# Can Lightroom fix this?



## Marc Santacroce (May 19, 2019)

Hello LRers, I'm hoping to draw on your experience. Background: I have 400 500 35mm slides from 1967-68 and 1970-71 that I have had digitally scanned and delivered as jpeg and tif. Some I've even individually cleaned with alcohol and rescanned. Unfortunately, due to poor storage conditions over many years (50) some have mold that exhibits mostly in sky shots. Also there is considerable noise in the skies, even those these were shot in bright sunlight at low ISOs. I've tried all I can do in LR with graduated filter and  luminance noise reduction. Still there is too much noise. I am wondering if I should just try a sky replacement in PS or whether I can work the problem in LR. I'll attach a sample for your review. Anxious to hear what advice you have. These images are precious memories from a long ago youth, and I'm hoping you can help.  Thank you, and best wishes, Marc.


----------



## Paul McFarlane (May 23, 2019)

Hi Marc

Noise will be a result of the scan and resolution, not the original ISO. What resolution are the images? I assume you are referring to local adjustment for noise for the sky; try a little negative clarity also on this.


----------



## Marc Santacroce (May 23, 2019)

Thanks, Paul- I’ll try the negative clarity. I pumped up the noise reduction, might not have been the best choice.


----------



## Zenon (May 24, 2019)

Maybe even negative Texture. People are using it to smooth portraits.


----------



## Linwood Ferguson (May 25, 2019)

I think it worth noting that "noise" is likely grain in the images, and all the noise reduction programs for digital processing will NOT work as digital noise is different.  That presumes I wam right and it is film grain.  If whoever did the scans actually introduced digital noise that is excessive, I would insist they get redone.  There's no excuse for a lot of digital noise in a scan of a slide.  As noticed, smoothing tools like clarity, texture, and specifically try brushing these onto the most impacted areas so as not to mess up detail areas that may look OK.


----------



## Jimmsp (Jun 12, 2019)

murdoc.kyzin said:


> I didn't know that negative texture would be as useful as this, thanks


I have used it a few times on portraits of older folks, with great results. You can generally soften wrinkles and facial blemishes. The subjects have loved the results.


----------



## Jimmsp (Jun 12, 2019)

Marc Santacroce said:


> I'll attach a sample for your review.


I would be willing to play a bit with this, but the only image I get is 500 px wide - not enough to see or fix.
I have fixed (improved) quite a few of my scans in both LR and with other software.
Please post a larger one someplace.
Jim


----------



## mariah1902 (Mar 9, 2020)

I think for noise reduction you should go for Photo shop, as to eliminate noise  you need some strong tools to make sure your output is good.  Yes light room can also do the job, but from my experience I never used Light room to reduce noise.


----------



## Paul McFarlane (Mar 9, 2020)

mariah1902 said:


> I think for noise reduction you should go for Photo shop, as to eliminate noise  you need some strong tools to make sure your output is good.  Yes light room can also do the job, but from my experience I never used Light room to reduce noise.


I would disagree. For the majority of shots, I fond the Lr NR is more than adequate. Ps is great for those awkward ones with lots of noise, but outside of that Lr does a decent job.


----------



## mariah1902 (Mar 9, 2020)

I 


pamcfarlane said:


> I would disagree. For the majority of shots, I fond the Lr NR is more than adequate. Ps is great for those awkward ones with lots of noise, but outside of that Lr does a decent job.
> [/QUOTE
> Yes you can disagree but I said it from my experience. I normally use PS for noise reduction and find it amazing. Maybe you are right, Light room can be used to do this more perfectly.


----------

