New stronger type or mode of noise reduction. Users should have the option to prioritize image smoothness over detail preservation.
New stronger type or mode of noise reduction. Users should have the option to prioritize image smoothness over detail preservation.
Hello capture one team. I would like to request an update for the denoising tool. It would be very helpful and useful for users to have the control on how the noise reduction is applied towards an image. I wanted to smooth out the entire background of an image using the noise reduction tool and just mask out the subject to prevent it from being included. The only issue is that the denoising tool is very weak and you cant completely smooth out the background.
There are often times where you want to prioritize smooth the entire background and theres no need to preserve the details. Capture one's current denoising tool is very mild, which can be good for other purposes. I hope there will be a feature that allows you to enable or choose a stronger version/mode of noise reduction.
Thank you for the hard work and have a nice day.
-
Greeting and Salutations:
I agree with the OP that this feature is extremely important.
In addition, I would like to see a stronger noise reduction tool that is on par with the rest of the competition. Most likely, it is too late to be included in the initial debut of CP23, it something that has to implement. Since, one of the upgrades in CP23 centers on efficiency of the workflow, it my strong opinion that noise reduction should be done in-house rather than using a 3rd party software such as TOPAZ or DXO in a round trip with a DMG file(s) as the result.
Here in the community forum and on 2 other Facebook groups, this has been the most critical issue regarding noise reduction tool and how it is not been up to par that I have always made my comments on. It is now the time to devote the required resources for the redevelopment of this critical tool.
I am looking forward to the arrival of CP23 now that I upgraded. Once again, thank you Capture One for your dedication in improving this product.
1 -
Permanently deleted usera stronger noise reduction tool that is on par with the rest of the competition.
The only "competition" that is markedly ahead of Capture One in this space is DxO Photolab - and it is very poor in other regards, which is why it has decided to make NR its "USP".
It is now the time to devote the required resources for the redevelopment of this critical tool.
Strongly disagree: I'm confident that the vast majority of photographers' images are well within the scope of Capture One's NR (would you seriously argue otherwise?), so it makes perfect sense to leave the outliers to specialist noise reduction solutions.
0 -
I could be wrong but in my opinion from what I have observed, capture one is more than capable of making their noise reduction tool more stronger.
They are probably just capping or limiting the maximum strength allowed to denoise in order to create a standard quality preservation which can be helpful for some users, preventing them from over doing the noise reduction. But it can also be a disadvantage to some users who in some specifc cases where they dont care about detail/quality preservation(Masking helps isolate the subjects from the strong noise reduction).
There are lots of basic image editing tools that can outdo the strength of capture one's noise reduction tool. Are the results in quality/detail preservation better than capture one? No. But that is the point. The quality/detail preservation is not an issue because there are instances or specific cases where details are not important. The main objective is just to soften the backgorund.
It would be really useful if capture one just allows the users to use the full potential of the noise reduction tool. Even if it still needs some improvement and further development. Users wouldnt mind using the stronger denoise tool even if it is still not completely done or developed to a performance close to dxo or topaz.0 -
As I have found in different venues of photography forums, there are many different camps regarding the opinions on the level of performance for noise reduction. Hence, I am in the camp that Capture One should improve the level of noise reduction performance.
I started using CO after switching from DXO as my raw editor in the beginning of 2019. I used Photomechanic at first to manage my files and then Adobe Bridge in conjunction with DXO, since DXO had no provisions for that at that current time. I first started using DXO back in 2016, after doing much research at that time. The final decision came down to DXO and LR. The decision to use DXO where from a lot of articles that some users of LR use DXO as the raw engine.
The only "competition" that is markedly ahead of Capture One in this space is DxO Photolab - and it is very poor in other regards, which is why it has decided to make NR its "USP".
With the above statement from Keith R in a previous post here, I agree.
As I got more into DXO, the more I found that quality of the final product looked too artificial instead of a natural look. I noticed this when i switched from a crop sensor to a full frame sensor. The tools that always shine in DXO where noise reduction, geometry, and sharpening. Even with the NIK collection at is side, DXO PhotoLab 6 still does not meet the level of Capture One today.
Since using CO, I found that steady improvement in both geometry and sharping over the last few years, that CO is holding their own against the competition. The combination of catalogs and sessions has made my work flow faster and efficient. Now I am looking to see the new culling tools and how to use them to my advantage.
With that said, getting back to the point of this thread, as a tool, noise reduction should meet the requirements of all, not a small niche.
In response to Keith R:
Strongly disagree: I'm confident that the vast majority of photographers' images are well within the scope of Capture One's NR (would you seriously argue otherwise?), so it makes perfect sense to leave the outliers to specialist noise reduction solutions.
To begin, I am not a professional photographer, but a very serious enthusiast and I have had work published over the years. So I guess, maybe a semi-professional. I do know that the last few updates, in my opinion, that CO has made my 2 Canon R5 bodies and RF L glass sparkle even more.
I have found that working in different products you tend to loose something. Currently, if I need the "specialist noise reduction solution(s)", I have to send it out to DXO without doing any corrections in C1 and get it back as a DMG file. Then I correct the image in C1 to what needs to be done without over cooking the returned image. Sometimes, if find that I have to do additional adjustments in DXO before sending it back C1 to accomplish the right balance for the final image in C1. There is a sacrifice in efficiency in terms of workflow and some level of incompatibility between products not mention the additional file management. Therefore, my belief, if everything is done in-house capturing the power of the product, in this case Capture One.
The OP in their last post makes strong points that I agree with. A lot of merit goes into that commentary that CO should take under advisement.
As those who complain that CO is still behind the competition, especially when compared to LR, that is their opinion. As for myself, CO gets the job done for me efficiently and great images. Yes, I do think there should be other new features added on, but at the moment, CO has to continue to strength the tools they have and not worry about LR new toys are doing.
1
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
4件のコメント