Index  •   • New Posts  •   • RTAT  •   • "Best Of"  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New Posts  •   • RTAT  •   • "Best Of"  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing
Thread started 11 May 2007 (Friday) 09:22
PREV/NEXT

Noise reduction - unsharp mask - CS2

 
philmar
Goldmember
philmar's Avatar
4,731 posts

Joined Jan 2007

Toronto, Canada
MORE INFO

I have a question for the techie types here.
I notice that when I do a large batch process for noise reduction (using actions) in CS2 that the time involved is dramatically longer than it takes to do a batch action 'resize - unsharpen mask - convert color space- 8 bit mode- save as' (using the exact same batch side)
I am curious as to why CS2 noise reduction takes much much longer than all the other actions combined?
Is there something about noise reduction that requires more memory or CPU processing?

May 11, 2007 09:22

A photo I took HERE published in National GeographicTime on your hands? Then HERE'S plenty more photos to nibble onexternal link:
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/phil_marion​/sets/external link
MY STUFFS 5DIII, 30D, 24-70 L, 24-105 L, EF 10-22, 70-200 f4 IS L, 100 mm f2.8, macro, Tamron 150-600, Nifty 50 mm f1.8, Canon 1.4x TC, 430EX AND A HUGE CREDIT CARD BILL!!!

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
In2Photos
Cream of the Crop
In2Photos's Avatar
19,808 posts

Joined Dec 2005

Near Charlotte, NC.
MORE INFO

Not sure which Noise Reduction you are using, the PS version built-in or a plug-in. But yes some just take more time then others.

May 11, 2007 09:27

Mike, The Keeper of the Archive

Current Gear and Feedback| My Pbase Galleryexternal link | mdsportsphoto.comexternal linkhttp://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=835433

LOG IN TO REPLY
philmar
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
philmar's Avatar
4,731 posts

Joined Jan 2007

Toronto, Canada
MORE INFO

I'm using the CS2 built-in version.

Do plug-ins work faster? I have just spent the last week leaning sharpening - I don't think I have the energy to learn the intricacies and nuances of noise reductions right now:rolleyes:

May 11, 2007 10:35 as a reply to In2Photos's post 1 hour earlier.

A photo I took HERE published in National GeographicTime on your hands? Then HERE'S plenty more photos to nibble onexternal link:
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/phil_marion​/sets/external link
MY STUFFS 5DIII, 30D, 24-70 L, 24-105 L, EF 10-22, 70-200 f4 IS L, 100 mm f2.8, macro, Tamron 150-600, Nifty 50 mm f1.8, Canon 1.4x TC, 430EX AND A HUGE CREDIT CARD BILL!!!

LOG IN TO REPLY
In2Photos
Cream of the Crop
In2Photos's Avatar
19,808 posts

Joined Dec 2005

Near Charlotte, NC.
MORE INFO

philmar wrote in post #3189289external link
I'm using the CS2 built-in version.

Do plug-ins work faster? I have just spent the last week leaning sharpening - I don't think I have the energy to learn the intricacies and nuances of noise reductions right now:rolleyes:

I don't think that plug-ins work faster. I use Noise Ninja and it takes some time to complete the task. Granted my PC isn't the fastest but I don't use it enough fro it to bother me. Noise was something I used to worry about but very rarely do I use it now.

May 11, 2007 10:44

Mike, The Keeper of the Archive

Current Gear and Feedback| My Pbase Galleryexternal link | mdsportsphoto.comexternal linkhttp://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=835433

LOG IN TO REPLY
philmar
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
philmar's Avatar
4,731 posts

Joined Jan 2007

Toronto, Canada
MORE INFO

Anyone know why noise reduction takes longer than sharpening?

Perhaps because sharpening occurs only on pixels on/near edges whereas noise occurs in much larger areas like shadows forcing CS2 to do a lengthier set of pixel related mathematical calculatiuons?

May 11, 2007 12:20

A photo I took HERE published in National GeographicTime on your hands? Then HERE'S plenty more photos to nibble onexternal link:
http://www.flickriver.​com/photos/phil_marion​/sets/external link
MY STUFFS 5DIII, 30D, 24-70 L, 24-105 L, EF 10-22, 70-200 f4 IS L, 100 mm f2.8, macro, Tamron 150-600, Nifty 50 mm f1.8, Canon 1.4x TC, 430EX AND A HUGE CREDIT CARD BILL!!!

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
In2Photos
Cream of the Crop
In2Photos's Avatar
19,808 posts

Joined Dec 2005

Near Charlotte, NC.
MORE INFO

philmar wrote in post #3189856external link
Anyone know why noise reduction takes longer than sharpening?

Perhaps because sharpening occurs only on pixels on/near edges whereas noise occurs in much larger areas like shadows forcing CS2 to do a lengthier set of pixel related mathematical calculatiuons?

It has to be because of the algorythims. Try a more complicated sharpening tool like the TLR sharpening scripts and noise reduction will fly compared to it.

May 11, 2007 12:47

Mike, The Keeper of the Archive

Current Gear and Feedback| My Pbase Galleryexternal link | mdsportsphoto.comexternal linkhttp://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=835433

LOG IN TO REPLY
Ronald ­ S. ­ Jr.
Prodigal "Brick" Layer
Ronald S. Jr.'s Avatar
16,190 posts

Joined Aug 2005

Sayre, Pennsylvania
MORE INFO

When I use The Noise Ninja plug-in with CS2 on a single shot, it takes around 3-5 seconds to complete the task. Multiply that out.

May 26, 2007 10:35

Mac users swear by their computers. PC users swear at theirs.

LOG IN TO REPLY

1,063 views & 0 likes for this thread
Noise reduction - unsharp mask - CS2
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing

NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO THE FORUMS
Registered members get all the features: search, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, own reviews...




SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF    •   JUMP TO FORUM    •   FORUM RULES    •   Index    •   New Posts    •   RTAT    •   "Best Of"    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality. We do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browsers' data storage methods.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.1version 1.1
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00122 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.01s
Latest registered member is Dickster72
729 guests, 537 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014