Lightroom 12.3 claims to have AI noise reduction

[koenkooi]

From https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-cc/using/whats-new/2023-3.html#denoise

Reducing noise from your images just got easier with AI-powered Denoise. You can now enhance photos taken with high ISO settings by eliminating noise efficiently. With this addition to the Detail panel in Lightroom, you can now reduce noise automatically and manually.

Only works on proper RAW files, which have a Bayer or X-trans pattern. So no linear DNGs, TIFFs or m/sRAW.

 

[koenkooi]

A quick try with an ISO3200 picture from an R5, it's a lot better than the stock NR, but not as good as DxO or Topaz:


It will create a DNG copy of your RAW, so be prepared for your storage medium filling up a lot quicker!

 

[AlanF]

Photoshop is excellent for image manipulation but not for sharpening or noise reduction. And, like all Adobe products, it's not intuitve to use, at least not for me.

 

[koenkooi]

And the official Adobe blog post: https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2023/04/18/denoise-demystified

 

[Maximilian]

A quick try with an ISO3200 picture from an R5, it's a lot better than the stock NR, but not as good as DxO or Topaz: ...

Thanks for sharing this information.

 

[HeavyPiper]

Just uploaded this morning and my Ligthroom crashed. Had to reinstall the old revision and was told to wait for another update.

 

[mawalker]

I've used it on Wedding Photos from this spring up to ISO 10000, and the important fact is it did a better job than I could do and allot quicker...
I've not tired it on my Mac book yet, but my PC moans (all the fans kick in) when I run the de-noise!

Get's the nod from me as someone who does not want to waste too much time..

 

[danfaz]

I think it does a pretty good job! This is a 12800 ISO image. Look at them at 100%, and there is a very noticeable difference.

 

[Jethro]

I've just started playing with it - and initial reaction is that I'm pretty impressed. I've only tried single images (ie not batches) and the first was slowwww, but it seemed to get quicker as I tried more pictures (all with the same body/lens combination), so there may be some actual 'learning' going on. When I get a good candidate and some time, I'll try it against Topaz Photo AI. It's miles better than the historical Adobe NR function though.

 

[cooldood]

I have not tried it mostly because I love Topaz

 

[Jethro]

Haven't had time to do my own direct comparisons - but here is a review (v DXO) from the revitalised DPR:

Adobe Denoise vs. DxO DeepPRIME XD...which NR algorithm is best?

It's high noon at the Pixel Corral! Which rootin-tootin noise reduction algorithm will win in our duel, Adobe's new Denoise or the seasoned vet DxO DeepPRIME XD?

www.dpreview.com

Hint: the Adobe version is pretty good (much better than previous), not as good as DXO in fine detail, and slow and clunky from a performance point of view (ie like pretty much everything Adobe releases ...). So, useful to have, but not best in class.

 

[koenkooi]

I've noticed that on some textures, like frog skin, Dxo DeepPrimeXD will replace the noisy texture with something that looks like a Hilbert Curve. The resulting robotic space frog looks nice, but very artificial.

As for speed, DxO PL takes about 12 seconds per R5 RAW for denoise+optical correction, LR takes about 15 seconds per R5 RAW for denoising. So it's not a huge difference on my Mac Studio.

 

[Jethro]

Really quick example - I was processing some shots from my recent trip to Madrid, which included a very brief look into an early 18th century wine cellar (which was basically pitch black).

The below (1/125, f/4.0, ISO 4000) are pushed 4 stops (and WB corrected), but not much else. The enhanced version (hint: on the right!) is (nearly) noise free at 100%, and to me usable. It took about 30 seconds to process. Actually, pretty impressed:


Edit: here is a pretty-much automated version from Topaz Photo AI:

Pixel peeping at the Topaz version, there is less (ie nil) noise, but a noticeable amount of detail has gone. And I can't adjust the WB on the Topaz dng without getting a strange result. I prefer the LR in this case.

 

[AlanF]

Really quick example - I was processing some shots from my recent trip to Madrid, which included a very brief look into an early 18th century wine cellar (which was basically pitch black).

The below (1/125, f/4.0, ISO 4000) are pushed 4 stops (and WB corrected), but not much else. The enhanced version (hint: on the right!) is (nearly) noise free at 100%, and to me usable. It took about 30 seconds to process. Actually, pretty impressed:

View attachment 210115View attachment 210116
Edit: here is a pretty-much automated version from Topaz Photo AI:
View attachment 210117
Pixel peeping at the Topaz version, there is less (ie nil) noise, but a noticeable amount of detail has gone. And I can't adjust the WB on the Topaz dng without getting a strange result. I prefer the LR in this case.

What is the result of processing the RAW in LR to a jpg without noise reduction but with right WB and then applying Topaz Denoise? I only ever use Topaz as a last step on jpegs as it seems deficient as a RAW converter, and DxO is my preferred converter.

 

[Jethro]

What is the result of processing the RAW in LR to a jpg without noise reduction but with right WB and then applying Topaz Denoise? I only ever use Topaz as a last step on jpegs as it seems deficient as a RAW converter, and DxO is my preferred converter.

I'll try that - but disappointed in the Topaz dng output based on the RAW image.