I photographed a ring exchange with my old 1DX (2012) in backlight, at ISO 100, but because the technology of the sensor is so old I have really ugly noise after brightening.
Now I stumbled across an interesting procedure, you first denoise with Severe here you set the original detail slider to about 80% or more.
Then you denoise with Standart, LowLight or Clear as you like.
With this procedure you can save some pictures.
Severe alone I can not take because it erases the clothing details, so afterwards with another model do the rest.
The output is comparable to that of DxO Deep Prime.
As always with me based on a tiff after Iāve edited it.
Not sure why you have posted this on a thread about On1 NoNoise! Maybe you should a new thread with it, as itās an interesting idea and worth checking.
Possibly.
Anyway, the double-pass didnāt work for me on this image. And, since this is ostensibly a discussion about On1 NoNoise, it also did a better job getting the texture of the fabric. Both that and the DxO sample, were processed completely using auto.
In all cases, I was working on the original DNG, which was taken at 1/600 at ISO 1280.
Sory. No go. Even at fairly normal resolution, although the texture is OK, the colour is right off.
I will stick with the version produced by DxO Deep Prime with just one click.
(By the way, I am pretty sure I sent the devs this image, amongst others, during the beta testing of the current version of DeNoise. Either they didnāt use it, or they failed!)
I tried both with your suggested settings and my own. Neither did a good job.
In this instance, I was using (a trial of) DxO PureRaw, so I was working with my original DNG file. What you see has not had any further processing.
And, some companies are better than others at providing tutorials (ahem) than others that demo their marketing product claimsā¦
I seem to recall when I got my Lexus (ā¦) they had someone from the tech sales grp come out to meet me for a scheduled appt on the pickup day at the dealership to show me how to find/operate some of the intrinsic features they were claiming to be assets in the model I purchased. Clearly (also ahem re: flawed analogiesā¦) they werenāt teaching me how to drive (after 90 yrs of me doing that). But they were providing a proper tutorial to ensure I got the best value from the product & ensuring features were used as designed.
I think ON1 regularly delivers tutorials that show, in a straightforward way (even if using biased, optimal images) how their products can be used & provide disclaimers re: what will work best and in what context. All that said, I havenāt been a fan of the quality of their products beyond their 1st-2nd gen pro line from back when (which can no longer be installed on computers).
Well ON1 2023 is out and the Tack Sharp is laughable compared to Topaz Labs. NoNoise is slightly better than Tack Sharp. But hands down the winner is Topaz Labs in these categories.
Iām sorry to have to agree about Tack Sharp. And the new masking tool is pretty useless. Iāve never been a fan of the Imperfect brush either. Howver, for most every day needs. I have found that no noise does a decent job I havenāt yet tried it on those very difficult images (see above) for which the only solution in the past was using DXO PureRAW. I plan to do a little bit of testing in the next few days just out of curiosity.
