Noise and your workflow

[gurtch]

I am in process to have my first print made on metal. It is an image made with a GFX 100S. I I am getting a 24”x32 which needs no up sizing. Please see the enclosed queries regarding workflow and noise. Dan owns the print shop making my image.

Thanks all very much

Dave in NJ

See below:

Thanks Dan. Very, very helpful.
TO ALL HELPFUL FOLKS HERE: what is your typical workflow for printing?
Mine is
1. Develop raw files using DXO Photolab 8. Applies lens fault corrections, and allows other tweaks to the image
2. Use Photoshop to dodge, burn, replace sky, add gulls, etc.
3. Apply Capture Sharpening. Up res if necessary. Apply Output Sharpening
4. Print via inkjet
Dan has noticed on my non enlarged file I sent him for metal printing, that there is noise, especially in the sky area. I made full sized ink jet prints, and never really noticed it, but Dan said dye sublimation printer drivers behave a little differently and recommended I think about an additional step of Noise reduction. I have Topaz Photo AI and Topaz Gigapixel, both of which have noise reduction. But I have read great things about DXO Deep Prime noise reduction built into Photolab. When I tried to use it, it was greyed out (not available). It turns out it only works on RAW files. It means I need to build that step into my work flow very early on. When I combine skies or birds in flight, I needed to build in noise reduction very early on (too late for that)!
Thanks all
Dave

 

[JimKasson]

I am in process to have my first print made on metal. It is an image made with a GFX 100S. I I am getting a 24”x32 which needs no up sizing. Please see the enclosed queries regarding workflow and noise. Dan owns the print shop making my image.

Thanks all very much

Dave in NJ

See below:

Thanks Dan. Very, very helpful.
TO ALL HELPFUL FOLKS HERE: what is your typical workflow for printing?
Mine is
1. Develop raw files using DXO Photolab 8. Applies lens fault corrections, and allows other tweaks to the image
2. Use Photoshop to dodge, burn, replace sky, add gulls, etc.
3. Apply Capture Sharpening. Up res if necessary. Apply Output Sharpening
4. Print via inkjet
Dan has noticed on my non enlarged file I sent him for metal printing, that there is noise, especially in the sky area. I made full sized ink jet prints, and never really noticed it, but Dan said dye sublimation printer drivers behave a little differently and recommended I think about an additional step of Noise reduction. I have Topaz Photo AI and Topaz Gigapixel, both of which have noise reduction. But I have read great things about DXO Deep Prime noise reduction built into Photolab. When I tried to use it, it was greyed out (not available). It turns out it only works on RAW files. It means I need to build that step into my work flow very early on. When I combine skies or birds in flight, I needed to build in noise reduction very early on (too late for that)!
Thanks all
Dave

I would denoise during step 2.

 

[SrMi]

I am in process to have my first print made on metal. It is an image made with a GFX 100S. I I am getting a 24”x32 which needs no up sizing. Please see the enclosed queries regarding workflow and noise. Dan owns the print shop making my image.

Thanks all very much

Dave in NJ

See below:

Thanks Dan. Very, very helpful.
TO ALL HELPFUL FOLKS HERE: what is your typical workflow for printing?
Mine is
1. Develop raw files using DXO Photolab 8. Applies lens fault corrections, and allows other tweaks to the image
2. Use Photoshop to dodge, burn, replace sky, add gulls, etc.
3. Apply Capture Sharpening. Up res if necessary. Apply Output Sharpening
4. Print via inkjet
Dan has noticed on my non enlarged file I sent him for metal printing, that there is noise, especially in the sky area. I made full sized ink jet prints, and never really noticed it, but Dan said dye sublimation printer drivers behave a little differently and recommended I think about an additional step of Noise reduction. I have Topaz Photo AI and Topaz Gigapixel, both of which have noise reduction. But I have read great things about DXO Deep Prime noise reduction built into Photolab. When I tried to use it, it was greyed out (not available). It turns out it only works on RAW files. It means I need to build that step into my work flow very early on. When I combine skies or birds in flight, I needed to build in noise reduction very early on (too late for that)!
Thanks all
Dave

From Adobe:

Denoise Demystified | Adobe Blog

Get a closer look at Denoise, our latest AI-powered feature for Lightroom and Camera Raw, explained by Adobe Fellow and ACR team member, Eric Chan. “From the ACR team” is a blog series that brings you insights directly from the team that builds the imaging features for Lightroom, Lightroom...

blog.adobe.com

"Order matters. I recommend applying Denoise early in the workflow, before healing and masking. AI-driven, image-based features such as Content-Aware Remove and Select Subject can be affected by noise, so it’s best to use those features on a clean starting point."

 

[JimKasson]

I am in process to have my first print made on metal. It is an image made with a GFX 100S. I I am getting a 24”x32 which needs no up sizing. Please see the enclosed queries regarding workflow and noise. Dan owns the print shop making my image.

Thanks all very much

Dave in NJ

See below:

Thanks Dan. Very, very helpful.
TO ALL HELPFUL FOLKS HERE: what is your typical workflow for printing?
Mine is
1. Develop raw files using DXO Photolab 8. Applies lens fault corrections, and allows other tweaks to the image
2. Use Photoshop to dodge, burn, replace sky, add gulls, etc.
3. Apply Capture Sharpening. Up res if necessary. Apply Output Sharpening
4. Print via inkjet
Dan has noticed on my non enlarged file I sent him for metal printing, that there is noise, especially in the sky area. I made full sized ink jet prints, and never really noticed it, but Dan said dye sublimation printer drivers behave a little differently and recommended I think about an additional step of Noise reduction. I have Topaz Photo AI and Topaz Gigapixel, both of which have noise reduction. But I have read great things about DXO Deep Prime noise reduction built into Photolab. When I tried to use it, it was greyed out (not available). It turns out it only works on RAW files. It means I need to build that step into my work flow very early on. When I combine skies or birds in flight, I needed to build in noise reduction very early on (too late for that)!
Thanks all
Dave

From Adobe:

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2023/04/18/denoise-demystified

"Order matters. I recommend applying Denoise early in the workflow, before healing and masking. AI-driven, image-based features such as Content-Aware Remove and Select Subject can be affected by noise, so it’s best to use those features on a clean starting point."

If using Lr, I agree.

 

[left eye]

All I can say is that the larger I print (up to wall size) the more noise/grain I add - avoids the digital plastic look. Grain is a huge positive for me, though I appreciate not for review sites - which then (I believe unjustly) colours other people’s views on noise.

I wonder what dye-sub and their RIPs do to make noise look bad?

 

[AlanG1]

In addition to the other comments, keep in mind that if there is noise in the image when you sharpen, you will be sharpening that noise making it look worse, so I recommend any noise reduction be done prior to your capture sharpening step.

It has always been recommended to me to do noise reduction as early in your editing process as possible.

 

[SrMi]

All I can say is that the larger I print (up to wall size) the more noise/grain I add - avoids the digital plastic look. Grain is a huge positive for me, though I appreciate not for review sites - which then (I believe unjustly) colours other people’s views on noise.

I wonder what dye-sub and their RIPs do to make noise look bad?

In my book, noise and grain are two different things. Grain emulates the filmic look and can be pleasing. Digital noise is less appealing.

 

[left eye]

All I can say is that the larger I print (up to wall size) the more noise/grain I add - avoids the digital plastic look. Grain is a huge positive for me, though I appreciate not for review sites - which then (I believe unjustly) colours other people’s views on noise.

I wonder what dye-sub and their RIPs do to make noise look bad?

In my book, noise and grain are two different things. Grain emulates the filmic look and can be pleasing. Digital noise is less appealing.

Digital noise has become more ‘filmic’ these days, and noise is much less present than it used to be. Worse than noise is plastic smudged NR, alongside sharpened edges.

If noise is an issue I’d still go for reducing it only by about 1/2 then add grain (for which I use a blurred noise-adding layer in PS which I have full control over - not a preset grain film pack thing - which are usually too coarse for my liking).

 

[SterlingBjorndahl]

Since your printer mentioned sky noise specifically and since you're working in Photoshop you have the option to Select -> Sky and denoise just the sky. Then optionally you can invert the selection and do your sharpening on non-sky areas.

If it's tricky work, duplicate the base layer before you sharpen so you can mask precisely if some areas get over-sharpened.

I use the old "Noiseware" denoiser which allows me to adjust which colors and tones are denoised by how much. For skies I created a preset called "Sky" that heavily denoises blues and cyans in particular, since "blue channel noise" is a particular problem with Bayer sensors (or so I have read). Unfortunately if foliage is any part of my selection it can get turned to mush, hence my frequent use of Select -> Sky anyway.

Best wishes,
Sterling
--
Lens Grit

 

[gurtch]

I am in process to have my first print made on metal. It is an image made with a GFX 100S. I I am getting a 24”x32 which needs no up sizing. Please see the enclosed queries regarding workflow and noise. Dan owns the print shop making my image.

Thanks all very much

Dave in NJ

See below:

Thanks Dan. Very, very helpful.
TO ALL HELPFUL FOLKS HERE: what is your typical workflow for printing?
Mine is
1. Develop raw files using DXO Photolab 8. Applies lens fault corrections, and allows other tweaks to the image
2. Use Photoshop to dodge, burn, replace sky, add gulls, etc.
3. Apply Capture Sharpening. Up res if necessary. Apply Output Sharpening
4. Print via inkjet
Dan has noticed on my non enlarged file I sent him for metal printing, that there is noise, especially in the sky area. I made full sized ink jet prints, and never really noticed it, but Dan said dye sublimation printer drivers behave a little differently and recommended I think about an additional step of Noise reduction. I have Topaz Photo AI and Topaz Gigapixel, both of which have noise reduction. But I have read great things about DXO Deep Prime noise reduction built into Photolab. When I tried to use it, it was greyed out (not available). It turns out it only works on RAW files. It means I need to build that step into my work flow very early on. When I combine skies or birds in flight, I needed to build in noise reduction very early on (too late for that)!
Thanks all
Dave

I would denoise during step 2.

Thanks all.

Jim: Step 2 is apparently too late. Step 1 converts from RAW to TIF. Opening the TIF again in DXO Photolab 8 does not allow advanced Noise Reduction, such as "Prime" or "Deep Prime,", and "Deep Prime XD/XD2s"

 

[JimKasson]

I am in process to have my first print made on metal. It is an image made with a GFX 100S. I I am getting a 24”x32 which needs no up sizing. Please see the enclosed queries regarding workflow and noise. Dan owns the print shop making my image.

Thanks all very much

Dave in NJ

See below:

Thanks Dan. Very, very helpful.
TO ALL HELPFUL FOLKS HERE: what is your typical workflow for printing?
Mine is
1. Develop raw files using DXO Photolab 8. Applies lens fault corrections, and allows other tweaks to the image
2. Use Photoshop to dodge, burn, replace sky, add gulls, etc.
3. Apply Capture Sharpening. Up res if necessary. Apply Output Sharpening
4. Print via inkjet
Dan has noticed on my non enlarged file I sent him for metal printing, that there is noise, especially in the sky area. I made full sized ink jet prints, and never really noticed it, but Dan said dye sublimation printer drivers behave a little differently and recommended I think about an additional step of Noise reduction. I have Topaz Photo AI and Topaz Gigapixel, both of which have noise reduction. But I have read great things about DXO Deep Prime noise reduction built into Photolab. When I tried to use it, it was greyed out (not available). It turns out it only works on RAW files. It means I need to build that step into my work flow very early on. When I combine skies or birds in flight, I needed to build in noise reduction very early on (too late for that)!
Thanks all
Dave

I would denoise during step 2.

Thanks all.

Jim: Step 2 is apparently too late. Step 1 converts from RAW to TIF. Opening the TIF again in DXO Photolab 8 does not allow advanced Noise Reduction, such as "Prime" or "Deep Prime,", and "Deep Prime XD/XD2s"

You can denoise in Ps through masks.

 

[JimKasson]

All I can say is that the larger I print (up to wall size) the more noise/grain I add - avoids the digital plastic look. Grain is a huge positive for me, though I appreciate not for review sites - which then (I believe unjustly) colours other people’s views on noise.

I wonder what dye-sub and their RIPs do to make noise look bad?

In my book, noise and grain are two different things. Grain emulates the filmic look and can be pleasing. Digital noise is less appealing.

Digital noise has become more ‘filmic’ these days

What do you mean by that? Digital noise is mostly Gaussian. FIlm grain has more low frequency components. There can be low frequency sensor noise that is more visually objectionable because of the human contrast sensitivity function. Is that what you mean?

, and noise is much less present than it used to be. Worse than noise is plastic smudged NR, alongside sharpened edges.

If noise is an issue I’d still go for reducing it only by about 1/2 then add grain (for which I use a blurred noise-adding layer in PS which I have full control over - not a preset grain film pack thing - which are usually too coarse for my liking).

--
https://blog.kasson.com

 

[gurtch]

I went back and tried using Topaz Photo AI and WAS able to use their noise reduction on the TIFF file. Here are Three screen shots.
1. My typical workflow Capture Sharpen and Output Sharpen using Photokit Sharpen (long discontinued)
2. Topaz Denoise applied, nothing else.
3.Topaz Denoise and PK Output sharpen applied. This seems to be the best. Screen Shots were with image enlarged to Actual Pixels
Thanks again
Dave

 

[gurtch]

The actual picture looks like this:

 

[gurtch]

Over on another forum regarding Noise vs Sharpness, etc, the poster said this (My image was made at ISO 400):

"An unrelated minor note is that GFX100S has a dual gain sensor from ISO 500. Therefore the dynamic range at ISO 500 (10.84) is better than at ISO 400 (10.55). The latter is the same as the dynamic range at IS 640 (10.55). Basically, when possible, don't shoot at ISO 400".

A surprise to me.

Dave

 

[left eye]

All I can say is that the larger I print (up to wall size) the more noise/grain I add - avoids the digital plastic look. Grain is a huge positive for me, though I appreciate not for review sites - which then (I believe unjustly) colours other people’s views on noise.

I wonder what dye-sub and their RIPs do to make noise look bad?

In my book, noise and grain are two different things. Grain emulates the filmic look and can be pleasing. Digital noise is less appealing.

Digital noise has become more ‘filmic’ these days

What do you mean by that? Digital noise is mostly Gaussian. FIlm grain has more low frequency components. There can be low frequency sensor noise that is more visually objectionable because of the human contrast sensitivity function. Is that what you mean?

Colour noise used to be more noticeable than luminance noise (20 years ago), large bright colour blotches.

Now colour and luminance noise are about equal, maybe even colour noise taking a back seat, looks more 'natural' - like grain, than 'digital video'.

, and noise is much less present than it used to be. Worse than noise is plastic smudged NR, alongside sharpened edges.

If noise is an issue I’d still go for reducing it only by about 1/2 then add grain (for which I use a blurred noise-adding layer in PS which I have full control over - not a preset grain film pack thing - which are usually too coarse for my liking).

 

[JimKasson]

All I can say is that the larger I print (up to wall size) the more noise/grain I add - avoids the digital plastic look. Grain is a huge positive for me, though I appreciate not for review sites - which then (I believe unjustly) colours other people’s views on noise.

I wonder what dye-sub and their RIPs do to make noise look bad?

In my book, noise and grain are two different things. Grain emulates the filmic look and can be pleasing. Digital noise is less appealing.

Digital noise has become more ‘filmic’ these days

What do you mean by that? Digital noise is mostly Gaussian. FIlm grain has more low frequency components. There can be low frequency sensor noise that is more visually objectionable because of the human contrast sensitivity function. Is that what you mean?

Colour noise used to be more noticeable than luminance noise (20 years ago), large bright colour blotches.

With CMOS sensors?

Now colour and luminance noise are about equal, maybe even colour noise taking a back seat, looks more 'natural' - like grain, than 'digital video'.

What's changed?

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

Well, the Kodak CMOS 14 MP wasn't a good replacement for their 6 MP CCD. That one tended to be a bit blotchy such that I chose not to buy one at the time. Good thing, too as that 14 MP sensor had more issues to come....

I did buy a Canon 1Ds instead but then found I preferred that 6 MP Kodak CCD over the Canon 1Ds 11 MP CMOS. I did like the higher resolution for printing, so I sold the Canon and bought a 16 MP CCD Pro Back and a Contax 645.

Stan

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

It has been a topic around here since the early days of the sensor.

I tend to jump ISO in full stops and so go from 200 to 500 and skip 400....

Stan

 

[SeeingSomeThingsMissingMany]

Hi,

It has been a topic around here since the early days of the sensor.

I tend to jump ISO in full stops and so go from 200 to 500 and skip 400....

Stan

Been umming and aahing which Gfx having handled them all in photography stores. Settled on original 100 even though 100S has useful features, 50R I can make look "less intimidating" "more friendly" out and about in London. Will still take me another perhaps 4 5 years to save up mpb with warranty 100 + lenses + adapter for other glass.

--
Photography after all is interplay of light alongside perspective.