Noise reduction??

[gchappel]

Shooting highschool football here in central florida is like shooting in a cave.  ISO 12000+ to get 1/800 at f2.8. 
Even my d4 has a fair amount of noise here. 
I am still learning C1, but I often like the output more than lightroom- although I have used lightroom since the beginning.
My only real issue if noise.  Lightroom and dxo seem to handle this much better.
Any thoughts?  How are you handling noise?  Do I need to export it to photoshop and then bring it back into C1?
Thanks for any help
Gary

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Shooting highschool football here in central florida is like shooting in a cave.  ISO 12000+ to get 1/800 at f2.8. 
Even my d4 has a fair amount of noise here. 
I am still learning C1, but I often like the output more than lightroom- although I have used lightroom since the beginning.
My only real issue if noise.  Lightroom and dxo seem to handle this much better.
Any thoughts?  How are you handling noise?  Do I need to export it to photoshop and then bring it back into C1?

Hi Gary,

Having/adding more light for the initial image capture should significantly benefit image quality. Shooting at ISO's above 1600 is generally detrimental to image quality, and it may be better to stick to ISO 1600 and then underexpose for the required shutterspeed. That will also allow to more easily capture highlights without clipping them.

Given a noisy image capture, I prefer to use a dedicated noise reduction program, like "Topaz Labs Denoise" or "NeatImage". The reason I prefer that over built-in noise reduction in Capture One (or e.g. Lightroom), is that these programs offer much more control over the noise reduction process and they produce very good results.

NeatImage allows to create and store noise profiles that can be automatically chosen for new images, e.g. for a specific camera, and ISO setting, after Raw conversion to TIFF output (with EXIF metadata). Topaz Denoise automatically analyses the image on a case by case basis. Another interesting alternative is DxO's PRIME noise reduction, but it only works on Raw conversions and those are limited to Adobe RGB output space. There are more alternatives.

The benefit of using C1 noise reduction is that it simplifies the workflow, which may be relevant for sports photography when processing time is limited, e.g. due to deadlines. So you should see what weighs more heavily and whether the built-in noise reduction quality is adequate for a first run. You can always reprocess selected images to higher quality if time is less of an issue.

So, to summarize. I'd try and improve the initial capture lighting situation, and underexpose at something like ISO 1600 to meet shutter speed requirements, in order to improve the fundamental capture quality. Then compare the quality of built-in versus external noise reduction. Use C1 noise reduction for speed gains in the workflow, then re-process selected images.

In all cases, if you don't need full resolution, downsampling can help to reduce the apparent noise. So try filling the frame with the image to avoid excessive cropping. Capture One's improved resampling quality really helps, especially if you only use output sharpening after resampling.

Cheers,
Bart

[Richard_Marcellus]

I shoot a lot of figure skating and also have issues with light levels in many rinks. I use a Nikon D850 and D750 and I am frequently at about ISO4000, 1/1000 sec and f/2.8 so it isn't quite a bad as you but still noise is an issue.

For my very favourite shots I'll take .tiff files (no C1P sharpening applied) into Photoshop and like Bart I'll use a dedicated noise reduction program and sharpen after. However for the 1000s of other shots that I am also editing and keeping I set my sharpening setting with the threshold a bit higher than I normally would use on low ISO shots (generally 200,1,5,0 for high ISO work) then bump the default C1P NR Luminance setting from 50 up a bit (60-80 or even 100). You can also experiment with dropping the detail slider a bit. It isn't perfect, but as I am generally also dropping the resolution down for distribution then there is a secondary noise smoothing step occurring then. Because of this the noise is really only a problem (to me) when I need to crop substantially. The end users of the images are often not as fussy about noise as us photographers and are much more interested in major factors like facial expression and gesture.

With my Nikon bodies I don't find it makes much difference in quality to shoot 1-2 stop underexposed then raise the exposure in post, so what I generally do is manually set exposure down 1-2 stops (ie ISO 2000, 1/1000, f2. and whenever the scene is more static I'll quickly slow the shutter speed down to 1/500 or lower to correct the exposure and grab a bit more light.

I would love to see C1P incorporate higher quality noise reduction into the program, but when you watch the dedicated NR plugins function, you can see that this isn't a quick operation. It may also be an operation that is best performed on RGB data. Quality vs speed (and file size) is a tradeoff. I looked at DXO PhotoLab (with the Prime NR turned on) and I didn't end up with a better looking final result with some admittedly limited testing. However, the overall look of the images is a combination of many factors (not just noise) and I am much less experienced with the DXO software compared to C1. I really like the C1P look, the workflow tools and the speed so I will stick to dedicated plugins when I really want them.

Regards,

Richard

[gchappel]

Thanks for the insights.  I have not tried underexposing at a lower iso for years.  I will certainly give that a try.  My real keepers- that are going to be printed bigger than 8x10" I do send through photoshop.  I use either Denise or Noiseware, depending on the image.  For volume I am going to need to stay in C1.
Newbie at C1, I have not tried playing with the detail slider. 

I will certainly try your ideas- thanks!!

Gary

[Dinarius]

One thing I have noticed is that the default 50 for colour noise is usually way too much for my files.

Zero it out so that the noise reappears; then 15-25 on the return scroll is usually enough.

D.

[myotis]

I am still learning C1, but I often like the output more than lightroom- although I have used lightroom since the beginning.
My only real issue if noise.  Lightroom and dxo seem to handle this much better.
Any thoughts?  How are you handling noise?  Do I need to export it to photoshop and then bring it back into C1?

With my Nikon 1s and wildlife pictures, I use DXO Prime Noise, either run from C1 (open with option) or directly in DXO where you can process multiple files at once.  DXO prime noise reduction is very good, if a bit slow, (I just leave it running and do something else) and you can save from DXO as a linear DNG which still gives you full colour management back in C1. I switch everything off in DXO other than the noise reduction.

DXO is very good for semi-automated noise reduction (once you tweak the defaults) if you have a lot of images that need noise reduction. And its become a sort of a standard for Nikon 1 users, where noise is nearly always an issue.

I'm not however, all that fond of the image quality from DXO, and for one offs, I use C1 and then finish off with either Neat Image or Noiseware in Photoshop.

The latter approach gives me image quality (including noise and detail)  I prefer, but with a lot more work than running the files through DXO.

If I was doing a lot of high iso images that needed to be turned around quickly, I would almost certainly put them through DXO Prime noise reduction, and then load the DNGs into C1, or given the new tools in the latest DXO Photolab, I might even consider missing out C1.

If you haven't used DXO, its worthwhile having a look at the trial,

Cheers,

Graham



Cheers,

Graham

[gchappel]

Thanks again
I do use dxo- rarely. 
I have not tried using it just for noise, then bringing it into C1.  I will certainly give that a try. 
So much to learn.  I know my way around lightroom- I just wish adobe would up their game. 
In the meantime- I will spend more time with C1.
Gary

[myotis]

I do use dxo- rarely. 
I have not tried using it just for noise, then bringing it into C1.  I will certainly give that a try. 
So much to learn.  I know my way around lightroom- I just wish adobe would up their game. 
In the meantime- I will spend more time with C1.
Gary

I don't use it very often either, but I do find the ease of getting good noise reduction impressive whenever I do.

Cheers,
Graham

[kirkt]

Shooting highschool football here in central florida is like shooting in a cave.  ISO 12000+ to get 1/800 at f2.8. 
Even my d4 has a fair amount of noise here. 
I am still learning C1, but I often like the output more than lightroom- although I have used lightroom since the beginning.
My only real issue if noise.  Lightroom and dxo seem to handle this much better.
Any thoughts?  How are you handling noise?  Do I need to export it to photoshop and then bring it back into C1?
Thanks for any help
Gary

Have you considered shooting with a monopod and a flash secured to it, under the camera, pointed slightly upward?  I've used this with a 580EXII to get light into the scene, even at HSync shutter speeds.  You may need to gel and grid the flash to restrict the light spill and match the prevailing venue lighting.

Neat Image or DxO Prime NR will also help.

Kirk

[gchappel]

Kirk
I have not tried the monopod flash trick for several years.  It did give me light under the helmets, but gave funny shadows across our fields.  I should try it again. 
Unfortunately last game was last friday, so I have to wait a year to play in these conditions again.
The majority of these shots are just online.  They all get printed 4x6.  In these small sizes I can stay in lightroom and the images look fine.  It is when someone wants one printed larger than 8x10 that the noise and loss of color and dynamic range drive me crazy.  It never bothers the players or parents they always love them- even when I cringe. 
Thanks for the ideas
Gary