Noise Reduction Software

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by DR, Aug 11, 2004.

  1. DR

    DR Guest

    Any recommendations?

    I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.
     
    DR, Aug 11, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. DR

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: "DR"
    >
    >Any recommendations?
    >
    >I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.


    I used Neat Image on some ISO 1600 available-light shots my wife took in a
    nursing home with a 10D and was very impressed at how well it did. It's not
    free but it's relatively cheap.

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Aug 11, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. DR

    Steve B Guest

    There's a free Neat Image as well as the paid for version.

    "Bill Hilton" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > >From: "DR"
    > >
    > >Any recommendations?
    > >
    > >I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.

    >
    > I used Neat Image on some ISO 1600 available-light shots my wife took in a
    > nursing home with a 10D and was very impressed at how well it did. It's not
    > free but it's relatively cheap.
    >
    > Bill
     
    Steve B, Aug 11, 2004
    #3
  4. DR

    John Bean Guest

    On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 13:11:48 -0400, DR wrote:

    > Any recommendations?
    >
    > I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.


    I use a paid-for Neat Image, but if you want *free*, try Helicon:

    http://helicon.com.ua

    Very impressive, easier to use than Neat Image.

    --
    John Bean

    In a few minutes a computer can make a mistake so great that it would have
    taken many men many months to equal it (Anon)
     
    John Bean, Aug 11, 2004
    #4
  5. DR wrote:
    > Any recommendations?
    >
    > I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.


    Noise Ninja and Grain surgery are the best on the marked. I don't know about
    the prices though, but if you want quality and speed, that's the way to go.

    --
    ------------------------------
    online photo portfolio
    www.stojcic.com

    " If you saw a man drowning and you could either save him or photograph
    the event, what film would you use?" - Anonymous
     
    Drazen Stojcic / BUNTOVNIK, Aug 11, 2004
    #5
  6. DR

    Guest

    In message <>,
    dy (Bill Hilton) wrote:

    >>From: "DR"
    >>
    >>Any recommendations?
    >>
    >>I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.

    >
    >I used Neat Image on some ISO 1600 available-light shots my wife took in a
    >nursing home with a 10D and was very impressed at how well it did. It's not
    >free but it's relatively cheap.


    Do any of the noise reduction programs reduce noise in RAW files? It
    would seem to me that noise could be reduced at a higher level of
    quality if the RAW data is processed for noise, before demosaicing.
    Noise (except for quantization noise) should be equal in all channels
    before demosaicing and color balancing.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Aug 11, 2004
    #6
  7. DR

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >>I used Neat Image on some ISO 1600 available-light shots my wife took in a
    >>nursing home with a 10D and was very impressed at how well it did. It's not
    >>free but it's relatively cheap.


    >From:
    >
    >Do any of the noise reduction programs reduce noise in RAW files? It
    >would seem to me that noise could be reduced at a higher level of
    >quality if the RAW data is processed for noise, before demosaicing.


    Phase One's Capture One RAW conversion programs (LE, SE, Pro) have built-in
    noise reduction so you can do it during conversion.

    I've used C1 SE with a 10D, 1Ds and 1D Mark II and I feel the output files are
    better than what I can get from Photoshop CS RAW, much less the Canon software,
    though I don't use the noise reduction feature since I'm usually shooting at
    low ISOs with the 1Ds and Mark II, which have excellent noise suppression.

    You can download the three C1 versions and use them free for a total of 60 days
    before deciding whether or not to buy. Definitely worth the bucks to me ...

    http://www.c1dslr.com/ ... or see here for a comparison of a Mark II image as
    a jpeg vs converted using ACR, Canon DPP and EVU, and Capture One ...
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1dmkii/page17.asp

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Aug 11, 2004
    #7
  8. DR

    Graytown Guest

    I'll agree with Drazen... I use a paid version of Noise Ninja ($29) and it
    woks like a charm... even on images shot in low light conditions at iso1600.

    Rohit

    --
    http://www.graytown.ca
    Design - Photography - Hospitality Marketing Solutions


    "DR" <> wrote in message
    news:cfdjtq$ser$...
    > Any recommendations?
    >
    > I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.
    >
    >
     
    Graytown, Aug 11, 2004
    #8
  9. writes:
    > Do any of the noise reduction programs reduce noise in RAW files?
    > It would seem to me that noise could be reduced at a higher level of
    > quality if the RAW data is processed for noise, before demosaicing.


    The Photoshop CS RAW converter (ACR) have a noise reduction slider.
    However, all it does is do is to regulate the strength of a low-pass
    filter.

    The specialized noise reduction programs such as Neat Image and Noise
    Ninja work on a different level, with built-in sensor and image
    profiling tools.

    I don't know if C1's RAW converter is more sophisticated (there is no
    C1 version for my cameras) - but noise reducation in ACR doesn't
    replace NI/NN.
    --
    - gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
    ========================================================================
    «To live outside the law, you must be honest.» (Bob Dylan)
     
    Gisle Hannemyr, Aug 12, 2004
    #9
  10. DR

    Guest

    In message <>,
    dy (Bill Hilton) wrote:

    >>>I used Neat Image on some ISO 1600 available-light shots my wife took in a
    >>>nursing home with a 10D and was very impressed at how well it did. It's not
    >>>free but it's relatively cheap.

    >
    >>From:
    >>
    >>Do any of the noise reduction programs reduce noise in RAW files? It
    >>would seem to me that noise could be reduced at a higher level of
    >>quality if the RAW data is processed for noise, before demosaicing.

    >
    >Phase One's Capture One RAW conversion programs (LE, SE, Pro) have built-in
    >noise reduction so you can do it during conversion.


    The fact that it is builtin doesn't mean that it is done at the right
    stage, or that it is intelligent noise reduction like neat image or
    noise ninja. C1's noise reduction doesn't strike me as being especially
    intelligent; not like the noise specialists.

    >I've used C1 SE with a 10D, 1Ds and 1D Mark II and I feel the output files are
    >better than what I can get from Photoshop CS RAW,


    Same here, but that is because it doesn't have the level of artifacts
    that CS ACR has (that "endless maze" look).

    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Aug 12, 2004
    #10
  11. DR

    Martin Brown Guest

    In message <>,
    writes
    >In message <>,
    > (Bill Hilton) wrote:
    >
    >>>From: "DR"
    >>>
    >>>Any recommendations?
    >>>
    >>>I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.

    >>
    >>I used Neat Image on some ISO 1600 available-light shots my wife took in a
    >>nursing home with a 10D and was very impressed at how well it did. It's not
    >>free but it's relatively cheap.

    >
    >Do any of the noise reduction programs reduce noise in RAW files? It
    >would seem to me that noise could be reduced at a higher level of
    >quality if the RAW data is processed for noise, before demosaicing.
    >Noise (except for quantization noise) should be equal in all channels
    >before demosaicing and color balancing.


    Not quite. The analogue gain is usually turned up higher on the blue
    channel to compensate for the lower sensor response to short
    wavelengths. Blue channel normally needs more aggressive treatment.

    Regards,
    --
    Martin Brown
     
    Martin Brown, Aug 12, 2004
    #11
  12. DR

    Darran West Guest

    "DR" <> wrote in message
    news:cfdjtq$ser$...
    > Any recommendations?
    >
    > I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.
    >

    Fred Miranda (http://www.fredmiranda.com/software/) make a plug-in called
    ISOx Pro which costs $19.90. However, it will only work with Photoshop 6, 7
    or CS.
     
    Darran West, Aug 12, 2004
    #12
  13. DR

    Petr Guest

    Don't know about other programs but Photoshop has an option for different
    color noise reduction provided you are shooting in RAW

    "Martin Brown" <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In message <>,
    > writes
    > >In message <>,
    > > (Bill Hilton) wrote:
    > >
    > >>>From: "DR"
    > >>>
    > >>>Any recommendations?
    > >>>
    > >>>I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.
    > >>
    > >>I used Neat Image on some ISO 1600 available-light shots my wife took in

    a
    > >>nursing home with a 10D and was very impressed at how well it did. It's

    not
    > >>free but it's relatively cheap.

    > >
    > >Do any of the noise reduction programs reduce noise in RAW files? It
    > >would seem to me that noise could be reduced at a higher level of
    > >quality if the RAW data is processed for noise, before demosaicing.
    > >Noise (except for quantization noise) should be equal in all channels
    > >before demosaicing and color balancing.

    >
    > Not quite. The analogue gain is usually turned up higher on the blue
    > channel to compensate for the lower sensor response to short
    > wavelengths. Blue channel normally needs more aggressive treatment.
    >
    > Regards,
    > --
    > Martin Brown
     
    Petr, Aug 12, 2004
    #13
  14. DR

    Anoni Moose Guest

    "Drazen Stojcic / BUNTOVNIK" <> wrote in message news:<cfdsal$s9j$>...
    > DR wrote:
    > > Any recommendations?
    > >
    > > I'm looking for something free, or very inexpensive. Simple to use.

    >
    > Noise Ninja and Grain surgery are the best on the marked. I don't know about
    > the prices though, but if you want quality and speed, that's the way to go.


    I've tried those, but for general noise (not just digital camera, but
    scanner effect noise, but patterning of any sort) reduction, I've tried
    quite a few programs including the ones above, but Neat Image beats
    them all on performance, sometimes by quite a lot. But for speed it loses,
    it takes quite a while to process compared to others. It's user interface
    also isn't as simple -- although easy once figured out.

    Mike
     
    Anoni Moose, Aug 12, 2004
    #14
  15. DR

    Guest

    In message <q9NSc.89899$gE.62007@pd7tw3no>,
    "Petr" <> wrote:

    >Don't know about other programs but Photoshop has an option for different
    >color noise reduction provided you are shooting in RAW


    Judging from past experience with software, I feel no need to assume
    that they do the noise reduction before complicating the image with
    demosaicing and color balance.

    I mean, photoshop gets so many things so wrong there is no reason to
    assume they are doing this optimally.
    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Aug 12, 2004
    #15
  16. DR

    Petr Guest

    Like I said, if you shoot in RAW you have the option to reduce noise before
    the image is adjusted in any other way.

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In message <q9NSc.89899$gE.62007@pd7tw3no>,
    > "Petr" <> wrote:
    >
    > >Don't know about other programs but Photoshop has an option for

    different
    > >color noise reduction provided you are shooting in RAW

    >
    > Judging from past experience with software, I feel no need to assume
    > that they do the noise reduction before complicating the image with
    > demosaicing and color balance.
    >
    > I mean, photoshop gets so many things so wrong there is no reason to
    > assume they are doing this optimally.
    > --
    >
    > <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    > John P Sheehy <>
    > ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    Petr, Aug 12, 2004
    #16
  17. DR

    Guest

    In message <3sRSc.88394$J06.36907@pd7tw2no>,
    "Petr" <> wrote:

    >Like I said, if you shoot in RAW you have the option to reduce noise before
    >the image is adjusted in any other way.


    Like *I* said, you don't know that noise reduction is occuring in the
    RAW data just because there is a feature in the RAW converter. The data
    is no longer RAW as soon as the converter does anything to it at all.

    ><> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> In message <q9NSc.89899$gE.62007@pd7tw3no>,
    >> "Petr" <> wrote:
    >>
    >> >Don't know about other programs but Photoshop has an option for

    >different
    >> >color noise reduction provided you are shooting in RAW

    >>
    >> Judging from past experience with software, I feel no need to assume
    >> that they do the noise reduction before complicating the image with
    >> demosaicing and color balance.
    >>
    >> I mean, photoshop gets so many things so wrong there is no reason to
    >> assume they are doing this optimally.


    --

    <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    John P Sheehy <>
    ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    , Aug 12, 2004
    #17
  18. DR

    Petr Guest

    I just find that photoshop does this better than anything else I have used.
    Don't know bout your experience.

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In message <3sRSc.88394$J06.36907@pd7tw2no>,
    > "Petr" <> wrote:
    >
    > >Like I said, if you shoot in RAW you have the option to reduce noise

    before
    > >the image is adjusted in any other way.

    >
    > Like *I* said, you don't know that noise reduction is occuring in the
    > RAW data just because there is a feature in the RAW converter. The data
    > is no longer RAW as soon as the converter does anything to it at all.
    >
    > ><> wrote in message
    > >news:...
    > >> In message <q9NSc.89899$gE.62007@pd7tw3no>,
    > >> "Petr" <> wrote:
    > >>
    > >> >Don't know about other programs but Photoshop has an option for

    > >different
    > >> >color noise reduction provided you are shooting in RAW
    > >>
    > >> Judging from past experience with software, I feel no need to assume
    > >> that they do the noise reduction before complicating the image with
    > >> demosaicing and color balance.
    > >>
    > >> I mean, photoshop gets so many things so wrong there is no reason to
    > >> assume they are doing this optimally.

    >
    > --
    >
    > <>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
    > John P Sheehy <>
    > ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
     
    Petr, Aug 12, 2004
    #18
  19. "Petr" <> wrote in message
    news:GYRSc.91420$gE.81257@pd7tw3no...
    > I just find that photoshop does this better than anything else I

    have used.
    > Don't know bout your experience.


    The Adobe Camera Raw converter loses too much sharpness in the process
    for my taste. In my experience, Neat Image hardly loses any, and Noise
    Ninja is reported to be quite good as well.

    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Aug 13, 2004
    #19
  20. DR

    Petr Guest

    Yeah I have noticed that but when I am done fixing whatever needs to be
    done, I use a Chroma filter called smart sharpen which works wonders so I
    don't really mind. Reduces the length of my workflow as well

    "Bart van der Wolf" <> wrote in message
    news:411cd17f$0$568$4all.nl...
    >
    > "Petr" <> wrote in message
    > news:GYRSc.91420$gE.81257@pd7tw3no...
    > > I just find that photoshop does this better than anything else I

    > have used.
    > > Don't know bout your experience.

    >
    > The Adobe Camera Raw converter loses too much sharpness in the process
    > for my taste. In my experience, Neat Image hardly loses any, and Noise
    > Ninja is reported to be quite good as well.
    >
    > Bart
    >
     
    Petr, Aug 13, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. bobster
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    2,603
    °Mike°
    Mar 2, 2004
  2. Nonya Bidness

    Re: Noise Reduction Software?

    Nonya Bidness, Dec 8, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    680
    Dave Oddie
    Dec 16, 2003
  3. peter

    any editing software with noise reduction?

    peter, Oct 31, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    789
    HRosita
    Nov 2, 2004
  4. RobbH

    New noise reduction software, currently free

    RobbH, Dec 10, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    298
    David J Taylor
    Dec 10, 2004
  5. John Navas

    Noise Reduction software (Neat Image, Noise Ninja, etc.)

    John Navas, Oct 19, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    480
    John Navas
    Oct 19, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page