Adobe noise reduction

In case anyone hadn't noticed, Adobe released several new updates to its software packages recently. Prominent among them is (finally) a new AI-based denoising tool called, appropriately enough, Denoise. There are a couple of articles in the Adobe blog here: https://blog.adobe.com/en/topics/lightroom. Adobe's new algorithm seems to work in a similar fashion to those of DxO and Topaz, through 'training' the software to identify and correct noise while retaining details, using millions of image samples. I understand that at the moment it only works with raw files, because it links the denoising and demosaicing functions together (DxO's AI functions also do this, and will not work on (for example) TIFFs). Hopefully someone will share their experiences of the new software in the forum at some stage.

Simon

I have been starting to test it out this week, I have found it to be a very impressive tool and looks to somewhat rival other popular offerings from Topaz and DxO. The process is perhaps a little slower compared to DxO, however the results can be controlled well and the workflow integration is helpful. In combination with Lightroom's subject masking for selective sharpening it works well to run denoise and then gain details with more refined sharpening.

Attached are 3 quick trials, noting this is more of a real world comparison as opposed to testing each in isolation. Image shot at ISO6400 on Canon R7, very dim light also making it hard to avoid noise at high ISO
Manual Denoise - Lightroom Inbuilt Model, not pushed too hard.
AI Denoise - Lightroom AI module completed then used selective mask to bring back some subject sharpness. I found the amount can be increased initially then detail reclaimed with the subject selection to resharpen the bird (in this example I did over sharpen a little I think).
DxO Pure Raw 2 - Running the program on its own no additional masking or sharpening applied.

Interesting comparison. At this size of image (1800px?) I expect the differences are masked slightly by downsizing. However, to my eye the middle one (AI Denoise if I am reading correctly) is the worst, although that may come down to the settings you have chosen. There are still levels of noise here that I would be unsatisfied with. The other two (manual, which I am assuming is on the right in the post, and DxO) are fairly similar in terms of overall NR and detail achieved. Looking at the green feathers on the bird's upper back. the manual seems to provide a good balance of noise reduction and detail, although looking closely I am wondering if there is some moire there. The AI denoise leaves this area quite messy. The DxO seems to have marginally less high frequency detail than the Manual, but this may just be the levels of contrast and sharpening applied. While I am not sure about PureRaw, the DxO Photolab does allow adjustments to sharpening in conjunction with denoising so this is controllable to some extent.

I think from the perspective of Lightroom users, this is a good thing. Including plugins, there is now a choice of two native NR methods, DxO, Topaz and possibly also NeatImage. The user can pick which one they prefer the look of. Also, the software manufacturers will be driven to further improve their product to stay competitive.

Simon

Correction - I meant the manual is on the LEFT in the post.

Simon Pelling wrote:

Also, the software manufacturers will be driven to further improve their product to stay competitive. Simon

Or the alternative providers will lose so much business (given Adobe's dominance) they will fold?

The Left is Lightroom AI Denoise, Middle is Manual and Right is DXO. They are uploaded a bit out of order to the text, however file name has each labeled.

Not a very scientific test run and I hope to test more comprehensively soon. I don't doubt this will be the first of many more significant upgrades from Adobe, the speed of processing may improve and perhaps the overall control.