Adobe Lightroom, Adobe Photoshop and Nik Software Sharpener and Dfine (Noise Management Software).
I shoot only RAW with a Canon EOS 30D with good quality lenses.
I import the RAW files from the CF card directly (DNG and save) into LR, add keywords, organize, etc.
However, I am now at the point where I need to determine a sensible workflow that includes these steps:
Import RAW into LR as DNG.
Edit, as needed, in PS.
Apply RAW Presharpening (as provided in Nik Sharpener).
Manage Noise (with Nik Dfine (2.0 available in next 24 hours).
Apply usage-based sharpening prior to printing or saving final file version.
Maintain organization in LR.
My original plan was:
1. Import RAW in LR.
2. Open in PS.
3. Apply noise reduction.
4. Apply RAW presharpening.
5. Save (with new version being an "Edit" copy back in LR.
6. Maintain organization in LR.
I'm wondering, though, if I wouldn't be better off doing the basics to the files prior to LR import. Note that the Nik tools work in 16-bit mode.
This is theoretically what I'm thinking, and would appreciate other user's input:
1. Save RAW files to location on Mac.
2. Apply Noise reduction to RAW files with Nik software within PS (perhaps automated, perhaps batched).
3. Apply RAW presharpening to RAW files with Nik software within PS (perhaps automated, perhaps batched).
4. Import noise- and presharpening-adjusted files into LR, with metadata additions, etc.
5. Open files in PS as needed, with files becoming edit versions within LR.
Any thoughts?

To summarize, then:
First time opening a RAW file from Lightroom, LR automatically creates a copy and appends "-Edit" to the filename. If it's a RAW file, only available option is the third option in the dialog box: "Edit a Copy with Lightroom Adjustments."
Once opened in Photoshop, any number of adjustments can be made and saved. All adjustments are reflected in the -Edit copy when previewed in back in LR.
If, later, I want to perform further PS edits on the -Edit version, I have 3 options as presented in the dialog box.
1. "Edit Original (LR adjustments will not be visible)"
2. "Edit a Copy (LR adjustments will not be visible)"
3. "Edit a Copy with Lightroom Adjustments"
Option 1 will open -Edit version #1 (but it will not show any changes made in LR to the -Edit file when opened in PS)
Option 2 will create a copy of -Edit version #1 and open that new file, -Edit-2 (but it will not contain any changes made in LR to the -Edit file)
Option 3 will create a copy of -Edit version #1 and open that new file, -Edit-2 and it will contain any changes made in LR to the -Edit file
So, a typical workflow would be:
1. Import RAW file in LR.
2. Make adjustments in LR.
3. If needed, open a copy (by default) in PS via LR (command-E).
4. Adjust in PS, save.
5. Adjusted file is stacked with original RAW file in LR.
6A. Assuming no additional edits in LR, further PS adjustments can be made to -Edit version original, keeping just 1 stacked version in LR.
6B. If additional adjustments are made to the saved -Edit version in LR, and further PS adjustments are needed, I must edit a copy of the -Edit file, ultimately resulting in a second stacked file.

Workflow using a PS noise reduction action with LR???

OK, I've taken maybe 1200 pictures at a Volleyball tournament. I import them into LR and delete the OOF shots and keyword them with the players numbers. Then I filter for just one player's number and assign the ten best as picks...I need to do it by player number so each player ends up with the about the same number of pictures on the website. I repeat for the other nine players and now I have a a total of 100 picked photos.
Now I want to use a PS action for Noiseware to reduce the noise because LR's noise reduction isn't enough at ISO 3200. How can I get all of these to run as a "batch" in PS.
What I have been doing is to export these and then batch that folder in PS, but then I lose any keywords that went with the individual pictures.
Help...Thanks,
Bill

Bill-
You shouldn't be losing keywords just by virtue of running a batch in PS- double check the image's info after Export and before batch operation.
Next, make a PS action to do this. Then, from that have it make a droplet. Place droplet in LR folder for such, then make a custom Export preset in LR that calls in the droplet at the end of the choices. (Choose sRGB for your color space)

Noise Reduction Workflow

What are peoples' thoughts about a noise reduction workflow in LR?
Since NR should be applied before any sharpening, it seems that it would make sense to turn off NR in LR if I use Noiseware and then use Photokit capture sharpening in PS.
Any other thoughts?
Thanks!
Reid

OK Here's a sample with the LR image in the left, the right was done in PS using Imgaenomic Noise Reduction Professional. This was shot with the D300 with no flash, ISO 3200. The tiles in the right image look closer to the way the tiles really looked. The LR image on the left is sharpened in LR and Luminance reduction set to 89 and Color to 34.
The separate image is the one without NR and sharpening in LR.
http://members.shaw.ca/claude.biron/NR_Samples/
btw I didn't spend much time in PS using Imagenomic. Just selected one of their noise reduction presets, and saved back to LR.

I have used the resume tablet and put my resume into format but when emailing it, it will not open on windows. How can I change the format to where they will be able to open and view it?

I have used the resume tablet and put my resume into format but when emailing it, it will not open on windows. How can I change the format to where they will be able to open and view it?

I guess you mean one of the resume templates.
What "format" have you saved your finished resume in?
The only formats a Windows user will be able to open are .doc (Word), .pdf and rtf. The 1st 2 are usually the best.
There is no Windows version of Pages.
Peter

I just put a DVD into my IMac 27" and it makes noise like it's trying to read the DVD but then ejects it. Can anyone help me? I just ran out of Apple Care.

Can anyone help me? I just put a DVD into my IMAC 27". It sounds like it's trying to read but then it ejects it. I tried this DVD on another IMAC with not problems. My computer just ran out of Apple Care. Help!

I took the steps that I read on this forum and now my DVD Player works!

Noise reduction function built into built into graduated filter and adjustments brush!

Really useful functionality, but maybe the tool name shout be "Noise reduction" rather than "noise" for the graduated filter and adjustments brush. If I understand it correctly, the way all the sliders work now is that that movement to the left decreases the function of the slider, and to the right increases the function - if that is the case, then by labelling the slider "noise" would suggest that moving to the right is increasing the noise when in fact it is the reverse!

The explanation is that "noise reduction" doesn't fit the available space in all languages.

Noise Reduction Programs as External Editor

Can anyone tell me if I can set up a noise reduction program (Noiseware, Noise Ninja, Neat Image, etc) as an external editor to LR and use the "round trip" feature used with PS/PSE? I don't currently have either PS or PSE, since LR has been able to handle my editing needs with the exception of noise reduction. Hence my research into free-standing programs.
Thanks in advance.
Adam

From the Noise Ninja web site:
http://www.picturecode.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
"It is usually best to apply noise reduction as early as is practical in the workflow. Post-processing adjustments like sharpening, contrast stretching, and color balancing can alter pixel values and noise levels in unpredictable ways. Depending on the amount of adjustment, this can make it more difficult for Noise Ninja to estimate noise levels. Sharpening, for instance, is a nonlinear operation that can significantly distort the distribution of noise values.
If your workflow requires that you use Noise Ninja after some other operations, then try to create noise profiles using calibration images that have been put through the same operations.
Running Noise Ninja early in the workflow is a good rule of thumb, but Noise Ninja can be applied at any time. Sometimes it may not be possible or practical to run Noise Ninja at an earlier point in the workflow. For example, most users are not using a RAW processor with plug-in that allows Noise Ninja to be run before other adjustments in the RAW processor."

Upscaling and noise reduction in ACR

I've been thinking about upscaling images and the best time to do so (if I need to of course) in my workflow. As I understand it, it's always best to carry out any noise reduction prior to upsampling an image, as this helps avoid increasing the size of any noise that may be apparent in the image.
However, I'm thinking that in ACR, this in theory would not be neccessary as ACR would carry out any noise reduction and upsampling in a pre-defined processing order. So put simply, I could increase the image size and then carry out any NR as required after upscaling. This would allow me to tailor the NR to fit the increased image dimensions (and of course I could then carry out capture sharpening for the larger image as well).
Is my thinking correct here - does it not really matter in terms of image quality if I don't do any NR before changing the image dimensions in ACR?
M

I did a lot of experimentation with upsampling during conversion.
I found that - in my opinion - upsampling during Camera Raw operation yields superior results to doing it later. I also believe that dialing in some noise reduction during Camera Raw is needed, as even low ISO images get pretty grainy otherwise.
Every camera is different, but what I ended up saving for defaults is this, keeping in mind that I do my conversions to the largest possible image size, then downsample later for specific uses.
Only you know what your goals are and what you like in your images, so I encourage you to experiment as I did with different combinations of settings to try to find the right balance.
-Noel

Are there any other enhancements in noise reduction tools in CS6

Are there any other enhancements in the noise reduction tools besides the improvement mentioned of the spot healing brush. Are there improvements on the click and pop removal tool and the noise reduction in the spectral editing view. Quite anxious to know...

Paul:
Welcome to the Apple Discussions. There is a hidden feature for changing the Redeye and Retouch tool size:
How to Change the Size of the Retouch and Red-Eye Removal Tool
Type Caps lockControl9
Undo caps lock
Click on the Retouch or Red-Eye Removal tool
The tab key will toggle between cursor types, a cross or a circle
The "[" and "]" keys decrease or increase the size accordingly.
NOTE: Using the "{" "}" keys will will change the value next to the circle and that represents the degree of change or intensity that the tool imparts on each pass.
Also check out the tip at the end of my signature for backing up the library database file on a frequent basis.
Do you Twango?
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've written an Automator workflow application, iPhoto dB file backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

In-camera high ISO noise reduction & ACR

I've been involved in a discussion over on DPReview where someone believes that, when shooting with a Nikon dSLR (in this case a D7000, but the model isn't really important) high ISO NR is automatically applied in-camera directly to the raw file, and this will be carried over to any raw conversion software, including third-party software such as ACR/LR.
Now I do agree that even with NR switched off, Nikon do automatically apply some limited NR to high ISO images in-camera, but I'm pretty much 100% certain that this is not something that ACR would interpret, and so it would not actually have any effect on the appearance of the raw file when it's processed. In fact, if the high ISO NR is somehow embedded into the raw file, that would go against my whole concept of how a raw file works in a convertor such as ACR! Surely any "default" high ISO NR is just added to the proprietry part of the EXIF, and is therefore only factored in when using Nikon conversion software (ViewNX, etc)? Otherwise, the file could not truly be considered to be 'raw'.
I think I'm right, but wanted confirmation from some of the experts on here! And of course, I'm also quite happy to be proven wrong!
M

Noel Carboni wrote:
By the way, the reference I found for D7000 shows that the High ISO NR can be disabled. See this page: http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D7000/D7000A7.HTM
What camera do YOU have, Molly?
-Noel
Hi Noel,
Wow, I'm impressed with your efforts here! Your point about blurring being a potential sign of whether or not NR has been applied to the high ISO raw files is a good one, and I agree that, based on that thinking, the examples you've found don't really seem to show much evidence of that, particularly the shots of the focus/resolution target.
I do have a D7000; I replied as such back in post three ("yes I do" in response to your question "do you have such a camera?"), but I can see how that may not have been as clear as it should have been! I'm going to try some test shots myself to see if I can pick out any evidence of softening/blurring that may indicate NR being applied during the processing of the raw data. However, unfortunately my PC is currently being fixed as I've been having some hardware issues, so that testing won't be happening until I get it back (hoping within a week, missing it already).
Regarding your reference that indicates that high ISO NR can be switched off, yes it can, but apparently only up to a point - here's what it states in the Nikon manual (and what has in turn sparked off this discussion over on DPR):
"High ISO NR - option: off - Noise reduction is only performed at ISO sensitivities of ISO 1600 and higher. The amount of noise reduction is less than the amount performed when low is selected for High ISO NR" (as the article indicates, there are three options apart from off: high, normal, and low).
As I've said previously, my understanding was that all of that had zero bearing on the raw file once it was loaded into ACR: regardless of any NR settings applied in-camera, either by the user or by Nikon bypassing the user, they were all thrown away by the Adobe raw processing algorithms, as are things like picture controls, sharpening, contrast, etc. But following my recent discussion, I started to wonder if my understanding of the raw capture process was incorrect, hence this thread.
Thanks again for your work here. Above and beyond the call of duty!
M

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.

Where to put noise reduction into workflow (PSE5)

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for