AP, Dfine or Neat image

[Pompel]

Problem: Indoor sports photography, using high ISO that causes grainy images. Which is best for removing the noise/grain: 

Dfine 2 (NIK), Neat Image or AP own "denoise"? I am interesting to hear your experiences?

(Perhaps not correct the forum to ask the question, but I take the chance)

Thank you

tss

[firstdefence]

I think the best option would be to strip test using a grainy image and applying each plugin/filter or app then compare the results and choose which one you prefer.

 

AP's Denoise does a fair job, Dfine2 is good if you add more control points in manual mode, neat image I haven't tried but I'm downloading the trial now to test with. I think of the 3 Dfine2 appears to work best, Neat Image didn't seem to have much affect.

[John Rostron]

I find that Neat Image works quite well, but I agree that Dfine is probably the best.

John

[Pompel]

I thought so. I'm struggling a little with Dfine, I'm not quite happy with the results, so I thought i maybe buy Neat Image.

But if there is so little difference between the apps i guess I continue to use Dfine and AP. 

(I was hoping you would say that Neat Image is a fantastic and the best noise removal software on the market, so I could justify  purchasing the program )

Thank you for responding

tss

[John Rostron]

I should point out that most of my noise removal is done on scanned slides rather than high-ISO digital images. Dfine seems to do well at removing the resisual film grain.

John

 

[firstdefence]

4 minutes ago, Pompel said:

I thought so. I'm struggling a little with Dfine, I'm not quite happy with the results, so I thought i maybe buy Neat Image.

But if there is so little difference between the apps i guess I continue to use Dfine and AP. 

(I was hoping you would say that Neat Image is a fantastic and the best noise removal software on the market, so I could justify  purchasing the program )

Thank you for responding

tss

Neat Image do a trial version so you can have a play before you buy and decide for yourself, personally I found it a bit unrefined, the GUI wasn't the nicest to use but don't let that put you off, try it and then make a choice, you never know it might be the "best noise removal software on the market" for you. lol

 

[firstdefence]

@Pompel You don't say whether you are on Mac or Windows?

[Pompel]

8 minutes ago, firstdefence said:

@Pompel You don't say whether you are on Mac or Windows?

I am on Windows

The results may not be so different, so i guess it's a matter of which programs you think are easiest to work with.

tss

[firstdefence]

I like Dfine, I like the finesse you get with the control points. The only program that comes close for me is DxO Photo Optics although It's now called DxO PhotoLab but it has a hefty $200 price tag for the elite version which has the Raw Denoising option. So Dfine is the clear winner when it comes to results, control and of course price.

[v_kyr]

Well there are a bunch of tools which allow to remove noise/grain to some degree here, though results also highly depend on their algorithmic accuracy and the kind of input image noise, aka high ISO and lighting conditions. - Another tool which sometimes gives good results is Topaz DeNoise which is also easy to use.  However, I first would try the tools you already have available there.

[firstdefence]

10 hours ago, v_kyr said:

Well there are a bunch of tools which allow to remove noise/grain to some degree here, though results also highly depend on their algorithmic accuracy and the kind of input image noise, aka high ISO and lighting conditions. - Another tool which sometimes gives good results is Topaz DeNoise which is also easy to use.  However, I first would try the tools you already have available there.

Topaz has some nice plugins, well laid out too.

[John Rostron]

I have just done a comparison of Dfine and Neat image on a scanned slide of a sea anemone. I have cropped the image to just the background plus a tentacle. All images are the original resolution (not re-sized). In both cases, I used the a region in the area shown as the training area for the denoising.

Original image as scanned (and cropped):

Using Nik Dfine:

Using Neat Image Reduce Noise V8:

Both have reduced the scanning noise without unduly affecting the detail on the tentacle. It would be hard to choose which is the best.

John

[Pompel]

12 hours ago, firstdefence said:

Topaz has some nice plugins, well laid out too.

I have Topaz Detail, but i have not tested it properly yet. 

 

11 hours ago, John Rostron said:

I have just done a comparison of Dfine and Neat image on a scanned slide of a sea anemone. I have cropped the image to just the background plus a tentacle. All images are the original resolution (not re-sized). In both cases, I used the a region in the area shown as the training area for the denoising.

 Both have reduced the scanning noise without unduly affecting the detail on the tentacle. It would be hard to choose which is the best.

John

Based on your photos, I might have chosen the one where Neat Image was used. If you look at the tentacle. But it's hard when you do not see the whole picture / actual size.

( Maybe I have to buy anyway)

  tss

[John Rostron]

On 2/12/2018 at 10:27 PM, Pompel said:

Based on your photos, I might have chosen the one where Neat Image was used. If you look at the tentacle. But it's hard when you do not see the whole picture / actual size.

I would probably agree in this case. I used this image as I was using it as a subject for trying masking to combine de-noising and sharpening. My overall impression over a variety of other slide scans is that Nik is marginally better.

I attach three jpegs of the original image only slightly cropped around the edges. Click an image and select the full size option.

The original image:

The image after Dfine:

The image after Neat Image V8:

John

[firstdefence]

Actually I like the Neat version, the tentacles seems smoother more ethereal, so lends itself to the subject.

[Polygonius]

1 hour ago, firstdefence said:

Actually I like the Neat version, the tentacles seems smoother more ethereal, so lends itself to the subject.

Me too, it seems it reduces more noise by keeping all details unaffected, does not produces any halos...

Please John, could you post some othere examples (and BTW also with AP-denoise for comparison - that would be really pleasant).

[John Rostron]

22 hours ago, Polygonius said:

Please John, could you post some othere examples (and BTW also with AP-denoise for comparison - that would be really pleasant).

Here is the same image processed in Photo (latest Beta) using the defaults. Moving the sliders did not seem to make any improvements.

John