In camera noise reduction vs Lightroom

[jd1566]

Hello Michael,
In your recent article on shooting at night you said "Why is the presence of in-camera noise reduction an issue, when what you wants is noise reduction? Simply, because most cameras are again far too heavy-handed when it comes to NR, and being able to season to taste on ones computer is almost always a better way to go."

I have a D700 and am wondering if this camera falls into the category of "most camera"  when it comes to in-camera noise reduction.  i.e. should I be turning it off and using Lightroom or other software tools to clean up noise?  What is likelyto give the best results, considering I am shooting night scenes at around 6400 ISO.

Thanks,

JD

NB - I also noticed something annoying when I do long exposures but at a low ISO (either ISO 200 or artificially low 100)- I seem to be getting a lot of noise - anyone care to comment?  I am shooting 2 and 4 minute exposures at dusk with a dark filter and am trying to capture movement of clouds and water in a sort of mist-like texture. I get fairly grainly results though.

[PeterAit]

Hello Michael,
In your recent article on shooting at night you said "Why is the presence of in-camera noise reduction an issue, when what you wants is noise reduction? Simply, because most cameras are again far too heavy-handed when it comes to NR, and being able to season to taste on ones computer is almost always a better way to go."

I have a D700 and am wondering if this camera falls into the category of "most camera"  when it comes to in-camera noise reduction.  i.e. should I be turning it off and using Lightroom or other software tools to clean up noise?  What is likelyto give the best results, considering I am shooting night scenes at around 6400 ISO.

Thanks,

JD

NB - I also noticed something annoying when I do long exposures but at a low ISO (either ISO 200 or artificially low 100)- I seem to be getting a lot of noise - anyone care to comment?  I am shooting 2 and 4 minute exposures at dusk with a dark filter and am trying to capture movement of clouds and water in a sort of mist-like texture. I get fairly grainly results though.

As to your first question, why not try it and see for yourself?

As for the second, sensors generate thermal noise, there's no getting around it (this is why the sensors used in astronomy and other specialized applications are cooled with liquid nitrogen or something similar). The longer the exposure, the more time the sensor has to register the noise, hence your problem. High ISO noise is a related problem - the noise is the same but the high ISO setting makes the sensor able to pick up more of it.

Peter

[Jeremy Payne]

I have a D700 and am wondering if this camera falls into the category of "most camera"  when it comes to in-camera noise reduction.  i.e. should I be turning it off and using Lightroom or other software tools to clean up noise?  What is likelyto give the best results, considering I am shooting night scenes at around 6400 ISO.

If you are shooting RAW and using LR to process your images, the in-camera settings don't do anything.

The in-camera settings do two things:

** Apply NR to in-camera JPEGs

** Give the Nikon RAW developer NR 'starting points' for conversion - which can be changed; these settings are not read by LR

[dwdallam]

If you are shooting RAW and using LR to process your images, the in-camera settings don't do anything.

The in-camera settings do two things:

** Apply NR to in-camera JPEGs

** Give the Nikon RAW developer NR 'starting points' for conversion - which can be changed; these settings are not read by LR

Does in camera noise reduction do anything to any RAW files?

[MarkL]

NB - I also noticed something annoying when I do long exposures but at a low ISO (either ISO 200 or artificially low 100)- I seem to be getting a lot of noise - anyone care to comment?  I am shooting 2 and 4 minute exposures at dusk with a dark filter and am trying to capture movement of clouds and water in a sort of mist-like texture. I get fairly grainly results though.

Do you have long exposure noise reduction turned off? I have no probelms at all with long exposure noise with my D700 with it on.

[Jeremy Payne]

Does in camera noise reduction do anything to any RAW files?

On a Nikon ...

The High ISO NR settings leave "markers" in the RAW data that (I believe) are only read by the NIK converter ... and all they do is set the starting point for the NR controls in the converter.  

High ISO NR does not affect the RAW data ... but Long Exposure NR does affect the RAW data.

[situgrrl]

Do you have long exposure noise reduction turned off? I have no probelms at all with long exposure noise with my D700 with it on.

Long exposure noise reduction is totally different from software based reduction; LENR doubles the exposure length above (usually) 1 second.  The camera makes a second exposure of nothing in order identify hot pixels.  It then deletes the second frame from the first to give you a hot spot free picture.  IMO this is something to be left on unless time is a major issue.

[Panopeeper]

NB - I also noticed something annoying when I do long exposures but at a low ISO (either ISO 200 or artificially low 100)

ISO 100 on the D3 is IDENTICAL to ISO 200 with +1EV exposure bias. If you use ISO 100 in "normal" setting, the result is one stop overexposure.

[dwdallam]

So what if you are shooting Canon? Does high ISO noise reduction do anything to the RAW images? If so, same question: in camera or out for noise reduction?

Also, when the DX2 (I think) came out, people were amazed at its ability to shoot ISO 6400+ with virtually no noise. However, if you can achieve the same results in post with a Canon, what's the big deal--other than noise free out of camera jpgs?

[madmanchan]

So what if you are shooting Canon? Does high ISO noise reduction do anything to the RAW images? If so, same question: in camera or out for noise reduction?

No.

Also, when the DX2 (I think) came out, people were amazed at its ability to shoot ISO 6400+ with virtually no noise. However, if you can achieve the same results in post with a Canon, what's the big deal--other than noise free out of camera jpgs?

Workflow and speed.

[Panopeeper]

when the DX2 (I think) came out, people were amazed at its ability to shoot ISO 6400+ with virtually no noise

That must have been really amazing. The TOP real ISO of the D2X and D2Xs is 800. 6400 is not available even as fake.

[dwdallam]

That must have been really amazing. The TOP real ISO of the D2X and D2Xs is 800. 6400 is not available even as fake.

Well what Nikon camera was the model that had this awesome low noise files all the way up to its max? I think Micheal tested it?

I had no idea the same level of reduction can be achieved using software. That's very enlightening.

[Panopeeper]

I had no idea the same level of reduction can be achieved using software. That's very enlightening.

Most of the noise reduction performed in-camera is software (firmware nowadays is software). The hardware NR of CMOS is a very different quality, that has nothing to do with what people mean as "noise reduction": it contributes to the "cleanness" of individual pixels.

The really important aspect is, that noise reduction, at least the "core", be done in the raw conversion, before or during demosaicing.

[Jeremy Payne]

Well what Nikon camera was the model that had this awesome low noise files all the way up to its max?

You are probably thinking of the D3 and D700 which definitely have broken new ground at higher ISO's.

I've printed well-exposed D700 images shot at 6400 that look REALLY good at 8 x 10.  Haven't gone bigger yet.

It is around ISO 1600-3200 where my D700 starts to look like my little Canon G9 at ISO 100.

Here's ISO 6400 shot basically by candlelight ... with post-capture NR applied by Lightroom prior to JPEG conversion.

[Panopeeper]

Here's ISO 6400 shot basically by candlelight ... with post-capture NR applied by Lightroom prior to JPEG conversion.

Jeremy, your demonstration invites some comments.

1. As far as I can judge it from this small image, most of what would be noisy is under the black point. There is nothing wrong with that, it's part of the mood. The shot looks excellent (at least in this size), but it has nothing to do with noise. The advantage of low noise is in keeping the shadow details, not hiding the noise. You can make excellent shots even with your G9 if you raise the black point high enough.

2. You could have achieved the same with ISO 1600 (everything above 1600 with the D3/D700 is eye-wash). I wonder if and how much the clipped areas would look like if two stops more of the highlights had been preserved.

[Jeremy Payne]

Jeremy, your demonstration invites some comments.

1. As far as I can judge it from this small image, most of what would be noisy is under the black point. There is nothing wrong with that, it's part of the mood. The shot looks excellent (at least in this size), but it has nothing to do with noise. The advantage of low noise is in keeping the shadow details, not hiding the noise. You can make excellent shots even with your G9 if you raise the black point high enough.

2. You could have achieved the same with ISO 1600 (everything above 1600 with the D3/D700 is eye-wash). I wonder if and how much the clipped areas would look like if two stops more of the highlights had been preserved.

Fair points ... here's a better example ... 100% crop:

[attachment=13102:Capture.JPG]

[Panopeeper]

here's a better example ... 100% crop:

Right; by raising the black point, the noise in the background would vanish - but it would cost some details in the main subject.

I guess the blotchiness (on the man's face and shirt, and on the panel/wall/whatever behind the man) will not go away with size reduction; the end of the camera's ability is reached here. (This is not a critique on the D700; every camera has its limits, the D3/D700 are very good.)

Do you mind uploading this raw file for some experiments?

[Jeremy Payne]

Do you mind uploading this raw file for some experiments?

Not at all ... it was one of the very first D700 files I processed, let alone one at 6400 ... I'm remote at the moment, but will be back at home-base soon and will upload to SendUIt or whatnot.

[Jeremy Payne]

I uploaded a few examples ... figured it might be instructive ... zip file is a bit large at 90mb

If that's a problem, let me know and I'll upload the single file.

http://senduit.com/b0ac91