Feedback requested - Sharpening and Noise Reduction

I've frequently struggled with obtaining what I consider acceptable processing
of images to tame both sharpening and noise. With the new 5D4, I've a new impetus
to try things differently. Surely the camera itself plays a role in this, but I've gone back
to trying Adobe Camera Raw for what I've read about as being a very good tool.

I use Photoshop CS6, and will not move to a leasing model for the software I use.
I'm also considering darktable and LightZone for replacement.

It seems I'm moving in the right direction.
5D4, 28-135 IS USM, f/8, ISO 6400, 1/125:

Looks good to me!

I use CS5 still and purchased the Noiseware plugin years back, and have been using since for countless models.

My general recipe for this is:
- keep sharpening down to a minimum before the noise reduction
- do the noise reduction (mildly, not heavy handed)
- sharpen and add contrast
- now do the noise reduction a bit more heavy handed
- whatever else you want to do to the image

Also you may find that if you go to each color channel, and do different kinds of NR on each channel, your final RGB result might come out better in the end.

This is from my 5D4, at ISO 25600. The first is the result directly from the raw through DPP, with no post processing. The 2nd is a crop (100%, but had to resize to fit POTN). The 5D4 is pretty amazing and has simplified my workflow for all high ISO shooting. Keep playing with your copy at these ISOs and try different things, like DPP to JPG, vs Camera Raw, and other techniques and tools.

With DPP -> CS5 -> Noiseware, this is what I get after processing. If I would use Topaz Denoise, I would have a different result. If I would use Adobe NR tools, I would get a 3rd result. One just needs to find the workflow that is efficent for how they work.

Do you have any other samples at those higher ISO?

Much appreciated(Cary, isn't it? Apologies if I'm wrong)!

After attempting ACR on so many 40D and 50D images, it seemed I couldn't find
acceptable results. With the new 5D4, it seems I can now find a compromise.
Photoshop comprised the majority of my attempts before, while I had a Eureka!
moment with ACR on this image.

Sharpening was ONLY done with ACR for this capture; nothing further in CS6.
Such is why I'm so pleased with this one. Passing older captures into CS6
for processing left me disappointed, with exception to a ballooning event
I shot in full sunlight with a 40D(see gallery).

I doubt I'm ready for separate color-channel processing, but I thank you for
the advice to go there. I will explore it if I ever feel I should, but for now,
I'm just pleased to have achieved a result I'm happy with, and validated
by someone else.

SkedAddled wrote in post #18904112
Much appreciated(Cary, isn't it? Apologies if I'm wrong)!

After attempting ACR on so many 40D and 50D images, it seemed I couldn't find
acceptable results. With the new 5D4, it seems I can now find a compromise.
Photoshop comprised the majority of my attempts before, while I had a Eureka!
moment with ACR on this image.

Sharpening was ONLY done with ACR for this capture; nothing further in CS6.
Such is why I'm so pleased with this one. Passing older captures into CS6
for processing left me disappointed, with exception to a ballooning event
I shot in full sunlight with a 40D(see gallery).

I doubt I'm ready for separate color-channel processing, but I thank you for
the advice to go there. I will explore it if I ever feel I should, but for now,
I'm just pleased to have achieved a result I'm happy with, and validated
by someone else.

40D and 50D were difficult and I would have to go to the raw, start with all settings there, and then take it to JPG and still do alot of work. The 7D was a bit better, but the 7D2 improved quite a bit, the 5D4 is another step up. I can actually set up picture styles and other settings, and then use the high ISO JPG right from the camera. The JPG engine changed after the 7D, so the 7D2 and 5D4 both produce better JPG results than older bodies.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18904110
Do you have any other samples at those higher ISO?

Yes, here is an image which was only downsized for the forum.
I believe it displays the extraordinary capabilities of the 5D4 in image capturing.
It is unedited by me, only downsized.

Like I have always said, the 5D4 is one of the best cameras Canon has developed. Looking good!

The 5D4 is pretty amazing. Crop is from the bird on the left bottom.

I have no affiliation with this site. It is $15 but pretty good. Lots of free stuff in youtube.

https://backcountrygal​lery.com …photoshop-video-workshop/

PK Sharpener is now free. It was $100 about 2 years ago. Not sure how long it will work. When Catalina (Mac) is released in a few weeks older software like CS6 will work but you won't be able to re-install it.

Takes a lot of the guesswork out of re-sizing and sharpening amount.

http://www.pixelgenius​.com/

digital paradise wrote in post #18904465
PK Sharpener is now free. It was $100 about 2 years ago. Not sure how long it will work. When Catalina (Mac) is released in a few weeks older software like CS6 will work but you won't be able to re-install it.

Takes a lot of the guesswork out of re-sizing and sharpening amount.

http://www.pixelgenius​.com/

Yeah, I've had the PK suite for a short time. Windows.
Never got acceptable or satisfactory results within PS with it; perhaps I haven't understood
its workings. A HDD crash forced me to start over, and with that mentality, perhaps spurred
me on to revisiting ACR, and revisiting possibilities.

I continue to use Photoshop/ACR CS6, as I have no interest in leasing or renting software,
so this setup will be my choice due to widespread support and tutorials for the package.
I'll continue to use the combination until a suitable replacement comes along,
which genuinely seems to be just around the corner.

In terms of sharpening and noise, this looks great to me. For the given ISO, the noise is very much under control and is quite impressive.

I do think that the image would benefit from some dodging/burning to help minimize some of the extraneous distractions (particularly the adjacent cars and the white expanse of the upper wall at the right and left) and to help focus the eye on the subject and even out some of the shadows on the white car. Also, a tad more sharpening on some of the chrome would make it pop just a bit. There is a yellow color cast that, because the car is white, becomes somewhat more apparent than would normally be the case with the given lighting.

I took a stab at some of those adjustments and would be happy to post if that is OK.

Bcaps wrote in post #18905253
In terms of sharpening and noise, this looks great to me. For the given ISO, the noise is very much under control and is quite impressive.

I do think that the image would benefit from some dodging/burning to help minimize some of the extraneous distractions (particularly the adjacent cars and the white expanse of the upper wall at the right and left) and to help focus the eye on the subject and even out some of the shadows on the white car. Also, a tad more sharpening on some of the chrome would make it pop just a bit. There is a yellow color cast that, because the car is white, becomes somewhat more apparent than would normally be the case with the given lighting.

I took a stab at some of those adjustments and would be happy to post if that is OK.

Post away, Dave. I have no issue with that.

It should be noted that the white color of the car is, in fact, more of a cream color,
so it's not starkly white anyway. It looks true to my eyes on my monitors, in spite of them
not being calibrated.
With the car being a 1935 model, its color is age-appropriate.

Also be aware that I've never attempted what you're describing to such an extent.
These images are simply a feedback request against my overall results of the
abovementioned sharpening and noise properties. I'm just thrilled to have been able
to move a few steps up in the camera department, which is an obviously-improved
starting point for the processing.

SkedAddled wrote in post #18905579
Post away, Dave. I have no issue with that.

It should be noted that the white color of the car is, in fact, more of a cream color,
so it's not starkly white anyway. It looks true to my eyes on my monitors, in spite of them
not being calibrated.
With the car being a 1935 model, its color is age-appropriate.

Also be aware that I've never attempted what you're describing to such an extent.
These images are simply a feedback request against my overall results of the
abovementioned sharpening and noise properties. I'm just thrilled to have been able
to move a few steps up in the camera department, which is an obviously-improved
starting point for the processing.

This is what I came up with, which may not be true to life if there is some yellow in the white as I mostly removed that.

I did 4 things in this edit.

I set color by using the level tool and using the middle eyedropper on a neutral gray area. I used Unsharp Mask to add contrast. I then used Unsharp Mask to sharpen a bit more. I also ran the shadows/highlights tool to even up the rest of the room.

It looks like there might be a couple different sets of artificial lights, perhaps a mix of CFL and LED?