Denoiser software for complete morons

michaeladawson said:

Morris0 said:

Laptop CPUs and GPUs have similar numbers yet they don't have similar performance to the desktop models. If you take a look in task manager, you will probably discover that you only need 16-GB of RAM for this work flow.

Morris

Click to expand...

Yes, I am aware that laptops and desktops have different performance. Intel chips, as well as GPU processors that go into laptops are modified to work well in laptops with decreased cooling, etc.

Doesn't mean I can't be jealous.

I haven't gotten around to upgrading my desktop yet. It's getting on in years. It's tolerable for Adobe processing but I avoid it if I have to run Topaz. But it's useful to point out in a thread like this, since many (most?) people these days are probably using laptops rather than desktops, that AI software for denoising and sharpening puts a hit on processing speed.

Click to expand...

Agree, it's best to get "Gaming" laptops and pay special attention to the GPU as well as the processor. Unfortunately gaming laptops are heavier. They frequently have IPS monitors which photographers should get for the wider viewing angles.

Morris

Morris0 said:

Agree, it's best to get "Gaming" laptops and pay special attention to the GPU as well as the processor. Unfortunately gaming laptops are heavier. They frequently have IPS monitors which photographers should get for the wider viewing angles.

Morris

Click to expand...

Agree on this as well. Also, there's screen size to think about if you really want a photo processing laptop.

I don't claim to have the very best laptop. But I searched for what was available, features, read some reviews, etc. I ended up with a Dell XPS 17 9710. It has a 17" 4K screen, i9, Ge3060 laptop graphics card, etc. As a result it is fairly large and heavy. It's definitely not a MacBook Air.

I'm happy with it. There's no doubt faster gaming laptops out there if you go strictly by charts. I also considered an ASUS at the time.

michaeladawson said:

Morris0 said:

Agree, it's best to get "Gaming" laptops and pay special attention to the GPU as well as the processor. Unfortunately gaming laptops are heavier. They frequently have IPS monitors which photographers should get for the wider viewing angles.

Morris

Click to expand...

Agree on this as well. Also, there's screen size to think about if you really want a photo processing laptop.

I don't claim to have the very best laptop. But I searched for what was available, features, read some reviews, etc. I ended up with a Dell XPS 17 9710. It has a 17" 4K screen, i9, Ge3060 laptop graphics card, etc. As a result it is fairly large and heavy. It's definitely not a MacBook Air.

I'm happy with it. There's no doubt faster gaming laptops out there if you go strictly by charts. I also considered an ASUS at the time.

Click to expand...

I have a 15 inch Dell XPS with I7. The smaller size allows it to fit into both my roller bag and backpack. The backpack will fit under a US domestic seat. I always bring the backpack along so if they decide they are collecting roller bags I can switch my critical and expensive gear into it. I'm fed up with the Airlines. They treat us like luggage.

Morris

Morris0 said:

Homo erectus said:

I started using DxO Photolab 5 recently and I am super impressed with both it's default noise reduction tool and with it's AI noise reduction, called Deep Prime.

There's a free trial so you can test it for yourself. Also it can work as a plugin for Lightroom. I use it as a stand alone program.

Hope that helps.

Click to expand...

Deep Prime, the ultimate test of your ability to find things to do while your computer entertains it's self. In the end the results are amazing.

Morris

Click to expand...

Yeah, on my Ryzen 7 5800X system with 32 gigs of ram outputting a full size jpg from an ISO 12800 RAF takes about 40 seconds with Deep Prime. With regular noise reduction that same images take 4 seconds to output.

Still, the results are worth the wait when you need it!

michaeladawson said:

But I searched for what was available, features, read some reviews, etc. I ended up with a Dell XPS 17 9710. It has a 17" 4K screen, i9, Ge3060 laptop graphics card, etc. As a result it is fairly large and heavy. It's definitely not a MacBook Air.

I'm happy with it. There's no doubt faster gaming laptops out there if you go strictly by charts. I also considered an ASUS at the time.

Click to expand...

I have the prior year's 9700, similar specs but RTX2060. Mine developed a problem requiring replacement under warranty. I tried to talk them into letting me buy up to the 9710, but no go.

I'm happy with mine too. Relatively small for a 17", thanks to the 16:10 screen, which I like a lot. 4K may be overkill for 17", but my wife wanted touch screen.

Gaming laptops tend to be bigger for better airflow cooling, letting them run a GPU at higher wattage for better performance.

--
Brent

I didn't read all the comments but dont underestimate how demanding these denoise/sharpen AI programs are. No joke i went from 10+ minutes export for 1 photo using dxo deep prime on my old laptop with no GPU to around 7 seconds on my new laptop with amd cpu and rtx3070.

Dont think a fast cpu and 64gigs of ram will save you, if i disable the gpu the same image takes over a minute.

DXO photolab works great if you want a 1 click solution but as you use adobe stuff i would be tempted to use topaz tools instead or even a combination dxo pureraw and topaz, specifically topaz sharpen.

dxo deep prime will impress but you can also run that denoised image through topaz sharpen and it will improve it further and is also impressive, you can even use selective masking and the auto masking does a great job as well but not always perfect but a good start.

The only issues i have with topaz tools are that its even slower than dxo.., its fine for me and you tend to have to tweak the settings to get it optimal.

For what its worth i use capture one export to tif into topaz sharpen or if its a simple image that doesnt need much adjusting i might throw it into dxo photolab. I actually dont mind some noise but sometimes it has to go.

I dont sharpen and denoise all my photos, capture one/fuji does a good job upto iso 1600 on my xe3 imo and you can mask and stuff in capture one if needed.

michaeladawson said:

Kaoticphoto said:

I batch convert with dxo pureraw2 to dng, and i process as always in LR.

To have a reference xt3/4 files are processed in about 12/13 seconds whit pureraw2 using deep prime

Click to expand...

That's basically my point. You're using a different program for your initial raw conversion. You can do it if you want. I'm not going to.

Click to expand...

Homo erectus said:

Morris0 said:

Homo erectus said:

I started using DxO Photolab 5 recently and I am super impressed with both it's default noise reduction tool and with it's AI noise reduction, called Deep Prime.

There's a free trial so you can test it for yourself. Also it can work as a plugin for Lightroom. I use it as a stand alone program.

Hope that helps.

Click to expand...

Deep Prime, the ultimate test of your ability to find things to do while your computer entertains it's self. In the end the results are amazing.

Morris

Click to expand...

Yeah, on my Ryzen 7 5800X system with 32 gigs of ram outputting a full size jpg from an ISO 12800 RAF takes about 40 seconds with Deep Prime. With regular noise reduction that same images take 4 seconds to output.

Still, the results are worth the wait when you need it!

Click to expand...

What GPU do you have? They are the most important spec for DxO.

Morris

Morris0 said:

michaeladawson said:

I think the first question is what software do you currently use for your photo editing? A tool like DxO Deep Prime is excellent but it sort of requires that you switch over and start using DxO as your main software for editing photos.

Click to expand...

No, you can use DxO to strip RAW from your image and produce a DNG or TIFF that is then processed as always in the software you usually use.

Morris0 said:

If you're a Photoshop person then you have many more options. Topaz DeNoise is very good as well. But it will require that you have a good computer with a recent graphics board if you want decent speed out of it. DeNoise can also be made part of a Photoshop action if you are into batch processing. Unfortunately, I haven't found a way to turn on automatic detection of denoise level without also turning on automatic sharpening.

I used to use Nik Dfine2 as my standard tool as it works excellently with Adobe batch processing in auto mode.

My real question would be how bad is noise with the X-H2S? I find it hard to believe that you were fine with the noise in your previous Fujifilm cameras and that suddenly the X-H2S is that much worse that it is objectionable. I don't mean to argue the point, however. If you say it's bad I believe you. I'm just surprised, that's all.

Click to expand...

The noise conversation regarding X-H2s has stated it's similar to that of the X-T4. Not a big deal

Morris

Click to expand...

But is the denoising approach a way of making images taken by an APS-C camera acceptable or even really good?

Okand said:

Morris0 said:

michaeladawson said:

I think the first question is what software do you currently use for your photo editing? A tool like DxO Deep Prime is excellent but it sort of requires that you switch over and start using DxO as your main software for editing photos.

Click to expand...

No, you can use DxO to strip RAW from your image and produce a DNG or TIFF that is then processed as always in the software you usually use.

Okand said:

If you're a Photoshop person then you have many more options. Topaz DeNoise is very good as well. But it will require that you have a good computer with a recent graphics board if you want decent speed out of it. DeNoise can also be made part of a Photoshop action if you are into batch processing. Unfortunately, I haven't found a way to turn on automatic detection of denoise level without also turning on automatic sharpening.

I used to use Nik Dfine2 as my standard tool as it works excellently with Adobe batch processing in auto mode.

My real question would be how bad is noise with the X-H2S? I find it hard to believe that you were fine with the noise in your previous Fujifilm cameras and that suddenly the X-H2S is that much worse that it is objectionable. I don't mean to argue the point, however. If you say it's bad I believe you. I'm just surprised, that's all.

Click to expand...

The noise conversation regarding X-H2s has stated it's similar to that of the X-T4. Not a big deal

Morris

Click to expand...

But is the denoising approach a way of making images taken by an APS-C camera acceptable or even really good?

Click to expand...

No, because they start off great!

Morris

Morris0 said:

Okand said:

Morris0 said:

michaeladawson said:

I think the first question is what software do you currently use for your photo editing? A tool like DxO Deep Prime is excellent but it sort of requires that you switch over and start using DxO as your main software for editing photos.

Click to expand...

No, you can use DxO to strip RAW from your image and produce a DNG or TIFF that is then processed as always in the software you usually use.

Morris0 said:

If you're a Photoshop person then you have many more options. Topaz DeNoise is very good as well. But it will require that you have a good computer with a recent graphics board if you want decent speed out of it. DeNoise can also be made part of a Photoshop action if you are into batch processing. Unfortunately, I haven't found a way to turn on automatic detection of denoise level without also turning on automatic sharpening.

I used to use Nik Dfine2 as my standard tool as it works excellently with Adobe batch processing in auto mode.

My real question would be how bad is noise with the X-H2S? I find it hard to believe that you were fine with the noise in your previous Fujifilm cameras and that suddenly the X-H2S is that much worse that it is objectionable. I don't mean to argue the point, however. If you say it's bad I believe you. I'm just surprised, that's all.

Click to expand...

The noise conversation regarding X-H2s has stated it's similar to that of the X-T4. Not a big deal

Morris

Click to expand...

But is the denoising approach a way of making images taken by an APS-C camera acceptable or even really good?

Click to expand...

No, because they start off great!

Morris

Click to expand...

So I shouldn’t be viewing denoising software as something that’s used to save an image then

Okand said:

Morris0 said:

Okand said:

Morris0 said:

michaeladawson said:

I think the first question is what software do you currently use for your photo editing? A tool like DxO Deep Prime is excellent but it sort of requires that you switch over and start using DxO as your main software for editing photos.

Click to expand...

No, you can use DxO to strip RAW from your image and produce a DNG or TIFF that is then processed as always in the software you usually use.

Okand said:

If you're a Photoshop person then you have many more options. Topaz DeNoise is very good as well. But it will require that you have a good computer with a recent graphics board if you want decent speed out of it. DeNoise can also be made part of a Photoshop action if you are into batch processing. Unfortunately, I haven't found a way to turn on automatic detection of denoise level without also turning on automatic sharpening.

I used to use Nik Dfine2 as my standard tool as it works excellently with Adobe batch processing in auto mode.

My real question would be how bad is noise with the X-H2S? I find it hard to believe that you were fine with the noise in your previous Fujifilm cameras and that suddenly the X-H2S is that much worse that it is objectionable. I don't mean to argue the point, however. If you say it's bad I believe you. I'm just surprised, that's all.

Click to expand...

The noise conversation regarding X-H2s has stated it's similar to that of the X-T4. Not a big deal

Morris

Click to expand...

But is the denoising approach a way of making images taken by an APS-C camera acceptable or even really good?

Click to expand...

No, because they start off great!

Morris

Click to expand...

So I shouldn’t be viewing denoising software as something that’s used to save an image then

Click to expand...

Save? Enhance or improve.

Morris

Morris0 said:

Okand said:

Morris0 said:

Okand said:

Morris0 said:

michaeladawson said:

I think the first question is what software do you currently use for your photo editing? A tool like DxO Deep Prime is excellent but it sort of requires that you switch over and start using DxO as your main software for editing photos.

Click to expand...

No, you can use DxO to strip RAW from your image and produce a DNG or TIFF that is then processed as always in the software you usually use.

Morris0 said:

If you're a Photoshop person then you have many more options. Topaz DeNoise is very good as well. But it will require that you have a good computer with a recent graphics board if you want decent speed out of it. DeNoise can also be made part of a Photoshop action if you are into batch processing. Unfortunately, I haven't found a way to turn on automatic detection of denoise level without also turning on automatic sharpening.

I used to use Nik Dfine2 as my standard tool as it works excellently with Adobe batch processing in auto mode.

My real question would be how bad is noise with the X-H2S? I find it hard to believe that you were fine with the noise in your previous Fujifilm cameras and that suddenly the X-H2S is that much worse that it is objectionable. I don't mean to argue the point, however. If you say it's bad I believe you. I'm just surprised, that's all.

Click to expand...

The noise conversation regarding X-H2s has stated it's similar to that of the X-T4. Not a big deal

Morris

Click to expand...

But is the denoising approach a way of making images taken by an APS-C camera acceptable or even really good?

Click to expand...

No, because they start off great!

Morris

Click to expand...

So I shouldn’t be viewing denoising software as something that’s used to save an image then

Click to expand...

Save? Enhance or improve.

Morris

Click to expand...

Yeah, my bad, I meant enhance or improve

Okand said:

But is the denoising approach a way of making images taken by an APS-C camera acceptable or even really good?

Click to expand...

And here I thought it was only folks in the MFT forum who suffered from small sensor syndrome. ;-)

brentbrent said:

Okand said:

But is the denoising approach a way of making images taken by an APS-C camera acceptable or even really good?

Click to expand...

And here I thought it was only folks in the MFT forum who suffered from small sensor syndrome. ;-)

Click to expand...

Sorry, I only asked because I guess I’d see the denoise software as a way of making a good image better by reducing the noise in an image taken in low light for example

Morris0 said:

Homo erectus said:

Morris0 said:

Homo erectus said:

I started using DxO Photolab 5 recently and I am super impressed with both it's default noise reduction tool and with it's AI noise reduction, called Deep Prime.

There's a free trial so you can test it for yourself. Also it can work as a plugin for Lightroom. I use it as a stand alone program.

Hope that helps.

Click to expand...

Deep Prime, the ultimate test of your ability to find things to do while your computer entertains it's self. In the end the results are amazing.

Morris

Click to expand...

Yeah, on my Ryzen 7 5800X system with 32 gigs of ram outputting a full size jpg from an ISO 12800 RAF takes about 40 seconds with Deep Prime. With regular noise reduction that same images take 4 seconds to output.

Still, the results are worth the wait when you need it!

Click to expand...

What GPU do you have? They are the most important spec for DxO.

Morris

Click to expand...

My GPU is really old, an RX590. When I built this computer GPU prices were in the stratosphere so I reused the GPU from my old computer. I'm hoping to upgrade it this fall if I can.

Okand said:

brentbrent said:

Okand said:

But is the denoising approach a way of making images taken by an APS-C camera acceptable or even really good?

Click to expand...

And here I thought it was only folks in the MFT forum who suffered from small sensor syndrome. ;-)

Click to expand...

Sorry, I only asked because I guess I’d see the denoise software as a way of making a good image better by reducing the noise in an image taken in low light for example

Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought your question was tongue-in-cheek because of the reference to APS-C. I've been shooting MFT for the last 12 years, and I know that system is capable of producing "acceptable or even really good" images, as is APS-C.

Smaller sensors do have a bit of disadvantage in low light. Yes, the AI denoising in DXO can make a good image better. It can also make a horrible image passable. Here is a horrible image I shot in dim light with a 2014 MFT camera at 25600 ISO (NOT recommended), followed by the same image processed with DXO PL5's DeepPrime. That is still not a good image, but it's reasonably passable to memorialize an occasion.









If you have a better image to start with that only has some excess noise, DeepPrime can clean it up nicely.

--
Brent

Late to this de-noise party. The most recent version of On1 Photo RAW 2022 includes what's called NoNoise. Easy to use, fast and to me, pretty amazing results. Like other apps that have been mentioned, I believe On1 offers a free trial period. mhf

Homo erectus said:

Morris0 said:

Homo erectus said:

Morris0 said:

Homo erectus said:

I started using DxO Photolab 5 recently and I am super impressed with both it's default noise reduction tool and with it's AI noise reduction, called Deep Prime.

There's a free trial so you can test it for yourself. Also it can work as a plugin for Lightroom. I use it as a stand alone program.

Hope that helps.

Click to expand...

Deep Prime, the ultimate test of your ability to find things to do while your computer entertains it's self. In the end the results are amazing.

Morris

Click to expand...

Yeah, on my Ryzen 7 5800X system with 32 gigs of ram outputting a full size jpg from an ISO 12800 RAF takes about 40 seconds with Deep Prime. With regular noise reduction that same images take 4 seconds to output.

Still, the results are worth the wait when you need it!

Click to expand...

What GPU do you have? They are the most important spec for DxO.

Morris

Click to expand...

My GPU is really old, an RX590. When I built this computer GPU prices were in the stratosphere so I reused the GPU from my old computer. I'm hoping to upgrade it this fall if I can.

Click to expand...

That's very interesting, A new high end GPU may not yield as much of an improvement as one would hope fore. I'd love to know the results when you upgrade your GPU.

Morris

brentbrent said:

Okand said:

brentbrent said:

Okand said:

But is the denoising approach a way of making images taken by an APS-C camera acceptable or even really good?

Click to expand...

And here I thought it was only folks in the MFT forum who suffered from small sensor syndrome. ;-)

Click to expand...

Sorry, I only asked because I guess I’d see the denoise software as a way of making a good image better by reducing the noise in an image taken in low light for example

Click to expand...

Sorry, I thought your question was tongue-in-cheek because of the reference to APS-C. I've been shooting MFT for the last 12 years, and I know that system is capable of producing "acceptable or even really good" images, as is APS-C.

Smaller sensors do have a bit of disadvantage in low light. Yes, the AI denoising in DXO can make a good image better. It can also make a horrible image passable. Here is a horrible image I shot in dim light with a 2014 MFT camera at 25600 ISO (NOT recommended), followed by the same image processed with DXO PL5's DeepPrime. That is still not a good image, but it's reasonably passable to memorialize an occasion.

If you have a better image to start with that only has some excess noise, DeepPrime can clean it up nicely.

Click to expand...

Look at the eye lashes. Typical noise reduction blurring.

Morris