Expert LR3 Noise Reduction Opinion

Anyone super amazing with LR3 Noise Reduction & Post Processing?

I was shooting today at 6400 ISO on my 7D (usually only shoot 3200 ISO) and was wondering what a Pro could do with a shot like this. I enclosed the original DNG file below.

What settings would you use for Basic, Tone Curse, and Detail Panel for sharpening & noise reduction and overall PP to get the best image quality out of this. Using LR3 only.

DNG File: http://cdn.greattobeda​d.com/photos/_MG_5881.​dng

Would be easier if you posted the CR2: Then we could return just the xmp file...

René Damkot wrote in post #11742302
Would be easier if you posted the CR2: Then we could return just the xmp file...

I convert to DNG on import and format the memory card before next use. So I never save CR2 files.

the orginal should still be there...I thought lightroom was non-distructive

Saxi wrote in post #11742405
I convert to DNG on import and format the memory card before next use. So I never save CR2 files.

What's the logic behind that approach?

bfleck51 wrote in post #11742437
the orginal should still be there...I thought lightroom was non-distructive

Heh... Lightroom does not safeguard against intentional actions by the user.

bfleck51 wrote in post #11742437
the orginal should still be there...I thought lightroom was non-distructive

LR is non-destructive, but converting an image from CR2 to DNG is not. I do this on import to keep all my images in a more compatible format DNG, it also shaves about 20% off the file size.

PixelMagic wrote in post #11742545
What's the logic behind that approach?

DNG is more standardized, and about 20% smaller.

Sorry I can't help you with your NR question since I'm not currently on a computer with Photoshop. But I'm curious about "more standardized." More standardized that what? And given the cost of hard drives, a saving of 20% is inconsequential to me. And I say this as someone who has used an entirely DNG workflow since it was introduced in 2004.

Saxi wrote in post #11742554
DNG is more standardized, and about 20% smaller.

PixelMagic wrote in post #11742619
Sorry I can't help you with your NR question since I'm not currently on a computer with Photoshop. But I'm curious about "more standardized." More standardized that what? And given the cost of hard drives, a saving of 20% is inconsequential to me. And I say this as someone who has used an entirely DNG workflow since it was introduced in 2004.

CR2 files change every camera release, there is no guarantee it will be supported forever by all software in fact lots of software does not support it. DNG is more of a standard, although to be honest, it really isn't much of a standard as it hasn't fully been adopted.

The main reason is space, yes space is cheap but it isn't that simple. I only use high performance drives, SCSI, Raptors, and SSD which typically lag behind in sizes considerably from the 2TB for $80 type of disks. I also do full daily backups and keep all files in three locations (active, backup, off-site). So that 20% gets multiplied 3-5 times.

I got ya now...you convert before it even gets a chance to catalog....duh..thats why I put all my programs and files on an external hard drive...and also back up all my recient files to disc!

bfleck51 wrote in post #11743016
I got ya now...you convert before it even gets a chance to catalog....duh..thats why I put all my programs and files on an external hard drive...and also back up all my recient files to disc!

I backup once in the catalog every 15 minutes via syncs.

Here's a quick edit:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.