This Forum

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

Absolutely - and first to be clear, I am talking about opening up DeNoise AI independently (so not calling it as a plug in), and opening a NEF file in it.

What I see is far more destruction of details and depending on the file, some color shift. But detail destruction is my biggest issue and because you can't save as a raw file again, that destruction is permanent - so in effect you create a TIFF without the benefit of a far more advanced RAW conversion engine upfront (Adobe or C1 or Nikon) and detail retrieval gets hurt in the process.

You don't have that issue if you convert from RAW to TIFF first (in any superior converter) and then remove noise with Denoise AI - I have no idea why that is.

Just as an illustration I ran a very quick test ( had not used DeNoise AI on a raw file in weeks so I wanted to see if the more recent updates had improved things).

So here is a 1:1 crop of a NEF file properly exposed at Iso 2000. This just has a camera neutral profile applied, no noise reduction, no sharpening. It is exported as a jpg without resizing with sharpening for screen "normal" intensity. So it is about as minimally processed as possible in LR. Remember, this is a 1 to 1 pixel crop - so you don't benefit from any downsizing smoothing you'd normally get when creating a file to share on screen, but that's the best way to show the differences (ie I would never do it this way to print or post).

View attachment 23112

Here is the same file, exported as a TIFF first then processed in Topaz Denoise PlugIn inside LR, with the automatic settings. It is then exported as a jpg, no resizing, sharpening for screen, Normal intensity. So it's really the same file as above but cleaned first with Topaz. Keep in mind, this is about as worse case scenario for Topaz as possible. You'd normally Denoise a much larger crop first and then crop more tightly after noise removal to give the AI more data to work with.
The file cleaned up very nicely and although there is a slight loss of sharpness it would be quite easy to recover.

View attachment 23113

And finally, I opened the same NEF directly into Denoise AI and let the software pick the best settings. I exported as a TIFF 16bit from DeNoise and imported that file into LR then cropped it to the same 1:1 view as the previous 2. In theory, that method has the advantage of having the Topaz AI work with the full file and cropping happening only after noise reduction. I exported it then from LR as a JPG with th exact same settings as the previous 2.

First you'll obviously notice the very different exposure balance and actually, if you go to the exported TIFF you'll notice that some of the feathers on the throat are very close to clipped when the first 2 files really show you that they are not even close to clipped. There is no way to avoid that, Topaz picked the exposure and because it can only export a denoised file as a TIFF, the damage done is not recoverable.

Now the background is much cleaner but the loss of detail on the head and belly feathers is what bothers me more - in this file the damage is not too severe but go to an ISO 4000 file and it is massively destructive.

View attachment 23114

I hope that helps illustrating what I mean - Denoise AI is not a state of the art RAW converter but it is close to state of the art for noise reduction. So I use it at its best and leave out the rest.
Thanks for your reply. You have put a lot of effort into your explanation and I appreciate the time as well as the comprehensive explanation that you have given. That was a pretty impressive presentation you put together. I'll be using your method in the future.
 
Thanks for your reply. You have put a lot of effort into your explanation and I appreciate the time as well as the comprehensive explanation that you have given. That was a pretty impressive presentation you put together. I'll be using your method in the future.

You are welcome, least I could do on a thread that talks about the sharing spirit on this forum :)

If interested, here is how it turned out in the end once fully processed.

McGregor_Aug_18.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
You are welcome, least I could do on a thread that talks about the sharing spirit on this forum :)

If interested, here is how it turned out in the end once fully processed.

View attachment 23139
Again, thanks for sending. The end product is certainly worth the effort to get to it.
Also, you are 100% correct about the resources being shared on this forum. It is a pleasure and a revelation to read the tips, hints, procedures and experiences that are shared here.
Thanks again.
 
I like the walkstool idea too…. now I need to go choose 🤔
My 26" walkstool fits in my backpack where the monopod goes and the monopod fits on the side. The side has mesh pockets that would ultimately fail so I simply secure the monopod/monogimble with a strap at the top. The back has a sturdy pocket that the three walkstool legs fit into. When the camera is slung for quick draw either or both will fit in the backpack.
 
Back
Top