# noise ninja vs neat image vs whatever



## Robert T Higaki

I am starting to look at noise reduction software. Any inputs from you guys will be much appreciated.

                                   Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Denis de Gannes

I use the noiseware pro plugin for PS CS. Works for me. I also use Bibble Labs raw conversiobn software which has a Noise Ninga plugin.


----------



## Gene McCullagh

Hey Bob!
I use both Noise Ninja and Noiseware Pro. Some images respond better to one over the other. I also like the fact that Noise Ninja has a stand alone app which let's you use it from LR without having to fire up PS. I believe Noiseware also has this capability on the PC side but not on the Mac.
In any event, both are excellent programs.


----------



## Robert T Higaki

Thanks for the inputs. Hopefully, I will get more opinions on this subject.


                             Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Victoria Bampton

Quite partial to Noise Ninja myself. Neat Image is another one to throw into the mix too.


----------



## happycranker

I tried both Noise Ninja and Nik Dfine and thought the Nik software did a better job for me, although the default settings are a bit too smooth on texture, this can be easily fixed.


----------



## Robert T Higaki

[quote author=happycranker link=topic=795'.msg544'7#msg544'7 date=1254195'79]
I tried both Noise Ninja and Nik Dfine and thought the Nik software did a better job for me, although the default settings are a bit too smooth on texture, this can be easily fixed.
[/quote]
I never heard of Nik Dfine. I will look it up on the web.

                                         Thanks,
                                           Bob


----------



## Robert T Higaki

I went ahead and bought Noise Ninja. I am pretty happy the results I am getting with the noise reduction program.

                                Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Roy Mathers

I use Noiseware with great success. However, it's not often that I need noise reduction in the first place.


----------



## Robert T Higaki

I only have to use noise reduction in some(not all) of my shots done at ISO 64''. I really do not know why some are clean and some are not. 

                                       Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Mark Sirota

[quote author=Robert T Higaki link=topic=795'.msg5461'#msg5461' date=12546'7582]
I only have to use noise reduction in some(not all) of my shots done at ISO 64''. I really do not know why some are clean and some are not.[/quote]

All from the D3, I assume? Have you disabled Automatic D-Lighting (ADL)?


----------



## Robert T Higaki

Mark,

  Yes, it is the D3. Yes, the Automatic D-Lighting is off. My High ISO NR is set a normal.

   I did a couple of shots at ISO 8''' and Noise Ninja cleaned it up nicely. I am satisfied with the program.

                                    Bob-the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Robert T Higaki

I guess I should have set the D3 at High ISO NR at high. So much details to remember especially when you are shooting "on the spot."

                         Bob- the slide shooter at heart( I know digital has advantage here; there is 
                          no way I could have gotten the shots using film in low light situations.)


----------



## Mark Sirota

If they are raw files, it doesn't matter what you set High ISO NR to. It is ignored for raw files. (Long Exposure NR does apply to raw files, however.)


----------



## Robert T Higaki

I did not know that. Even my D3 owner's manual does not mention it.

                Thanks,
                    Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## wblink

DxO.


----------



## Robert T Higaki

I have bought Noise Ninja. I am very happy with the product. I have one shot at ISO 8''' and the program did a very good job of cleaning the image up. But, I guess with the beta LR3 this upgrade should also do a good job of noise reduction.

                               Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## JinYin_Thew

It is not fair to say that one plugin is better than the other based on a single example, but I think Noiseware did a better job for me. It has motived me to go ahead and buy Noiseware.

I would also like to say something about speed. It took about 18 seconds on my Mac for Noise Ninja to profile the full image (8 MP) and do its thing. Noiseware took about 15 seconds. (Noiseware seems to be doing something when it is invoked which I suspect could be some image profiling, so I took that into consideration.


----------



## wblink

[quote author=Mark Sirota link=topic=795'.msg5462'#msg5462' date=1254628293]
[quote author=Robert T Higaki link=topic=795'.msg5461'#msg5461' date=12546'7582]
I only have to use noise reduction in some(not all) of my shots done at ISO 64''. I really do not know why some are clean and some are not.[/quote]

All from the D3, I assume? Have you disabled Automatic D-Lighting (ADL)?
[/quote]

Why?


----------



## Mark Sirota

Because what ADL does is reduce the overall exposure, and then applies some fill light in the JPEG conversion phase. LR doesn't pay attention to the latter, so all you get is an underexposed raw file. And then you bring up the exposure in Lightroom, which increases the visibility of the noise.

And the reason it might apply to some ISO 64'' files and not others is that the amount of underexposure will vary with image content.


----------



## Robert T Higaki

Again, I apologize for the slow response. 

I really think the noise is directly proportional to the amount of light available. Look at the other thread(D3s). Compare the ISO 1'2,4'' shots of the Rolling Stones vs the Beatles. The Stones shot was done nearly in darkness therefore you see way too much noise. The Beatles shot was done at low light. Yes, still a lot of noise but not as bad as the Rolling Stones.

                                       Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Robert T Higaki

I did another test on noise as I want to back up my statement that noise is directly proportional to the amount of light.
So, this time I kept the aperture, and ISO 2',''' the same. I was able to dim the light. I used a Pentax digital spotmeter to measure the light( make it objective vs subjective). You can see that noise increases as the light decreases. I did the test on Iron Butterfly's In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida album.( all these years, I still do not understand this song)                           http://www.rxphotos.net/Photography/unofficial-high-ISO-test/11'979''_AmDDj#799224118_JuP3q

                                   Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## GadgetRick

Yup, the darker the scene, the more likely it is you'll get noise at ANY ISO but especially higher ISOs. Also, exposure makes a big difference. If you don't expose properly, you'll be more likely to get noise. If you crop too much, you're more likely to get more noise. A lot of factors go into noise.

I looked at the various NR tools out there and settled on Noise Ninja. Nothing wrong with the others I looked at but it made more sense for me than the others. I'm very happy with it and I'm (finally) getting around to learning how to control it better. I do NOT like the default settings--makes it too smooth--so I back off them right away. Also, you have to be careful, one level down (or up) makes a big difference in what it'll do.

It eats noise like Pacman eats little white dots, fruit and blue ghosts....


----------



## Brad Snyder

We're hoping on the basis of the new chroma NR in Lr3beta, that with the addition of the luma NR, (whenever that may be, the sooner the better I might add  ), that add-ons will be a thing of the past, at least in many cases.


----------



## ccraig

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Topaz DeNoise. I've only made a cursory look at noise reduction software, but I thought it produced noticably better results than noise ninja. Maybe I just wasn't trying hard enough.


----------



## wblink

[quote author=Mark Sirota link=topic=795'.msg62154#msg62154 date=1266863182]
Because what ADL does is reduce the overall exposure, and then applies some fill light in the JPEG conversion phase. LR doesn't pay attention to the latter, so all you get is an underexposed raw file. And then you bring up the exposure in Lightroom, which increases the visibility of the noise.

And the reason it might apply to some ISO 64'' files and not others is that the amount of underexposure will vary with image content.
[/quote]

Ahhh, thanks, never thought about it that way.


----------



## wblink

[quote author=Brad Snyder link=topic=795'.msg626'5#msg626'5 date=126767525']
We're hoping on the basis of the new chroma NR in Lr3beta, that with the addition of the luma NR, (whenever that may be, the sooner the better I might add  ), that add-ons will be a thing of the past, at least in many cases.
[/quote]

Chroma NR, Luma NR. When where and what did I miss?


----------



## Roy Mathers

They are both there on my copy, but the luminance one is greyed out. It will probably be functional in the final product.


----------



## Brad Snyder

Willem, there is a new Color (chroma) noise reduction algorithm available in the Lr3beta, which has generally received enthusiastic user feedback. There are controls for a new Luminance noise reduction tool as well, but they are not currently 'hooked-up'. I don't know the official status of this, but it's assumed this will be functional when Lr3.' is released officially, and will be as effective as the new color system.

Victoria describes this much better than I in her blog post on the topic, http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2''9/1'/22/whats-new-in-lightroom-3-beta-2/ . See the Develop Module topic. 

Note that the new NR method(s) is/are only available when an image is converted to the new 'process version'.


----------



## areohbee

[quote author=ccraig link=topic=795'.msg62619#msg62619 date=126771821']
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Topaz DeNoise. I've only made a cursory look at noise reduction software, but I thought it produced noticably better results than noise ninja.
[/quote] - I too own both Noise Ninja and Topaz DeNoise - I prefer using Topaz DeNoise. Noise Ninja's default settings are way too smeary (as are all noise reduction products), and to get the smeary look to go away I end up with the noise again. Topaz DeNoise settings are more intuitive for me and I think the results are more pleasing to my eye and easier to balance noise reduction with detail - IMHO.

On the other hand, I like Lightroom 3's new luminance noise reduction better than either one! (well I don't know about _better_ but its _very_ good and it sure is more convenient). I will be using external noise reduction a lot less from now on, maybe never in a few months if noise reduction is added to the local brush in Lr3-final.

Truth is, my favorite noise reduction software is CaptureNX2 - same algorithm as Dfine, or at least it used to be, but the ability to tie it to various selections with different settings, and toss in a few more adjustments to the mix along with noise reduction is a very compelling feature, indeed. You can't do that last bit with Dfine - only NX2.


----------



## Robert T Higaki

Rob and CCraig,

  Topaz Denoise does not have a plug in for LR. true??? I have looked at some samples and that program looks impressive.

  I went out shooting a Great Horned Owl inside a barn near a slough. One day, I used the D3s at ISO 12,8''. I did not even bother to apply noise reduction on those images- did not need it. The next day, I used the D3'' to take advantage of 1.5 crop factor but I had to push the camera to ISO4'''. The images had a lot of noise. I ran Noise Ninja and I was not satisfied with the results. 
 I guess I will wait for real deal LR3 instead. And use the D3s more often.

                           Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## areohbee

Topaz DeNoise has a plugin for Photoshop. Photoshop can be invoked as external editor from Lightroom. Works out about the same (assuming you have Photoshop that is).

(Lightroom plugins for image processing just invoke an external editor).

12,8'' with no NR ya say? - That D3s must be some fine camera!


----------



## Robert T Higaki

Rob,

  I do not have photoshop.

                Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## areohbee

Topaz DeNoise only works as a plugin to Photoshop or a "Photoshop-like" app. If you really wanted to use it, and you don't want to buy Photoshop, then maybe Photoshop Elements, or even a freeware program like IrfanView, eh?

Or, just use Lightroom 3! (and forget about Topaz DeNoise...)


----------



## Robert T Higaki

I guess I do have Elements on my newer computer but at this point, I am still learning LR and I have no time to learn Elements. I am very happy the the D3s- take a look my unofficial ISO speed test on the equipment thread.

Mod note: here's the link: http://www.lightroomqueen.com/community/index.php?topic=9'85.'

                    Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Halfje-Bruin

You can download Topaz Fusion Express to get integration with Lightroom, Aperture and iPhoto but only on a Mac. They are working on a Windows version for Lightroom on Windows.

Link: http://www.topazlabs.com/fusion/


----------



## Robert T Higaki

[quote author=Halfje-Bruin link=topic=795'.msg6444'#msg6444' date=1271158572]
You can download Topaz Fusion Express to get integration with Lightroom, Aperture and iPhoto but only on a Mac. They are working on a Windows version for Lightroom on Windows
[/quote]
good to know. I tend to push my cameras to the limits. I will go with whatever comes first- LR3 or Topaz fusion. In the meantime, I will play around with Noise ninja and try to figure out why I got such poor results with the images from the D3''.

                                   Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Robert T Higaki

OK- operator error(that is me). I hardly use Noise Ninja so I forget how to use it. Now, I can 'fix' my owl shots from the D3''.


                              Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Robert T Higaki

Here is a comparison between Noise Ninja and LR3:http://rxphotographer.smugmug.com/Noise-reduction/Noise-Ninja-vs-LR3/12546344_sXbqr#9''131388_NC7xF

The difference is dramatic.

               Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Brad Snyder

It sure is. What do think about the sharpness of the Lr version? To me, it seems a tad softer than the original, did you do any sharpening in Lr, or just the NR?


----------



## Robert T Higaki

Brad-

   I just used NR only.

                         Bob- the slide shooter at heart


----------



## Brad Snyder

Well, that's reassuring.


----------

