Lightroom Classic Auto Denoise Function

Lightroom Classic Auto Denoise Function

Author
Discussion

Fallingup

Original Poster:

1,618 posts

103 months

Friday 30th August
quotequote all
Hi
Quick question from a learner. If I wish to use the Denoise function on Lightroom Classic is it best to use this before or after I have made other adjustments to the exposure? Or does it not matter. Thanks.

leggly

1,822 posts

216 months

Saturday 31st August
quotequote all
I always use it first before I do any adjustments. I’m not saying it’s the right way but it works for me.

GravelBen

15,837 posts

235 months

Saturday 31st August
quotequote all
I generally apply denoise before other adjustments, as the noise level can change your perception of things like contrast, sharpness and saturation.

So if you make adjustments before denoise then you might end up going back and re-adjusting anyway.

I have been really impressed by denoise, I've gone back and re-processed some old photos I had more or less written off due to noise and been very happy with the results.

Fallingup

Original Poster:

1,618 posts

103 months

Saturday 31st August
quotequote all
Thanks guys. That's very helpful. Cheers.

Turtle Shed

1,722 posts

31 months

Monday 2nd September
quotequote all
Doubt it matters much, but do note that the AI denoise only works on RAW files, so if you need to do any retouching in Photoshop, you'll need to denoise first, because the file that comes back from Photoshop will be a DNG.

Julian Scott

3,216 posts

29 months

Tuesday 3rd September
quotequote all
As a still leaner....what does denoise do?

(I guess, reduces the noise, but what does that mean/how does that impact the file?)

havoc

30,668 posts

240 months

Tuesday 3rd September
quotequote all
If you're finding your files are consistently noisy (either due to the camera/sensor or due to shooting in low light), can I suggest (something like) DxO PureRaw* as step 1 in your image processing. I got it back when I had the Canon 7D, which wasn't a great sensor for noise, and it effectively rescued a bunch of otherwise pretty st images. I still use it selectively even with a newer mirrorless body.

It's main function is image correction and AI-driven denoising, and it does a much better (and quicker) job than Lr's own AI denoise function. It also does batch-processing very easily and quite quickly.

Only downside (to all AI denoise processes) is very large output DNG files. So discipline is required in pre-processing filtering/shortlisting. Either that or investing in a few more HDDs... biggrin



@Julian - noise = 'grainyness' in the image - the speckling and loss of detail/clarity in the image when you zoom in. Modern denoise engines can ID that and use AI learning to 'guess' (usually very very accurately) what the underlying pixels should have shown. Old school denoise tended to reduce localised contrast which often led to a 'softer' image.


* Topaz and ON1 also have similar programmes. Trial them and choose, I guess...

Julian Scott

3,216 posts

29 months

Tuesday 3rd September
quotequote all
havoc said:
If you're finding your files are consistently noisy (either due to the camera/sensor or due to shooting in low light), can I suggest (something like) DxO PureRaw* as step 1 in your image processing. I got it back when I had the Canon 7D, which wasn't a great sensor for noise, and it effectively rescued a bunch of otherwise pretty st images. I still use it selectively even with a newer mirrorless body.

It's main function is image correction and AI-driven denoising, and it does a much better (and quicker) job than Lr's own AI denoise function. It also does batch-processing very easily and quite quickly.

Only downside (to all AI denoise processes) is very large output DNG files. So discipline is required in pre-processing filtering/shortlisting. Either that or investing in a few more HDDs... biggrin



@Julian - noise = 'grainyness' in the image - the speckling and loss of detail/clarity in the image when you zoom in. Modern denoise engines can ID that and use AI learning to 'guess' (usually very very accurately) what the underlying pixels should have shown. Old school denoise tended to reduce localised contrast which often led to a 'softer' image.


* Topaz and ON1 also have similar programmes. Trial them and choose, I guess...
Thanks. I'll have a play because whenever I've used it, it's made no real difference (RAW images from a Leica Q2) but often used after some image processing anyway.

GravelBen

15,837 posts

235 months

Tuesday 3rd September
quotequote all
Results vary a lot depending on the image being processed - a lower ISO image shot in good light won't benefit much, but a high iso low light shot can have a massive improvement from denoise.