Comparison noise reduction LR3B2 vrs third party

[sturman]

Hi,

since Adobe is showing their new RAW engine including the new noise reduction function everywhere i was interested in how good it stacks up against some third party plug-ins. I happen to have Dfine 2.0 and Neat Image 4.7 (i know its not the latest version - but i do not have any other).

You can find it here.

I already posted it at the NAPP forum, so some of you might know it already - but since it is a closed forum i post it here also. Even though my website is mainly in German these comparison is done in English. You also find this comparison at the Link section of my website - you find it at the navigation bar at the top of each page.

You are also able to download those files including the RAW images/TIF files to play for yourself with them. I used a 1DsMkIII at ISO1600 and ISO3200 under tungsten light which is a tad on the worst case side rather than a optimal setting noise wise. This body is by no way a low noise wonder as the Nikon D3s.
Is it the one and last answer to that question how Adobe's noise reduction stacks up against the third party plug-ins? No, by no means. But it sure should help to get an idea how far Adobe has come in this regard - even used light handed. Please keep this in mind while reading it. I am no full time tester - and i never want to be one. I am a photographer and thats what i like.

Andy

[francois]

Hi,

since Adobe is showing their new RAW engine including the new noise reduction function everywhere i was interested in how good it stacks up against some third party plug-ins. I happen to have Dfine 2.0 and Neat Image 4.7 (i know its not the latest version - but i do not have any other).

You can find it here.

I already posted it at the NAPP forum, so some of you might know it already - but since it is a closed forum i post it here also. Even though my website is mainly in German these comparison is done in English. You also find this comparison at the Link section of my website - you find it at the navigation bar at the top of each page.

You are also able to download those files including the RAW images/TIF files to play for yourself with them. I used a 1DsMkIII at ISO1600 and ISO3200 under tungsten light which is a tad on the worst case side rather than a optimal setting noise wise. This body is by no way a low noise wonder as the Nikon D3s.
Is it the one and last answer to that question how Adobe's noise reduction stacks up against the third party plug-ins? No, by no means. But it sure should help to get an idea how far Adobe has come in this regard - even used light handed. Please keep this in mind while reading it. I am no full time tester - and i never want to be one. I am a photographer and thats what i like.

Andy

Thanks for the article. It'ss very interesting and very good news regarding LR3/ACR new noise removal engine capabilites.

[photopianeil]

Thanks for the article. It'ss very interesting and very good news regarding LR3/ACR new noise removal engine capabilites.

Thanks from me as well. I just got through doing a less empirical test myself with theater shots at ISO 6400 on the Nikon D. 300. I was blown on my seat. The letter-size prints with the new noise reduction looked like 100 speed negative film from Hasselblad. I tried a 24 x 30 and there was still almost no grain, even in the out of focus backgrounds. The faces and skin tones were as smooth as could be -- this is great stuff. I've also gotten some very interesting results with older more abstract images with water. I do some heavy sharpening and then some heavy luminance noise reduction in my images look like illustrations, good or bad. This is a brave New World.
Neil