Noise Reduction

[Groucho]

That's a good question. I have some videos shot with our PnS in low light that could use some noise reduction. I took some stills and ran them through Noiseware and it helped a lot.

There are some noise reduction filters for VirtualDub but I haven't played with any (yet), including some free ones I think. They probably don't work quite as well as the $1,300 one, but hey, they're worth a shot. VirtualDub is generally an extremely useful app. Here is one of them, an open-source noise filter.

 

[Master Mason]

Please share what noise reduction program you use and why.

Thanks

 

[AndrewWG]

I use Noiseware Community Edition. Mainly because it is free. Also, it does a real good job of getting all or at least most of the noise out of my photos.

 

[gruZ]

I'm a fan of Noise Ninja - it can be used as a standalone or a plug in for PS. It is not freeware, and truthfully I have not used Noiseware so I can't compare.

I like how adjustable it is, and the results are very good.

 

[Code]

Noise Ninja isn't my favorite in terms of interface, but in my experimenting, it has been far and away the best at the actual noise reduction (especially good after I did a noise profile for my camera at each ISO and then had it load the appropriate profile automatically based on EXIF).

It's a normal part of my workflow now.

 

[AndrewWG]

I downloaded the trial version of Noise Ninja awhile ago and could never figure out how to use it. I never got it to do anything at all. That's what pushed me to Noiseware. I think that at this point, I would be willing to try just about any program, but I wouldn't want to pay for them. I have bought enough software that I don't use!

 

[Master Mason]

That's my issue, I have no problem paying for software, but I want to be sure that the one I buy will do the job, and I am not buying a new one shortly afterwards. Hence my informal poll.

 

[matthew_hull]

I use Neat Image, with its Plug-In to Photoshop.

 

[Gdad]

I am trying to pick something out also- can some of you guys post some before & after pictures?

 

[SharonLowe]

I am trying to pick something out also- can some of you guys post some before & after pictures?

I use Noise Ninja and love it. Will do some 100 percent crops and post for you. I use the plug-in version and don't have any problems with its interface. I do have custom parameters set - factory default is to apply some sharpening but my stock agencies frown on any sharpening so I have it turned off.

 

[SharonLowe]

Okay, here is one, shot at 1600 with my 1DsMkII; nightime hand held. 100 percent crop showing the blue sky and part of a building.

Here is after NN. I had to run NN on the sky twice (I always run it on separate layers and I made a separate layer of the sky after running NN on the whole image). The nice thing about NN is you can paint it on in only the places you want to reduce the noise. It was just easier this time to select the solid blue sky.

No sharpening applied to either one. Also, I am seeing jpeg artifacts from having to compress for this site that I don't see on the originals.

 

[AndrewWG]

For what it's worth, here is that shot done with Noiseware.

 

[Anewman]

I use Noiseware and Noise Ninja, on tricky shots I compare both and it is not always the same winner.

Both are very customizable, but IMO Noise Ninja is easier to customize and is quicker on my machines. While Noiseware IMO is much more aggresive with default settings and has some interesting presets that some might like.

Here are some shots from today
Shot at ISO 1600 and only adjustment was resize/crop for web and noise reduction with default factory settings on both programs.
1 Original
2 Noise Ninja
3 Noiseware(plugin for CS2).

 

[DBL101]

I've also used NN a lot with good results. Not recently, but a few years ago I was taking cheer pictures at football and basketball games with a high ISO. It really seemed to make a difference.

 

[LPZ_Stitch!]

I tried the Trial stand-alone versions of Noise Ninja and Neat Image as well as the Community version of Noiseware for cleaning up my Canon S3 IS images. I don't have PS or PSP -- I use GIMP -- so the stand-alones are the only ones of any use to me.

Considering it's free, the Noiseware was (usually) the best; so that's all I use, now.

 

[SharonLowe]

I use Noiseware and Noise Ninja, on tricky shots I compare both and it is not always the same winner.

Both are very customizable, but IMO Noise Ninja is easier to customize and is quicker on my machines. While Noiseware IMO is much more aggresive with default settings and has some interesting presets that some might like.

Here are some shots from today
Shot at ISO 1600 and only adjustment was resize/crop for web and noise reduction with default factory settings on both programs.
1 Original
2 Noise Ninja
3 Noiseware(plugin for CS2).

Number 3, the Noiseware one, looks like it was very agressive on her skin. Might be nice for portraits where you want to soften the skin but I don't think I would want that much reduction on most other images.

 

[Groucho]

I tried the Trial stand-alone versions of Noise Ninja and Neat Image as well as the Community version of Noiseware for cleaning up my Canon S3 IS images. I don't have PS or PSP -- I use GIMP -- so the stand-alones are the only ones of any use to me.

If Gimp can use standard Photoshop plug-ins, you can still use the plug-ins.

I almost exclusively run them from Irfanview, which can run regular Photoshop plug-ins.

 

[madhttr]

Hello again ~

Here is a pic I took last night. Mind you I still havent gotten used to all of the settings and I have been reviewing my pics afterwards to find out what I did wrong. I had the camera set at P (first mistake) and ISO at 1600 (second mistake). I realize that the picture came out dark (see first image) so I did a high pass and tried to get rid of some of the noise and lighten it a bit. What would you suggest first, setting the camera with this kind of lighting so that the pictures would come out a little brighter, without using a flash. Also, what would you suggest to do to the picture afterwards to fix the picture incase this happens again?

 

[AndrewWG]

I would suggest that you shoot in RAW format to be better able to save this type of photo. Won't be perfect, but it would be much better than working on a jpg. I'm assuming that is what you were working on. I shoot in RAW+JPG on my Canon. I'm guessing your Nikon D40 has that capability?

 

[ukcatfan]

With no motion in the shot, I have one word... Tripod!

I would also go with manual mode, set the aperture to the correct DOF you want, and then just set the correct shutter to match. With a stationary subject, you can go with a low ISO as long as you have that tripod.

Kevin

P.S. It also looks like you metered off the store lighting when you should have metered off the car. Not sure if the D40 has spot, but it should have center weighted, which can still be used on a shot like this if you are careful.