A Master Class On Lightroom Denoise!
This video is a master class on Lightroom Denoise! If you want to see my techniques for making ISO 12,800 look like ISO 400, you're gonna love this! It's the BEST way to fix a noisy photo!
In fact, I think the advanced techniques at the end of the video allow you to make your images look better than any third-party app - just using Lightroom!
In this video, we'll take a really deep dive, and I'll show you everything you need to know to get the most from Lightroom Denoise. We'll talk about the kinds of images that work best, how the Donoise tool works, and some advanced techniques beyond just the simple Denoise dialog.
In fact, in my experience, the advanced techniques featured towards the end of this video preserve detail better than any third-party software I've tried while giving you the best possible noise reduction.
It's the best 45 minutes you'll spend on post processing!
Sorry. I must be getting too old to wander around in this fantasyland.
I have to be the advocate of truth on this one and suggest a few corrections to the topic.
If one shoots improperly exposed garbage willingly no amount of sharpening will make them a photographer. Buying a cell phone that does AI is all they need to reach their maximum photographic potential. The bar will be sufficiently lowered to guarantee success.
Denoise does not make 12,800 or any other ISO "Look like ISO 400". ISO 400 always looks like 400 and 12800 always looks like 12800. They are electronic gain values. One and zeros and RAW data never lies. AI simply aborts it into an illusion of what people WISH they had the pride and skill to create. Garbage in gets faked quality out. Did anyone else bother to read the Hogan guides or study induced noise or what dual gain is or any of those other principles that apply to the tools they paid thousands of bucks for?
AI denoise aborts what the photographers selects and replaces it with computer generated information.
But whatever turns you on. I've read great articles about how the Samsung S23Ultra is even better than what you are suggesting.
Does anyone reading any of this actually believe that any publisher of serious photography doesn't recognize the difference between faked out BS, AI converted throw aways and professional images created with human intelligence and pride?
When did grain in photographs become an evil concept? How many great historical images get thrown out of the MMoA when edge to edge, AI sharpness becomes a curators rule of thumb? What makes obvious fakery more marketable than classic realistic photographs that were shot precisely the way the creator intended and displayed with warts and all?
If AI make proper photography this easy, why are all so many saps buying long f/4 at 8 or 10 or 16 grand a pop. Are people really that unmotivated that they will spend big bucks for fan boy bodies and lenses and use them to shoot garbage to correct with CGI?
I'm sure that the AI photography crowds can't stand music performed live because it has ambience. Live music is never sharp "edge to edge". AI music always is.
I remember when photographic techniques were the main topic in BCG forums. Oh well...it's a tik tok, autotune world now and nothing is real. People sell out and forget where they began. But that's the business end of the internet "photography" world. You have to preach to the choir or the donation plate doesn't get filled. The choir wants to hear how to shoot pictures just like Steve or Simon or Gregory without putting in the time to learn to use the tools of the craft.
Why should they when the photographers they admire say "don't bother shooting images until you get it right...AI all you trash instead of throwing it out and you'll be just as good as me. Sort of...".
Ironically, I remember very well being influenced by Steve to buy my Wimberly head and learning to use it properly. I remember reading if you are chasing the subject you are going the wrong way. I remember Steve saying that getting closer is the solution to not having a long enough lens for a shot. I remember Steve emphasizing the value of being a competent naturalist in getting the shot right in the first place. All that ancient photography information was fascinating and helped me create.
It doesn't seem to carry any weight in the crowded "show me the money" internet photography world now that preserving throw aways shot at 20 frames a second is the most profitable aspect of photography to promote.
The only reason some people need to cheat is that someone tells them it's acceptable.
