Use the brush where useful to sharpen locally, maybe with some clarity added, avoiding bringing up noise globally. Then sharpening, which should be done with an eye to making the pic look natural as opposed to radioactive, i.e. Now is the time to add Clarity, Vibrance, Contrast. Back in LR, use the noise brush to smooth out any problems areas that remain. Go easy on the "recover detail" and "reduce blur" sliders, that's what you've got LR for. You may need to "add grain" to avoid posterization. Eliminating all the noise isn't necessary. Open in Denoise, adjust as needed, concentrating on the subject. The goal of a high ISO raw conversion is to hand off a relatively low contrast file with as fine grain as possible to Denoise. Moderate color noise reduction in LR is fine, but not to the point of losing detail. Save your work as a user preset to save time in future. Zoom way in and adjust sharpening/radius/detail until there is good sharpness but no halos. No additional sharpening should be done at this point, neither should you desharpen. No color or contrast boost should ever be applied prior to NR. You'll want to do your coarse adjustments in LR first for maximum dynamic range. I have seen few if any 'scapes that were of quality shot anywhere near high ISO. Give me a break! You don't seriously believe what you just said, do you? It's the INTERNET for crying out loud! There is no reward for truth and no penalty for lies.įor landscape photography, the goal should always be to use ISO 100 at f8 and stay away from noise reduction in the first place. Besides, getting rid of noise is FAR from the most important part of post processing. I still think you must have misunderstood what they were saying. That's the goal of every anti-noise product, nothing unique there and they all do it with varying degrees of success. Nor would I trust a product that told me to do so. No sane person would suggest converting a raw file to a bitmapped file without first setting basic color balance, contrast, levels, etc. You must have misunderstood what they said. THIS is what I want to work with-everything else GOES!". Everything else that the raw file contains are irrelevant, so I can throw them out. When you convert a raw file to tif, you are in effect, saying, "this is my base photo, it contains all the colors, all the other possible variations of white balance, contrast, levels, etc. A Tiff file is NOT a raw file, it is just ONE of the possible ways for a photo to look while a raw file represents the entire spectrum of possible ways to edit and present a photo. It's compression, or lack of it has nothing to do with file structure. In addition, in Noiseware 5 you can control noise reduction through highlights, mid-tones and shadows and through different colors, not to mention the standard frequency options. I've tested them all thoroughly and Noiseware 5 is far superior in that regard. The noise will either be more or less apparent. I understand about marketing but I'm not sure if they could blatantly say these things on a YouTube video that all the world can see at any time if there wasn't some truth to it.ĭo others also believe that I will limit my adjustment ability if I follow their advice? They said that the thing that makes DeNoise unique is that it maintains the detail while getting rid of the noise instead of smoothing it out like other products. The said that if you do adjustments before you DeNoise you are adjusting the noise as well which makes it harder for DeNoise to get rid of it. I watched additional video by them and they later stated that the TIFF file was also an uncompressed file so you could work with it the same as RAW. Before I left Lr for another workflow tool, I was pretty happy with my noise and sharpening results in Lr. THEN use additional anti-noise tools if you feel you need to.įrankly, I think the Lr anti-noise and sharpening is just fine, all it takes is practice to use effectively. I would not do it that way, use Lr or your favorite development tool, and then use the anti-noise and sharpening it provides. ANY bit mapped file is inherently less malleable than a raw file.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |