DxO PhotoLab 2 Noise Reduction

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
James Stirling
James Stirling Senior Member • Posts: 4,702
Re: DxO PhotoLab 2 Noise Reduction

I know a lot of folk here swear by DXO prime but I don't see it any better than other NR software options . When you look at the posted prime example at all closely it looks like a cartoon . I hate high ISO  noise so I am possibly an over harsh judge Unless you are forced by circumstances to go down that dark and noisy road avoiding it is the best option

Given the excellent IBIS and a static subject { I know you were just picking a handy test subject } you could easily have shot this 4 stops lower at 1600 ISO or better still used a tripod and shot at base ISO

-- hide signature --

Jim Stirling
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

 James Stirling's gear list:James Stirling's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Sony a7R III Nikon Z7 +13 more
nboyer Veteran Member • Posts: 5,130
Re: DxO PhotoLab 2 Noise Reduction
1

Jim - Are you up for a little fun? :-).  If you provide a high ISO raw file, I'd like to give it a shot with DxO and you can convert with whatever you prefer and we can put it up for people to choose which they prefer.  All done in good fun of course.  Cheers.  -Norm

James Stirling wrote:

I know a lot of folk here swear by DXO prime but I don't see it any better than other NR software options . When you look at the posted prime example at all closely it looks like a cartoon . I hate high ISO noise so I am possibly an over harsh judge Unless you are forced by circumstances to go down that dark and noisy road avoiding it is the best option

Given the excellent IBIS and a static subject { I know you were just picking a handy test subject } you could easily have shot this 4 stops lower at 1600 ISO or better still used a tripod and shot at base ISO

 nboyer's gear list:nboyer's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon Coolpix A Canon PowerShot G7 X Leica X (Typ 113) Leica M8.2 +6 more
James Stirling
James Stirling Senior Member • Posts: 4,702
Re: DxO PhotoLab 2 Noise Reduction

nboyer wrote:

Jim - Are you up for a little fun? :-). If you provide a high ISO raw file, I'd like to give it a shot with DxO and you can convert with whatever you prefer and we can put it up for people to choose which they prefer. All done in good fun of course. Cheers. -Norm

Norm, I actually do not have any high ISO shots and rather than take a contrived one why don't we use one of the DPreview samples. I was just looking at the E-M1X samples and this murky image is amongst them .

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/7114239063/olympus-e-m1x-sample-gallery/3244527197

Challenge on ?  though given I avoid high ISO like the plague I think I already at a disadvantage

James Stirling wrote:

I know a lot of folk here swear by DXO prime but I don't see it any better than other NR software options . When you look at the posted prime example at all closely it looks like a cartoon . I hate high ISO noise so I am possibly an over harsh judge Unless you are forced by circumstances to go down that dark and noisy road avoiding it is the best option

Given the excellent IBIS and a static subject { I know you were just picking a handy test subject } you could easily have shot this 4 stops lower at 1600 ISO or better still used a tripod and shot at base ISO

-- hide signature --

Jim Stirling
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

 James Stirling's gear list:James Stirling's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Sony a7R III Nikon Z7 +13 more
nboyer Veteran Member • Posts: 5,130
You Got Me Jim...

Well, okay, you got me Jim :-).  DxO does not yet support the E-M1X.  Dang it.  -Norm

James Stirling wrote:

nboyer wrote:

Jim - Are you up for a little fun? :-). If you provide a high ISO raw file, I'd like to give it a shot with DxO and you can convert with whatever you prefer and we can put it up for people to choose which they prefer. All done in good fun of course. Cheers. -Norm

Norm, I actually do not have any high ISO shots and rather than take a contrived one why don't we use one of the DPreview samples. I was just looking at the E-M1X samples and this murky image is amongst them .

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/7114239063/olympus-e-m1x-sample-gallery/3244527197

Challenge on ? though given I avoid high ISO like the plague I think I already at a disadvantage

James Stirling wrote:

I know a lot of folk here swear by DXO prime but I don't see it any better than other NR software options . When you look at the posted prime example at all closely it looks like a cartoon . I hate high ISO noise so I am possibly an over harsh judge Unless you are forced by circumstances to go down that dark and noisy road avoiding it is the best option

Given the excellent IBIS and a static subject { I know you were just picking a handy test subject } you could easily have shot this 4 stops lower at 1600 ISO or better still used a tripod and shot at base ISO

 nboyer's gear list:nboyer's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon Coolpix A Canon PowerShot G7 X Leica X (Typ 113) Leica M8.2 +6 more
James Stirling
James Stirling Senior Member • Posts: 4,702
Re: You Got Me Jim...

nboyer wrote:

Well, okay, you got me Jim :-). DxO does not yet support the E-M1X. Dang it. -Norm

Change of plan then I was already half way through my masterclass in NR { or not } lol

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/2955274204/olympus-om-d-e-m1-mark-ii-iceland-sample-gallery/0062532843

James Stirling wrote:

nboyer wrote:

Jim - Are you up for a little fun? :-). If you provide a high ISO raw file, I'd like to give it a shot with DxO and you can convert with whatever you prefer and we can put it up for people to choose which they prefer. All done in good fun of course. Cheers. -Norm

Norm, I actually do not have any high ISO shots and rather than take a contrived one why don't we use one of the DPreview samples. I was just looking at the E-M1X samples and this murky image is amongst them .

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/7114239063/olympus-e-m1x-sample-gallery/3244527197

Challenge on ? though given I avoid high ISO like the plague I think I already at a disadvantage

James Stirling wrote:

I know a lot of folk here swear by DXO prime but I don't see it any better than other NR software options . When you look at the posted prime example at all closely it looks like a cartoon . I hate high ISO noise so I am possibly an over harsh judge Unless you are forced by circumstances to go down that dark and noisy road avoiding it is the best option

Given the excellent IBIS and a static subject { I know you were just picking a handy test subject } you could easily have shot this 4 stops lower at 1600 ISO or better still used a tripod and shot at base ISO

-- hide signature --

Jim Stirling
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

 James Stirling's gear list:James Stirling's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Sony a7R III Nikon Z7 +13 more
rsf3127 Regular Member • Posts: 304
Almost forgot

It is the only software that corrects automatically the awful green cast in lifted shadows of Sony câmeras.

 rsf3127's gear list:rsf3127's gear list
Sony Alpha DSLR-A700 Sony a6000 Olympus OM-D E-M10 II Tamron SP AF 180mm F/3.5 Di LD (IF) Macro Sony DT 35mm F1.8 SAM +14 more
nboyer Veteran Member • Posts: 5,130
Re: Here's My Quick Attempt...

...what do you think, Jim?  If we had something with finer details, like high ISO hair detail, I think one would see how well the PRIME NR works.  Cheers,  -Norm

James Stirling wrote:

nboyer wrote:

Well, okay, you got me Jim :-). DxO does not yet support the E-M1X. Dang it. -Norm

Change of plan then I was already half way through my masterclass in NR { or not } lol

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/2955274204/olympus-om-d-e-m1-mark-ii-iceland-sample-gallery/0062532843

James Stirling wrote:

nboyer wrote:

Jim - Are you up for a little fun? :-). If you provide a high ISO raw file, I'd like to give it a shot with DxO and you can convert with whatever you prefer and we can put it up for people to choose which they prefer. All done in good fun of course. Cheers. -Norm

Norm, I actually do not have any high ISO shots and rather than take a contrived one why don't we use one of the DPreview samples. I was just looking at the E-M1X samples and this murky image is amongst them .

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/7114239063/olympus-e-m1x-sample-gallery/3244527197

Challenge on ? though given I avoid high ISO like the plague I think I already at a disadvantage

James Stirling wrote:

I know a lot of folk here swear by DXO prime but I don't see it any better than other NR software options . When you look at the posted prime example at all closely it looks like a cartoon . I hate high ISO noise so I am possibly an over harsh judge Unless you are forced by circumstances to go down that dark and noisy road avoiding it is the best option

Given the excellent IBIS and a static subject { I know you were just picking a handy test subject } you could easily have shot this 4 stops lower at 1600 ISO or better still used a tripod and shot at base ISO

 nboyer's gear list:nboyer's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon Coolpix A Canon PowerShot G7 X Leica X (Typ 113) Leica M8.2 +6 more
nboyer Veteran Member • Posts: 5,130
Re: One More...

Here is one from DPR's review of the E-M1 MKII, it was in their sample gallery.  This one has fine hair.  Cheers.  -Norm

nboyer wrote:

...what do you think, Jim? If we had something with finer details, like high ISO hair detail, I think one would see how well the PRIME NR works. Cheers, -Norm

James Stirling wrote:

nboyer wrote:

Well, okay, you got me Jim :-). DxO does not yet support the E-M1X. Dang it. -Norm

Change of plan then I was already half way through my masterclass in NR { or not } lol

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/2955274204/olympus-om-d-e-m1-mark-ii-iceland-sample-gallery/0062532843

James Stirling wrote:

nboyer wrote:

Jim - Are you up for a little fun? :-). If you provide a high ISO raw file, I'd like to give it a shot with DxO and you can convert with whatever you prefer and we can put it up for people to choose which they prefer. All done in good fun of course. Cheers. -Norm

Norm, I actually do not have any high ISO shots and rather than take a contrived one why don't we use one of the DPreview samples. I was just looking at the E-M1X samples and this murky image is amongst them .

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/7114239063/olympus-e-m1x-sample-gallery/3244527197

Challenge on ? though given I avoid high ISO like the plague I think I already at a disadvantage

James Stirling wrote:

I know a lot of folk here swear by DXO prime but I don't see it any better than other NR software options . When you look at the posted prime example at all closely it looks like a cartoon . I hate high ISO noise so I am possibly an over harsh judge Unless you are forced by circumstances to go down that dark and noisy road avoiding it is the best option

Given the excellent IBIS and a static subject { I know you were just picking a handy test subject } you could easily have shot this 4 stops lower at 1600 ISO or better still used a tripod and shot at base ISO

 nboyer's gear list:nboyer's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Nikon Coolpix A Canon PowerShot G7 X Leica X (Typ 113) Leica M8.2 +6 more
James Stirling
James Stirling Senior Member • Posts: 4,702
Re: One More...

nboyer wrote:

Here is one from DPR's review of the E-M1 MKII, it was in their sample gallery. This one has fine hair. Cheers. -Norm

I will give that one a quick try before I go to bed

nboyer wrote:

...what do you think, Jim? If we had something with finer details, like high ISO hair detail, I think one would see how well the PRIME NR works. Cheers, -Norm

James Stirling wrote:

nboyer wrote:

Well, okay, you got me Jim :-). DxO does not yet support the E-M1X. Dang it. -Norm

Change of plan then I was already half way through my masterclass in NR { or not } lol

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/2955274204/olympus-om-d-e-m1-mark-ii-iceland-sample-gallery/0062532843

James Stirling wrote:

nboyer wrote:

Jim - Are you up for a little fun? :-). If you provide a high ISO raw file, I'd like to give it a shot with DxO and you can convert with whatever you prefer and we can put it up for people to choose which they prefer. All done in good fun of course. Cheers. -Norm

Norm, I actually do not have any high ISO shots and rather than take a contrived one why don't we use one of the DPreview samples. I was just looking at the E-M1X samples and this murky image is amongst them .

https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/7114239063/olympus-e-m1x-sample-gallery/3244527197

Challenge on ? though given I avoid high ISO like the plague I think I already at a disadvantage

James Stirling wrote:

I know a lot of folk here swear by DXO prime but I don't see it any better than other NR software options . When you look at the posted prime example at all closely it looks like a cartoon . I hate high ISO noise so I am possibly an over harsh judge Unless you are forced by circumstances to go down that dark and noisy road avoiding it is the best option

Given the excellent IBIS and a static subject { I know you were just picking a handy test subject } you could easily have shot this 4 stops lower at 1600 ISO or better still used a tripod and shot at base ISO

-- hide signature --

Jim Stirling
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

 James Stirling's gear list:James Stirling's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Sony a7R III Nikon Z7 +13 more
James Stirling
James Stirling Senior Member • Posts: 4,702
Re: One More...

-- hide signature --

Jim Stirling
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

 James Stirling's gear list:James Stirling's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Sony a7R III Nikon Z7 +13 more
Adielle
Adielle Senior Member • Posts: 1,467
Re: One More...
1

Your version has the typical terrible jagged artifacts that Prime avoids. Other than that, too much sharpening.

bluehighwayman Contributing Member • Posts: 586
DXO NIK Collection compare to DxO PhotoLab 2 Noise Reduction

How does the noise reduction of the DXO NIK Collection compare to photolab 2?  I bought the NIK and am thinking of going to photolab 2 so I can drop my subscription to photoshop.  Would a combination of NIK and Photolab 2 be a good way to go?

 bluehighwayman's gear list:bluehighwayman's gear list
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 Olympus 12-100mm F4.0 +2 more
Adielle
Adielle Senior Member • Posts: 1,467
Re: DXO NIK Collection compare to DxO PhotoLab 2 Noise Reduction
2

bluehighwayman wrote:

Would a combination of NIK and Photolab 2 be a good way to go?

No. The DxO Prime noise reduction is always better (and the best there is) and adding more noise reduction after it can only make things worse. If you need noise reduction for things other than RAW files, the Nik stuff may be useful, but it doesn't make sense to use any other noise reduction on RAW files processed with PhotoLab.

TN Args
TN Args Veteran Member • Posts: 8,124
Re: One More...

Adielle wrote:

Your version has the typical terrible jagged artifacts that Prime avoids. Other than that, too much sharpening.

Show us the two side by side, wasn't that the point?

 TN Args's gear list:TN Args's gear list
Sigma dp0 Quattro Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +7 more
bluehighwayman Contributing Member • Posts: 586
Re: DXO NIK Collection compare to DxO PhotoLab 2 Noise Reduction

Adielle wrote:

bluehighwayman wrote:

Would a combination of NIK and Photolab 2 be a good way to go?

No. The DxO Prime noise reduction is always better (and the best there is) and adding more noise reduction after it can only make things worse. If you need noise reduction for things other than RAW files, the Nik stuff may be useful, but it doesn't make sense to use any other noise reduction on RAW files processed with PhotoLab.

Thanks for the reply!  I wasn't thinking of using both programs for noise reduction but rather just in terms of combining the best of the two as an alternative to photoshop.  Wanted to know before I spend $200 on Photolab.

 bluehighwayman's gear list:bluehighwayman's gear list
Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Olympus M.Zuiko ED 75-300mm 1:4.8-6.7 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17mm F1.8 Olympus 12-100mm F4.0 +2 more
Rokey Regular Member • Posts: 328
Re: DXO NIK Collection compare to DxO PhotoLab 2 Noise Reduction
4

Don’t spend $200 on PhotoLab   They regularly have sales of 30% or more, just wait for the next one to come along.

But then buy it!

-- hide signature --

Chris

Canasonic Junior Member • Posts: 33
Re: DXO NIK Collection compare to DxO PhotoLab 2 Noise Reduction

I agree with others here, DXO PRIME is the best I've seen regarding noise reduction. I would offer one setting tweak for using PRIME NR. I recommend that you set the noise reduction slider to 35 when using PRIME. I notice that 35 retains more detail and has less of the undesirable smoothing effect when compared to the default setting (usually 40).

Also, as some others have mentioned... DXO often runs sales. Get on their email list and they will notify you of sales and give you pre-order discounts when new software versions are being released.

James Stirling
James Stirling Senior Member • Posts: 4,702
Re: One More...

Adielle wrote:

Your version has the typical terrible jagged artifacts that Prime avoids. Other than that, too much sharpening.

I didn't add any sharpening beyond whatever default ACR applies Why not play along and show me how much better DXO does , I am trying out 2.2 at the moment

-- hide signature --

Jim Stirling
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams

 James Stirling's gear list:James Stirling's gear list
Sony RX100 IV Sony a7R II Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX8 Sony a7R III Nikon Z7 +13 more
TN Args
TN Args Veteran Member • Posts: 8,124
Re: One More...

James Stirling wrote:

Adielle wrote:

Your version has the typical terrible jagged artifacts that Prime avoids. Other than that, too much sharpening.

I didn't add any sharpening beyond whatever default ACR applies Why not play along and show me how much better DXO does , I am trying out 2.2 at the moment

I couldn't actually see any 'terrible jagged artefacts' -- why I asked for side-by-side examples too.

(Also, I found it very frustrating to use that 'hair' image as an example, almost impossible to know what is in focus and what is blurred due to out-of-focus vs NR)

 TN Args's gear list:TN Args's gear list
Sigma dp0 Quattro Panasonic Lumix DMC-GX7 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Panasonic Lumix G 14mm F2.5 ASPH +7 more
Adielle
Adielle Senior Member • Posts: 1,467
Re: One More...

TN Args wrote:

James Stirling wrote:

Adielle wrote:

Your version has the typical terrible jagged artifacts that Prime avoids. Other than that, too much sharpening.

I didn't add any sharpening beyond whatever default ACR applies Why not play along and show me how much better DXO does , I am trying out 2.2 at the moment

I couldn't actually see any 'terrible jagged artefacts' -- why I asked for side-by-side examples too.

Here's a render from PhotoLab. I used Adobe's E-M1 II DNG profile. As always, "Smart Lighting" Off. It's not hard to see what I mean, but I'll include a side by side picture as well.

Left: Adobe, Right: DxO

PhotoLab 2, Adobe's DCP profile, no geometric distortion correction (matches the ACR render)

(Also, I found it very frustrating to use that 'hair' image as an example, almost impossible to know what is in focus and what is blurred due to out-of-focus vs NR)

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads