Best Programs for Removing Noise

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by B1gMac, Jul 10, 2010.

  1. B1gMac macrumors regular

    B1gMac

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    #1
    What programs would you recommend for removing noise from photos? I have Photoshop CS4, and I know it can be done in there, but I was wondering if there are other, better, programs that specialize in removing noise.

    Thanks
     
  2. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #2
    Noise Ninja and Neat Image are probably the mot popular two. They all work a bit differently on different images, but they're all close enough that I don't think it's a big deal which you use.

    Personally, I use Neat Image.


    Paul
     
  3. NeGRit0 macrumors 6502a

    NeGRit0

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2008
    Location:
    Las Vegas, Nv
    #3
    I have Noise Ninja, and Topaz DeNoise. I prefer Topaz.
     
  4. funkboy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2008
    Location:
    elsewhere
    #4
    Noise Ninja is fantastic, but the new noise reduction algorithms built-in to Lightroom 3 are pretty good and work just like all the other Lightroom tools.

    Here's another interesting technique that I've been using in LR3 now that fully configurable point curves are available: when you've got a photo with a basically black background (like a concert shot with a well-lit artist's face on an otherwise dark stage), all the distracting noise in the black background will be in the lowest stop of dynamic range. I find that by making a custom tone map that further darkens the darkest 1/2 stop or so of the image, it blacks out the shadow noise. Obviously it's easy to overdo & make your image look "heavy", but if you reserve it for after you've set up your noise reduction you can use it further reduce any shadow noise that the NR misses, or balance the two (basically it's a tradeoff between overall fine detail retention and shadow detail).
     
  5. Edge100 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Location:
    Where am I???
    #5
    Lightroom 3. I've used Noiseware in the past, but I can honestly say that LR3 is 99% as good.
     
  6. absolut_mac macrumors 6502a

    absolut_mac

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2003
    Location:
    Dallas, Texas
    #6
    The 2 PS plug-ins that I like the best are Kodak's GEM, which has a fine and course selection depending on how bad the noise is (both can be further adjusted with sliders for more control), and Topaz Labs Denoise. I still haven't decided which of the aforementioned two I prefer, as they both have their advantages and disadvantages, but I much prefer them to both Noise Ninja and Neat Image, which lose too much detail and create excessive blurring.

    Here's a very thorough review of Denoise...

    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/software/topaz.shtml

    And the link for Kodak's GEM...

    http://www.asf.com/

    Let us know which one you prefer.
     
  7. Ruahrc macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2009
    #7
    Definitely- if you have CS5 or LR3, the current 3rd party noise reduction plugins have become redundant, as Adobe's RAW converter does it just as good or better. I have been pretty blown away by what I have been able to achieve from going back through some of my old RAW files and running them through the improved NR routines in LR3... even shots taken at ISO 3200 (Hi 1.0) on my D80 are usable for screen use... amazing!

    It's also a great example of the whole non-destructive RAW based workflow philosophy. By keeping the original RAW files that I took a long time ago intact, I can re-process them using updated converter technology a couple of years later and get more image quality out of them than I could have in the past. Great stuff! Also a good reason to keep RAW files which have a lot of potential artistically but maybe have a few flaws technically, as updated converters may be able to rescue some of those images as well.
     
  8. compuwar macrumors 601

    compuwar

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Location:
    Northern/Central VA
    #8
    Personally, I find one of the great advantages of being on a Mac to be the ability to use RPP as my raw converter, so for me the CS plugin of NeatImage is becoming useful as I start to explore the use of high ISO on my D3x.

    ACR is much better than it ever was, but it still doesn't offer the tonal and color graduations of RPP, nor the film-like gamma curve and now the film emulations. I'm totally hooked on the K64 tonal curve emulation in RPP these days.

    Paul
     

Share This Page