Several photos with grain/noise

[Dallas]

I had to shoot some pretty important shots on the max ISO for my camera
and quite a few came out with nasty grain & noise:

http://tinyurl.com/d5vmlm4

I'm using Photoshop 6 to try to fix them, but Filter>Noise>Median just
tends to melt the pixels into each other and turn sharp things a blob.

This software looks pretty cool.. but $79 bucks is kind stiff for a
utility.
http://www.topazlabs.com/denoise/


Someone suggested downloading the trial version of Adobe Lightroom and
give it a try for
30 days.

Any ideas or opinions?


--
Dallas

[Alan Browne]

If it's free to try, you'll be the best judge for your needs.

With the image above (does she have a sister? !), at print size, the
grain/noise will be far less.

YMMV but the denoise (several) packages I've tried always removed detail
where I wanted it preserved. In some cases areas of texture were
rendered textureless.

--
"Civilization is the limitless multiplication of unnecessary necessities."
-Samuel Clemens.

[Dallas]

Alan Browne wrote:

> With the image above (does she have a sister? !)

Ha, yes in fact... it was her sister's wedding I was shooting.
(candids)

> YMMV but the denoise (several) packages I've tried always removed
> detail where I wanted it preserved. In some cases areas of texture
> were rendered textureless.

I guess I'll find out, I'm downloading the trial DeNoise now. They say
it's a Photoshop plug in, let's see if it plugs into PS6. :- )


--
Dallas

[Alan Browne]

On 2012-05-23 17:13 , Dallas wrote:
> Alan Browne wrote:
>
>> With the image above (does she have a sister? !)
>
> Ha, yes in fact... it was her sister's wedding I was shooting.
> (candids)

Damn!

>
>> YMMV but the denoise (several) packages I've tried always removed
>> detail where I wanted it preserved. In some cases areas of texture
>> were rendered textureless.
>
> I guess I'll find out, I'm downloading the trial DeNoise now. They say
> it's a Photoshop plug in, let's see if it plugs into PS6. :- )

Let us know. Indeed a B4 and after of the prior shot would be interesting.

[Dallas]

Dallas wrote:

> I guess I'll find out, I'm downloading the trial DeNoise now.

What a rip off! The website say:
"Enjoy a fully-functional 30-day trial of any of the Topaz programs for
Mac or Windows."

The installer says:
"All functions are available except the ability to save the processed
image."

WELL THEN, IT'S NOT EXACTLY "FULLY-FUNCTIONAL" IS IT!

It'll be a cold day in hell before I buy their products now, can I have
my 40 minutes back?


--
Dallas

[Charles E. Hardwidge]

"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:e4WdneMwwuOVzSDS...@earthlink.com...

I ran your image through Lightroom 4 and it cleared the noise with a trace
loss of detail but nothing noticeable unless you were peeping. Topaz DeNoise
5.01 seemed a bit plasticky to me by comparison but that may be because I'm
no expert with the controls.

--
Charles E. Hardwidge

[Alan Browne]

You could test it and take screen grabs to show us.

[Savageduck]

I ran your file through NIK Dfine 2.0 in CS5, selectively applying the
noise reduction to the skin. Here is the result.
< http://db.tt/8Jz2goOt >

NIK has a 15 day trial and it is also part of their complete collection
which they have on sale from time to time.
< http://www.niksoftware.com/dfine/usa/entry.php >

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Savageduck]

BTW: here is an A/B comparison:
< http://db.tt/AgN76vPr >


--
Regards,

Savageduck

[otter]

On May 23, 4:00 pm, "Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote:
> I had to shoot some pretty important shots on the max ISO for my camera
> and quite a few came out with nasty grain & noise:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/d5vmlm4
>
> I'm using Photoshop 6 to try to fix them, but Filter>Noise>Median just
> tends to melt the pixels into each other and turn sharp things a blob.
>
> This software looks pretty cool..  but $79 bucks is kind stiff for a

> utility.http://www.topazlabs.com/denoise/

>
> Someone suggested downloading the trial version of Adobe Lightroom and
> give it a try for
> 30 days.

Here's my attempt with Lightroom:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkeshlear/7260033926/in/photostream/lightbox/

[otter]

Her eyes look spooky.

[Savageduck]

Damn! So they do.
I need to try that again. ;-)

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Savageduck]

OK!
Here is try #2 with non-spooky eyes.

< http://db.tt/nwBj7W59 >
...and the comparison:
< http://db.tt/z8eLDuq7 >


--
Regards,

Savageduck

[otter]

The eyes look better.

Here's another round of tweaks from me:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkeshlear/7261598614/in/photostream/lightbox/

[Dallas]

Savageduck wrote:

> < http://db.tt/nwBj7W59 >

Whoa... much better. The very first one you posted got rid of the
noise, but at the cost very soft focus. This one has a completely
acceptable level of sharpness. Pretty impressive.

--
Dallas

[Savageduck]

All of these noise reduction tools need a practiced and subtle hand.
For what it is worth any of the adjustment &/or effects plugins &
add-ons need to be used lightly. The first attempt is not always the
best one. With my first attempt I just went at it for a quick fix with
NIK DFine Pro 2, and the result was over done and a bit soft.

For my second attempt I used a little more restraint and care. I also
noted she had freckles on her arm and I didn't want to have those IDed
as noise. So I made a double pass with DFine Pro, first running a light
profile to the entire image. Then with a second pass I only used the
selective "skin" adjustment. That is made via a brush. I used a
reasonably soft brush and set the brush opacity to 55% and painted the
NR effect over all skin areas. Then I zoomed in and touched up
individual noisy areas which were still visible.
The result is above.

Since you have CS6 give the 15 day trial a try. You should be able to
do much better with the original files, particularly if you shot RAW.
Take a look at their videos to get a bit of guidance.

[Dallas]

otter wrote:

> Here's my attempt with Lightroom:
>
>
http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkeshlear/7260033926/in/photostream/ligh
tbox/

Maybe as good as SavageDuck's CS6/NIK output... impressive for a
lightweight graphic program.


--
Dallas

[Alan Browne]

On 2012-05-23 19:12 , Savageduck wrote:
> On 2012-05-23 14:00:56 -0700, "Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com>
> said:
>
>>
>> I had to shoot some pretty important shots on the max ISO for my camera
>> and quite a few came out with nasty grain & noise:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/d5vmlm4
>>
>> I'm using Photoshop 6 to try to fix them, but Filter>Noise>Median just
>> tends to melt the pixels into each other and turn sharp things a blob.
>>
>> This software looks pretty cool.. but $79 bucks is kind stiff for a
>> utility.
>> http://www.topazlabs.com/denoise/
>>
>>
>> Someone suggested downloading the trial version of Adobe Lightroom and
>> give it a try for
>> 30 days.
>>
>> Any ideas or opinions?
>
> I ran your file through NIK Dfine 2.0 in CS5, selectively applying the
> noise reduction to the skin. Here is the result.
> < http://db.tt/8Jz2goOt >

A little too smooth - some ladies may love it. It didn't remove grain
so much as smudge it out along with detail. Also, in that image at
least left a 3D effect of some sort.

It would be better (maybe) on the full sized original I suspect.

[Alan Browne]

Yep.

[Alan Browne]

Much better. For comparison, that's fine - just tab between the two
(one over the other).

[Savageduck]

On 2012-05-24 14:43:09 -0700, Alan Browne

<alan....@FreelunchVideotron.ca> said:

> On 2012-05-24 02:45 , Savageduck wrote:
>> On 2012-05-23 23:16:42 -0700, Savageduck
>> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> said:
>>
>>> On 2012-05-23 22:08:18 -0700, otter <bighor...@hotmail.com> said:

<< Le Snip >>

>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Her eyes look spooky.
>>>
>>> Damn! So they do.
>>> I need to try that again. ;-)
>>
>> OK!
>> Here is try #2 with non-spooky eyes.
>>
>> < http://db.tt/nwBj7W59 >
>
> Much better. For comparison, that's fine - just tab between the two
> (one over the other).

Yup! I really over worked that first version.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

[PeterN]

On 5/23/2012 5:00 PM, Dallas wrote:
>
> I had to shoot some pretty important shots on the max ISO for my camera

> and quite a few came out with nasty grain& noise:

>
> http://tinyurl.com/d5vmlm4
>
> I'm using Photoshop 6 to try to fix them, but Filter>Noise>Median just
> tends to melt the pixels into each other and turn sharp things a blob.
>
> This software looks pretty cool.. but $79 bucks is kind stiff for a
> utility.
> http://www.topazlabs.com/denoise/
>
>
> Someone suggested downloading the trial version of Adobe Lightroom and
> give it a try for
> 30 days.
>
> Any ideas or opinions?
>
>

All noise removal involves color blurring.

Try these with PS. MAKE SURE YOU DUPLICATE THE LAYER. AS OVERDOING
THINGS IS EASY.

run the surface blur filter. If you overdo it, reduce layer transparency

Go into LAB mode. create a smart object, (so you can correct the
adjustment,) try running the de-noise or surface blur filter on just the
lightness channel.



--
Peter

[otter]

Lightroom isn't quite as lightweight as you might think. It shares
the same RAW engine as Photoshop. I own both LR3 and CS5, but I use
LR3 much more often, simply because I like the interface better and
can get the job done faster - about 90% of the time. For the other
10%, it is easy to pop over to CS5 to do the work and then back.

I suppose I really should upgrade to LR4 and CS6, but will probably
wait for a Black Friday deal.

[Savageduck]

I agree LR is not lightweight at all. You might say it is a combination
of ACR & Bridge on steroids, with the ability to bounce to any other
editor such as PS at will. The added bonus is all work is
non-destructive.I don't use LR as much as I should, since the
improvements made to Bridge in CS5.

Just to clarify, I am using CS5 and have no intention of upgrading
until the advances offered are compelling enough. Right now they are
not.
I got a good LR upgrade deal via B&H, from LR2 to LR4 for $60 so I took
it. However 95% of my work is done in CS5.

I added the complete NIK Plugin Suite during a promotional sale. That
includes: DFine Pro 2, Viveza 2, Color Efex Pro 4, Silver Efex Pro 2,
and the least used Sharpener Pro 3.0 (I still prefer USM and "Smart
Sharpen).

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[otter]

On May 25, 12:35 am, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com>
wrote:

> On 2012-05-24 19:58:36 -0700, otter <bighorn_b...@hotmail.com> said:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 24, 4:38 pm, "Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote:
> >> otter wrote:
> >>> Here's my attempt with Lightroom:
>
> >>http://www.flickr.com/photos/billkeshlear/7260033926/in/photostream/ligh
> >> tbox/
>
> >> Maybe as good as SavageDuck's CS6/NIK output...  impressive for a
> >> lightweight graphic program.
>
> > Lightroom isn't quite as lightweight as you might think.  It shares
> > the same RAW engine as Photoshop.  I own both LR3 and CS5, but I use
> > LR3 much more often, simply because I like the interface better and
> > can get the job done faster - about 90% of the time.  For the other
> > 10%, it is easy to pop over to CS5 to do the work and then back.
>
> > I suppose I really should upgrade to LR4 and CS6, but will probably
> > wait for a Black Friday deal.
>
> I agree LR is not lightweight at all. You might say it is a combination
> of ACR & Bridge on steroids, with the ability to bounce to any other
> editor such as PS at will. The added bonus is all work is
> non-destructive.I don't use LR as much as I should, since the
> improvements made to Bridge in CS5.

I admit I probably haven't given Bridge a fair trial.

But I like to keep my work flow non-destructive as much as possible -
to the point of using smart objects when I switch over to CS5. But,
of course, there are some tools and filters in CS5 that can only be
used destructively, so those steps go last.

[Wolfgang Weisselberg]

PeterN <pete...@nospam.verizon.net> wrote:

> All noise removal involves color blurring.

Nope. Luminance noise won't be affected by colour blurring
and thus is not treated with color blurring.

-Wolfgang

[Dallas]

PeterN wrote:

> All noise removal involves color blurring.

I found a reasonable workaround in PS6. Airbrush/Mode: Lighten/12%
pressure/ then pick a skin color on the face.

From there you can actually paint over the dark noise with the skin
color without affecting the parts you want to keep.

http://tinyurl.com/7kbhv7p

Works well on wrinkles too.

--
Dallas

[tony cooper]

On Wed, 23 May 2012 16:00:56 -0500, "Dallas"
<Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote:

>
>I had to shoot some pretty important shots on the max ISO for my camera

>and quite a few came out with nasty grain & noise:

>
>http://tinyurl.com/d5vmlm4
>
>I'm using Photoshop 6 to try to fix them, but Filter>Noise>Median just
>tends to melt the pixels into each other and turn sharp things a blob.
>
>This software looks pretty cool.. but $79 bucks is kind stiff for a
>utility.
>http://www.topazlabs.com/denoise/
>
>
>Someone suggested downloading the trial version of Adobe Lightroom and
>give it a try for
>30 days.
>
>Any ideas or opinions?

I've been using the Noiseware Community Edition stand-alone for quite
some time. It does a good job. It's free, but there are nag screens
offering to upgrade you. You can save, print, and use the results.


http://www.imagenomic.com/download_nwsa.aspx



--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

[otter]

Sounds like a lot of work, but if you don't have an alternative I
guess it will do.

[PeterN]

Yes. it works. There are many ways to accomplish a goal with PS. The
best way is the method you are most comfortable when using. The add ons
work well and simplify the tasks. However, many can be performed from
within PX, without the add-on.

--
Peter

[Robert Coe]

On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 07:05:16 -0500, Joel <Jo...@NoSpam.com> wrote:
: "Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote:
:
: > I had to shoot some pretty important shots on the max ISO for my camera
: > and quite a few came out with nasty grain & noise:
: >
: > http://tinyurl.com/d5vmlm4
: >
: > I'm using Photoshop 6 to try to fix them, but Filter>Noise>Median just
: > tends to melt the pixels into each other and turn sharp things a blob.
: >
: > This software looks pretty cool.. but $79 bucks is kind stiff for a
: > utility.
: > http://www.topazlabs.com/denoise/
: >
: >
: > Someone suggested downloading the trial version of Adobe Lightroom and
: > give it a try for
: > 30 days.
: >
: > Any ideas or opinions?

:
: The photo looks like it should print out fine. The print is so cheap
: these days, so don't you try to print (4x6") first before messing with any
: program which may end up worse than the original.\
:
: And why max the ISO when the lighting condition seems fine enough for ISO
: 100-200

The scene was strongly backlit, and there's no evidence (reflections in the
eyes, for example) that fill flash was used. Ergo, high ISO.

Bob