LR 3 Noise Reduction vs Neat Image???

I currently use Bridge, ACR, and PS CS4 for all of my editing needs. I import to bridge (converting to DNGs during import), make as many edits as I possibly can in ACR, and then do noise reduction and sharpening actions in CS4. If there is a photo that needs extra work or I want to experiment with then I will do more in CS4, but for the most part all I use CS4 for is noise reduction (NI), sharpening, watermarking (if needed), and then re-sizing for print/web.

My question is this... is the new NR engine in LR3 good enough that I can rely on it to replace Neat Image for all but the toughest shots at ISO 3200 out of my 40D? I'm thinking that LR can do 95% of my normal workflow and then I can just use CS4 as needed for special situations. I would love to be able to just do everything from one program but really rely on Neat Image sometimes for basic noise redux at ISO 400 to 1600.

I should add that I am in a lot of situations from events that I batch process anywhere from fifty to a few hundred photos at once. LR3 looks like a good tool for that situation as well.

Well, cueball, I'd say you are a prime candidate for downloading the free trial of LR3 (make sure to run the Help/Update utility right off the bat), test things out, and get back to us and let us know how it works for you!

I can attest to how incredible LR (v.3+) NR is. I shoot regularly at 800-1600ISO, push exposure a fair bit and have never had the feeling that I needed something outside the LR environment--at least in terms of NR.

tonylong wrote in post #11097104
Well, cueball, I'd say you are a prime candidate for downloading the free trial of LR3 (make sure to run the Help/Update utility right off the bat), test things out, and get back to us and let us know how it works for you!

That's the plan for later tonight. I've got a long weekend off of work and this is my off week between classes so I have plenty of time to download and experiment over the next three days. I was mainly being lazy and looking for some quick info from anyone who's used both. Thank you for the heads up on running the utility right away. I'll let you guys know what I come up with over the next 30 days. Thanks.

I don't bother with noise reduction. You can really only see noise on images at 100% in photoshop or on prints 18" or greater, so for 99% of people it's not a problem that needs to be dealt with. If noise makes or breaks your image, it's probably not that great to start with.

cueball wrote in post #11098121
That's the plan for later tonight. I've got a long weekend off of work and this is my off week between classes so I have plenty of time to download and experiment over the next three days. I was mainly being lazy and looking for some quick info from anyone who's used both. Thank you for the heads up on running the utility right away. I'll let you guys know what I come up with over the next 30 days. Thanks.

Cool I don't have Neat Image, I only use LR, so I gave you the only help I had to offer!

I'm really not amazed at LR3's noise reduction. Sure, it can get the noise out, but it does it at the expense of detail.

Here are the things I have in order of quality:

- Photoshop with the Noiseware plugin. This is the best solution. I think Noiseware does the best job of all the solutions I have tried. Using it in photoshop means that I can use masks and layers to get the image perfect. Heavy noise reduction in the places I want it and lighter noise reduction where I want more detail.

- LR3 noise reduction. Perfectly good for 60% of situations, but not perfect for all situations. I just don't find it to be leaps and bounds above LR2 noise reduction.

- Aperture with the Noise Ninja plugin. Noise Ninja just can't compare to Noiseware. If Noiseware made a plugin for Aperture, that would probably be all I used.

- Aperture's built in noise reduction. Pure garbage. You can't even tell that anything has been applied.

If you were starting from scratch, I would say forget Bridge & ACR and use Lightroom instead. Forget Photoshop and get Photoshop Express with your favorite noise reduction plugin. I think this solution would work for many people.

I am impressed with LR3's noise reduction over CS4 and that goes for sharpening as well. Most of what I use it for is when shooting product and absolutely have to get it out (usually not a lot and not at really high ISO's, 400-800) like when shooting against blue skies at high shutter speeds. Yes most programs will get rid of this noise but I much prefer the way LR3 does it, is seems cleaner and in that range I do not notice any image quality loss. Those who get really technical might have a different answer but for me it's about getting it approved by the client and art director for publication on both print and the internet.

I think the default sharpening in LR3 is so superior to LR2 w/extra in CS4 that I often don't even bother touching it in post. Everything about my images seem to be cleaner, almost as if I just got a newer camera or lens. Not huge to notice at first but over time I really got to appreciate the extra quality.

Since I upgraded to CS5 many months ago (same NR engine as LR3) and thousands of concert shots at ISO1600, 3200 and sometimes 6400 later, I haven't used NeatImage once. Then again, I rarely use any noise reduction for web postings. When I have used the NR in ACR I have been extremely impressed how well it does hang on to detail while removing the noise.

tim wrote in post #11098275
I don't bother with noise reduction. You can really only see noise on images at 100% in photoshop or on prints 18" or greater, so for 99% of people it's not a problem that needs to be dealt with. If noise makes or breaks your image, it's probably not that great to start with.

I don't think I've ever disagreed more with a POTN post. It all depends on what and how you shoot. I shoot at a lot of underground events with poor ambient lighting. However, using a flash would kill the atmosphere. I shoot at ISO3200-6400 on my 7D which results in VERY noisy images (at any print size).

However, LR3's NR really is pretty impressive. You have to get used to the flow so the images don't come out looking overly smooth, but it also depends on what you are going to do with other PP for the image. I shot Theatre Bizarre last night in Detroit, and to keep with the atmosphere, most of the images will get moderate film grain and be converted to B&W. I STILL have to remove noise from most of them before I do this.

I'm loving the new LR3 & it's noise reduction.
I very frequently shoot 3200 ISO w/ my 7D, and although the 7D is very good at 3200 ISO (even better than 1600 it seems) there are some shots that do show a lot of noise.

Here is a shot I just messed with today, without noise reduction it looks pretty bad, but with LR3 I was able to remove the noise and still have a lot of detail. I think this is a wonderful 3200 ISO shot and would go so far to say I have more detail after NR than before.

The second I got notification LR3 was released, I bought it within 5 minutes as this was the biggest feature I was waiting for. I really prefer a non-destructive workflow.

SOOC

Thought I'd throw out an update on this,
I pulled the trigger and ordered a full copy of LR3. I am impressed with just about every aspect of the program. It's really what I was looking for concerning 95% of my photography. The noise reduction works very well for the majority of my high ISO shooting as of late. I found out Imagenomic does a student discount so I will be getting their plug-in suite for PS and use Noiseware if things really get hairy. Thanks for all the help, opinions, and info everyone.

cueball wrote in post #11216683
Thought I'd throw out an update on this,
I pulled the trigger and ordered a full copy of LR3. I am impressed with just about every aspect of the program. It's really what I was looking for concerning 95% of my photography. The noise reduction works very well for the majority of my high ISO shooting as of late. I found out Imagenomic does a student discount so I will be getting their plug-in suite for PS and use Noiseware if things really get hairy. Thanks for all the help, opinions, and info everyone.

Noise Reduction was the only significant reason I upgraded to LR3, I would have updated regardless as I tend to prefer to have the latest for applications I use on a regular basis. NR was my biggest complaint about LR, I wanted quality NR that fit into my non-destructive workflow.