Wha'ts the best way to denoise?
Take the photo again in good light
ENHANCE
>>4391187you slide the sliders to the right
>>4391187use ai noise reduction at different settings and export, then make stack of those for maximum noise reduction.
>>4391187Export at 50% resolution.
>>4391187Topaz raw denoise only on low (less than 30)Downscale 50% and tweak pre export and post export sharpening (this is important) to fit the photoDo not use an overly sharp downscale algo like lanczosYou can expect very nice 8x12s from a 24mp ff at iso 6400-12800 this way
>>4391187Dunno, but I like darktable's profiled denoise. Doesn't blur at all, just removes the ugly color noise pixels.
>>4391189underappreciated post
>>4391187maybe half_size, maybe amaze with enhance, maybe scale to half size it is difficult to guess with out raw image file
>>4391250based DT enjoyer
Just embrace the noise. Add more if there isn't enough.
>>4391187
>>4391187Denoise with Topaz, then re-noise in camera raw at a smaller size / reduced roughness. You heard me. You want less noise, not zero noise.
Lightroom's built-in AI denoiser is excellent, just use that.
>>4391187Duplicate 4 timesMove each copy 1 pixel to the left, right, top, and bottomPhotomerge
>>4391416>AI
>>4391262yeah, blur the image a bit and add your own noise on top
>>4391416>>4391464I just tried it. Works like magic.
>>4391187Denoise the shit out of chrominance and leave luminance as noisy as it is.>>4391189This obviously is the best way.
>>4391473tbqh it does, but I find it annoying that it has to make a full copy of the image, it takes a lot of space
>>4391464It just removes the ugly red and green pixels and uses machine learning to determine which colors to replace them with. I usually set the level at five or six percent, the image remains noisy, but the remaining noise looks like grain and it's fine.
>>4391473i mean you can do that too.But id rather just try to get my iso and exposure right before i even think about doing it
>>4391187ufraw has thing called color smoothing cannot remember if it has like 0,1,2,3 levels
>>4391187lower iso
>>4391473Looks like shit.
Adobe need to wake up and work on their core features because sharpening and noise reduction in Photoshop are about 15 years out of date at this point. I'd like to see some development of Ai features for panorama stitching and detail recovery too. They're trying, but they're sloooow...
>>4393048The news gladly puts up photos with adobes trademark super sharpened grain and total loss of color detail so adobe probably doesnt care and would rather monetize every mouse click instead
>>4393048They're doing nothing for the last ten years. There has not been a new feature that I really needed in Photoshop or Lightroom. I don't use it for Raw editting, so I'm stuck on a version that has a blond lady as splash up screen.
How many Adobe engineers are working on LR and PS? Must be the comfiest job in the world.
>>4393131> Must be the comfiest job in the world.It's probably the opposite, having worked in quite a few Fortune Top 500 corporations the most miserable and stressful jobs are when you don't really have anything to do (because for example product owners cannot decide on features and you do releases with bug fixes only), but you still have to report, most often to the same morons, what have you done in last two weeks, month and so on.
>>4393124Most adobe users are following a dogma they learned in a school that had a contract with adobe. Do raw adjustments in lightroom. Save as tiff. Do color and detail adjustments in photoshop.Adobes entire business model assumes masses of baby ducks created by their connections with educational institutions. Like microsoft. They dont improve because people just think adobe is the only real software suite for photo editing.
>>4396712will either do nothing to your snr (if sensor is iso invariant) or increase noise
>>4391189truth nuke
>>4391479Dxo Photolab works better/faster without making a copy, just werks like regular denoise.
>>4396729>Do raw adjustments in lightroom. Save as tiff. Do color and detail adjustments in photoshop.Why not just do RAW adjustments in Photoshop? Isn't Lightroom just a cut down version of photoshop?
>>4396749If Adobe improved file management in Photoshop there would be no need for Lightroom at all.
>>4391473Looks moderately smeary, but given how noisy the original image is I guess it's still fairly impressive and might be a legit good option in less noisy images to begin with where it wouldn't need to be as intensive
>>4391187Just the plain old photoshop one or bust. Sorry but it's just true
>>4391250I also really like profiled denoise. Removes most of the noise without giving the AIslop look.
