Reading mode: Light Dark

Noise Reduction Program

Go to last post
A

AndreTorng

Leading Member
Messages
874
Reaction score
0
Location
Southern Calif, US
Which program has the best noise reduction capability?

Sometimes I shoot night photos for sports or concert, and need a good noise redution program when I shoot ISO 1600 with normal jpg.

Thanks for your advices and comments.

Andre
 
Not a dedicated Noise reduction program but I hope you can tolerate a digression as I'm interested in your comments.

I recently took important pictures accidently set on 800 ISO instead of 1-200 ISO. = Too much noise !!:-(

So I just tested Silkypix 3 beta this afternoon and when converting Raw files it beat Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop CS1 as well as Adobe Lightroom. I found Lightroom Beta much faster and easier to learn than Silkypix but the converted result was was inferior to Silkypix.

Comments??

Does anyone use Silkypix and is the licensed product have any imporovement in speed from the Beta?
 
AlanB said:
Not a dedicated Noise reduction program but I hope you can tolerate
a digression as I'm interested in your comments.

I recently took important pictures accidently set on 800 ISO
instead of 1-200 ISO. = Too much noise !!:-(

So I just tested Silkypix 3 beta this afternoon and when converting
Raw files it beat Adobe Camera Raw in Photoshop CS1 as well as
Adobe Lightroom. I found Lightroom Beta much faster and easier to
learn than Silkypix but the converted result was was inferior to
Silkypix.

Comments??

Does anyone use Silkypix and is the licensed product have any
imporovement in speed from the Beta?
Click to expand...
Digital Outback Photo has several active Silkypix threads on it's Image Workflow forum here: http://www.outbackphoto.com/tforum/viewboard.php?BoardID=16

If not here, someone there would likely be able to answer your questions. (i'm technically challenged, otherwise i'd be able to help you :)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My Japan Gallery http://www.pbase.com/japanese__wanderings
 
I had been using Noise Ninja and wasn't too happy with it. Seemed to blur more than I liked. Recently started using Neat Image. Must better in my estimation. They have a free version.

Joe
 
I see many people mention Noise Ninja or Neat Image... why don't you use the noise reduction filter in Photoshop?
 
Try it for yourself. Pick a shot that really needs NR. Adjust it in PS and then some of the standalone programs. While you are tweeking each shot, look VERY carefully at the fine details. To me, that seems to be the weakest point of any of the NR software.

Neat Image seems to have an edge in that you can adjust color noise separate from luminance noise. This is true for sharpening as well.

When using Noise Ninja, the color portion doesn't seem to do as much as is possibe in NI. Also, NI breaks up the adjustment levels into fine, medium and coarse noise/detail catagories.

Joe
 
It would be interesting to see some comparisons. Can someone post some pics that were adjusted in photoshop and one of the others or between Neat Image and Noise Ninja? Or, if someone knows of link to such a comparison that would be great too.
 
I have had good results with noise ninja. I also picked it because I am currently thinking about shifting to a Apple OS from windows. The noise ninja lets you download either version and you can switch OS without having to purchase the program again.
 
I think it's the old "Chevy vs. Ford" debate; responses will vary as will user experiences.

I was using Neat Image Pro for several years (currently have the latest version, 5) when a photographer friend I admire, told me about Noise Ninja. I had read about it many times over the years of course, but was satisfied with Neat Image.

For the past year though, I've been doing a great deal of concert photography for CD covers. You can imagine the noise I have to deal with, shooting under stage lighting conditions with minimal flash allowed (besides, I prefer the look of the stage lighting). Sometimes it's acceptable, other times, abysmal.

On a whim, I decided to try NN. I was delighted with the multi-profiling it provides. Of course, I could not resist side-by-side comparisons. Quite honestly, it seemed a toss-up, with NI sometimes looking slightly better, other times, NN winning (in either case, the differences were always subtle).

However, I will say this: I believe they're both CAPABLE of equal results, if one takes the time for very fine tune tweaking and adjusting. That being said, when I'm processing a hundred photos or more from a concert, I don't have the time-- sad to say--to be that patient. Ultimately, I found myself leaning towards Noise Ninja as it's automated multi-spot-profiling was, in the long run, consistently slightly (there's that word again) than Neat Image. Still, there are times when I process the photo and don't like the results, so I delete that step and use Neat Image and will sometimes get better results.

The bottom line is I think you'll be happy with either one.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Frank
Whimsy is salvation for a life taken too seriously.
http://www.pbase.com/frankvigil
http://www.frankvigil.com
joe field said:
I had been using Noise Ninja and wasn't too happy with it. Seemed
to blur more than I liked. Recently started using Neat Image. Must
better in my estimation. They have a free version.

Joe
Click to expand...
--
Whimsy is salvation for a life taken too seriously.
http://www.pbase.com/frankvigil
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top