Thank you for sharing your workflow. That is a LOT of steps. I guess everyone eventually comes up with their own method. Here is my workflow with similar results and fewer steps. I import, edit in Lightroom, do everything I want to do except sharpening and denoise, then run it through topaz denoise on auto settings unless it selects severe noise, if it does, switch to standard, and then you are done. In standard mode, topaz gets rid of all the noise without messing up your subject. In severe noise mode, topaz messes up your subject. Of course, there is nothing wrong with your method, it just adds many steps that might not be necessary. You have a great channel. Keep up the excellent work and thanks for sharing your method which I might try if my method ever fails to work for me.
Agree with Phil, as I watched this video, (although I always like and appreciate Jan's videos) I am thinking: "Waay too complicated" Did I count 47 steps? Now, of course if you are a pro, and sell your photos, and teach, and only do this, it makes sense as the results are good, but I will take Phil's approach. Just my 2 cents though.
I do the same, but I tried the PureRAW demo and loved what it does. Much more refined / beautiful noise removal than Topaz was my feeling. A bit too much default sharpening, but we all complained in the forum and they added some kind of option to remove it. Still not a simple sharpening level slider, which is why I haven't bought yet.
I switched to using dxo photolab 5 exclusively for raw editing. I love that it's a once off payment so I could get rid of the Adobe subscriptions and the deep prime is a game changer
This is almost exactly my workflow: RAW convert and deep prime denoise with mild settings in Dxo Photolab, do the rest of the image in Affinity and denoise the result in Topaz Denoise and merge that as a layer back to Affinity, where unwanted denoising artefacts will get masked out. Basically those two denoisers complement each other: one being the preprocess denoiser, the other being the postprocess denoiser. 👍
Hello Jan, An interesting piece of education there, thank you. That said, I think that when the bird looked at you and thought, "Hey, Jan, I live in the wild and you expect silence and bright light? Well use Pure RAW and DeNoise and you won't worry so much." You had little choice but to use That picture. 😉
Hi Jan I bought it and just popped a few high ISO images through DXO. I was stunned at how good it made the image, no noise great detail and so very easy to use. Im no longer stopping at ISO 6400 and gettting shots a stop above and DXO maintains the detail. Amazing!
I appreciate your videos on this stuff! I do the culling with FastStone and then do raw conversion with DPP (R5 here). Just lens correction and export to tiff. DPP is slow, and the tiffs are huge, but it converts the raw files very well IMO, which is what I really want. It's free and consistent at least. From there, it's LR usually for me. I can apply a touch more noise reduction in LR with masking, but usually not necessary. I continue to watch all of your updates on this subject, as the software options are really playing catchup to the cameras these days. I can't imagine the confusion for new people just getting into this type of photography nowadays - buy an expensive setup and then run into a brick wall when you want to actually want to process a photo. So thank you for continuing to share your thoughts and methods!
@@unknownKnownunknowns once you export the .cr3 to .tiff from DPP, LR does a great job with the tiff file, no new noise or color shifts. It's just the .cr3 files that LR doesn't convert well at all. Downsides are that tiff is a large file size, and DPP is painfully slow. But the end result is accurate and clean photos. Cull in FastStone or other fast image viewer first, then only convert the keepers...
Hi Jan many thanks for another great video, I cull my images with Photo Mechanic and then use DxO PR ver 1 but never thought of running them through Topaz as well. Great tip about the graphics card never realised you could do that on DxO and Topaz. All the best Doug
Good you mentioned the darker DNG issue on R5 raws (0.5 stop darker most of the time). It is indeed annoying! It has been reported in DXO forum for a couple times but DXO has yet to give it a look. I hope they see your video and do something. A nicely done video after all Jan!
That was what impressed me too. It's not an either or situation, you use both to meld your ideal photographic creation. And, as your skill improves, you may even get the photo that you saw.
My 1-2 punch as well Pure Raw and then Denoise if needed .Almost same workflow, file from folder straight into Pure Raw, but I send it to LR library folder when finished, basic adjustments, then onto PS if needed to tweek, additional noise reduction using Denoise if needed. Return file back to LR and then delete DNG Pure Raw file
Thank you Jan, was shooting with s d4s, had it many years, I called it, "the princess of darkness :), This year I pulled the trigger on a Z9 with its "bucket full of pixels", soon found out about noise Currently using Topaz de noise, but will now look at DXO pure raw, unfortunately , not much slack left on the CC right now, 11 year old iMac was not coping with Topaz denoise too well (or video for that matter) and now Have a Mac Studio ultra ................ Gary .......................AU
I have found that DxO PhotoLab 5 Elite provides far more control of DeepPrime noise reduction and Lens Sharpening, including the brightness of the corners, and I much prefer it over using DxO PureRAW. It also integrates far better with Lightroom (which I use for DAM).
I do the same and for the same reasons. I use the CameraRaw profiles in DxO Photolab, do all of my raw editing, then return it to LR as a TIFF; additional processing is easily done in LR or (of course) also Photoshop.
@@kemerthomson Why Tiff? Why not DNG (having been demosaiced in DxO). Then apply edits in LR as for any other RAW image, and/or send to PS for further processing as required?
@@colinfieldgate4719 Because the DNG produces a color shift if you do anything other than optical corrections and noise reduction. Photolab does much better than LR in raw conversion, as does Canon’s software.
@@kemerthomson Maybe so. But I only apply noise reduction and optical corrections, preferring to use LR and PS for image editing. My point was that DxO PhotoLab is better than PureRAW for pre-processing RAW files as it provides more control.
It could be a decent workflow, but I didn't like having to include a whole new RAW converter in my workflow, so Pure Raw was the more streamlined option. I would hope they include more settings down the track
As I'm on Mac I don't use FastStone, but I love previewing from the SD card with Adobe Bridge. Beautiful full size stunning previews with easy navigation. Then select the keepers and copy to your preferred destination.
That sounds a really good option. As a first cull it’s a great idea and saves importing images to my hard drive that would get binned when reviewing them in LR. Thanks
@@davet3530 There's a nice carousel option with ⌘B, even has a loupe magnifier. I usually hit spacebar for the full size preview that can be sized with the mouse wheel / trackpad. Bridge does cache large previews which take space, so I clear out the cache occasionally.
Hi Jan, I share your assessment that PureRaw currently provides the best noise reduction. But now, in addition to the RAW file, you have an additional DNG file that is about four times as large. How to solve the problem? My workflow is as follows: after importing the DNG into Capture One and making all the adjustments, I copy all the adjustments to the RAW file. This can be done in Capture One with 2 clicks. This may seem nonsensical since only the edited DNG file represents the finished photo in good quality. But I only use the RAW file as a note for the adjustments. If I delete the DNG and recreate it again from the RAW file using PureRaw, I can simply copy the adjustments from the RAW file back to the newly created DNG and have my perfectly rendered photo back. This way I save a lot of disk space.
Very helpful video. I have both PureRaw 2 and Topaz NR AI. Because I have both Fuji and Nikon gear, I snapped up PR2 when I saw they supported the XTrans raw conversion. I've been neglecting to use Topaz Denoise AI at all since but as you've demonstrated there is a place for both! Thank you, you always bring something of value in your videos!
Where topaz shines is when you have an older file you send to a publisher for instance and want to clean that up, years after you edited it. Then it can be quite quick to run Topaz on it with good results
Thanks Jan, I have been trying the Pure Raw trial and using it from within LR. Your tips, particularly of putting the files into a folder on your desktop make good sense, I had noticed that the DXO Pure Raw files are quite large so getting rid of them once you have edited and saved the file is going to use less hard drive space. I agree too, turn off the sharpen aspect within DXO. I want to be able to selectively sharpen layer on.
Jan, Nicely presented and you gave me some good advice. I have a new R5 as you know. I have always in the past using my prior DSLR's used the lowest ISO as possible. I still do with the R5. However I am using auto ISO more so now but have kept the ISO to the max of 3200 and felt better at 1600 ISO. I will today increase the max ISO to 12,800 which when typing this I feel very uncomfortable with doing. I can change back to 6400 or so if need be. I purchased Topaz Denoise last week and I really enjoy it. I also have DXO which has the Deep Prime noise reduction as well. I had not thought of using both programs on the same image. I use Light Room and have not tried Photo Shop. Denoise Sharpen seems to help as well. Thanks Jan!
I use almost the same process you do, almost because I don't use Photoshop (I am not so good in it) but I use Lightroom... (one day I might buy your masterclass and learn something). I also use Topaz Sharpen sometimes to give a little more details, especially when my subject is a little blurry or just little tiny out of focus, I think it does a good job too
Thanks for yet another excellent video and tutorial on post processing! I found myself saying yes, Yes, YES toward the end and realized it’s all because of You giving me my start in the digital darkroom last year using your Master Class, PROSETS and excellent videos!!! My workflow mimics yours with my evolution of processes as I learn new ways to enhance my images. Pure Raw is a game changer! Thank you so much and keep up the Great work for others to benefit from!!
Perfect timing Jan, I'm just wondering as to whether it is worth the $59usd ?? to update to the new DXO Pure RAW 2? Have you had a chance to have a play with it or heard any reports on it yet? Thanks for tackling the daily subjects as well as the sponsored 'New Camera Gear' videos. .. Bruce.
As soon as they support my OM-1 I will be able to use my copies of PureRaw2 and DxOPhotolab5,currently can only use Topaz which allows me to use a Tiff exported from LR.
Awesome video Jan, since trying DXO pureRAW I haven't looked back to Topaz for denoising tbh. Not even is it better imo but it is so much faster. I still use Topaz to sharpen up..
Hi Jan, thanks for sharing these editing insights. And Yess, I fully agree we shouldn't be afraid of high ISO any more .. at least with DxO and some of those amazing new FF camera's. With my old APS-C DSLR the max supportable ISO was a hell of a lot lower. So I'm really wondering how the unicorn R7 will perform at ISO 12800 and higher. This high ISO approach also gives me better than expected results when using the EF2x on my 100-400Lii ;-) From Topaz, I'm not using Denoise often, but rather its Gigapixel (because the mp count is clearly the biggest weakness of my R6) and Gigapixel also applies some denoise to remove some remaining noise in the background.
@@jan_wegener They shall certainly not downgrade the noise quality .. but still the APS-C sensors will not reach FF level, and m4/3 will not reach APS-C, because with same technology it is directly related to pixel density, and the R5 reaches almost R6 level of low light IQ with higher pixel density but at a much higher (in some regions at least) price. Canon will not make the R7 significantly more expensive than the R6 just to get same low light IQ at a much higher pixel density.
Hi Jan, thanks for this: I was struggling with whether to use DXO first, then edit in Lr, or the other way around. I like your approach of denoising first. One thing I’m unsure of: what do you do with the dng files afterwards? They’re the new “master”, correct, since they would contain one’s Lightroom edits?
Something you didn’t mention is that can convert DxO file to DNG whereas Topaz converts to a TIFF file. For that reason I’ve always used topaz at end of work flow. I love this combo. Thanks
So helpful! Ty Jan! I’ve been playing around with the higher ISOs but wasn’t ever able to get rid of the noise like y’all do - I’m definitely going to have to check out Pure Raw!
Thanks very good information. I am curious what f stop do you use on that photo and where was your focus point? The reason I ask is the bill seems softer then the back feathers. Thanks
Thank you for another informative video Jan. Do you have any idea how DXO PureRaw and your prosets work with other processing software? I'm currently using ON1 Photo Raw, along with the Topaz suite.
@@jan_wegener Thank you Jan. I thought DXO would probably be compatible, plus I can try it for free. I'm disappointed the prosets won't work. Do you know if they would work with Affinity Photo? That's a PS clone with enhancements, so it works in much the same way.
I have no problem with high iso if it's needed to get the shot. I use a combination of pure raw2 and Capture one noise reduction and get excellent results up to iso 104000. There is no difference in brightness between .arw and processed .dng in C1. It may be an LR issue. I also have Topaz, but only use it on older tiff files. Pure raw2 better fits my workflow and does a better job in my opinion.
I'll throw this thought out there. When you look at an image at ISO 100 there is grain, subtle but it's there and obviously nothing like it is at higher ISOs. I see a lot of images online that have (obviously) gone through either Pure RAW or Topaz DeNoise which are grain free. I'm not saying this is right or wrong but to my eye a little grain is fine and as it should be. What do you think Jan?
Hi Jan What was the the name of the first program you used to review your images? Great video. My thinking is the same as yours regarding high ISOs. Surprising the number of people I speak with who still insist that they won’t shoot above 1000-2000
Great tools for pros, are there other perhaps cheaper techniques those of us lower budget wildlife photographers can employ? Other than shooting with low noise!
@@jan_wegener Good call. I was also able to answer my question to an extent. Lightroom has a lot of masking tools built in these days. To the localized edits are far easier to do there than they once were. While Lightroom does an OK job at controlling noise. Dedicated tools are going to be better. That said they are not necessary for us budget hobbyists. Although this video was about working with High Noise images, I found your edits very useful and re aim to replicate them in my own work.
Great tutorial Jan. My only difference is that I import the dng file from DXO to Lightroom. Does the DNG edit using Lightroom offer the "same" as the capability with camera RAW?
I use use DXO PhotoLab and turn up the Luminance if I need to remove more noise in the background. I'll push it to 50 or 55. By default its at 40. With DXO PureRaw you can't change the Luminance. For me DXO PhotoLab is better for reducing noise but DXO PureRaw is better for loading a lot of files up and walking away from the computer. DXO PhotoLab you can still load up a lot of files but its going to take a few extra minutes to load them up maybe two or three extra minutes. It's not a big deal but when you come home from a wedding you just want to load them up and click go and then go to bed.
Could you let me know which version of photoshop you are using? I purchased the prosets and DXO lab 5 and I was considering your masterclass. I am sure your workflow has changed and you are not using DPP anymore. Is your current workflow a part of the masterclass or does the class focus on your editing while in photoshop?
The masterclass doesn't include DXO, but you can see that in this video. The masterclass is focused on the important steps & tricks in Photoshop. These have not changed with the different versions.
Hi Jan, great instruction, great pics! Simple question: I am an allround nature photographer. ( general wildlife, macro and landscape). Just bought a R6, the Canon 100-500, and a Laowa 2.8 100mm. Wide angle will follow later. A lot to learn for an former analog underwater photographer, pfjew.!! Now i found out I need a better/faster PC, is coming up. so, for the time being, I practice in JPEG. But: which programs do I need? Luminar? Lightroom? I am confused on this. Luminar A.I is not appealing to me, but what can you advise to get started, and work on the images that deserve it? With all these new noise reduction prgrams mentioned here, I think I should become a full IT/Program software guru. Help! Keep shooting! Greetz from the Netherlands, Peter
I use FastStone Image Viewer to look through my images, other use Lightroom and then I edit and convert them in Camera RAW & Photoshop. If they're Noisy I use DXO Pure RAW to remover the noise.
How much time does this add to you posting lets say a days outing of birds. As to me this looks and seems as if there is a lot of time you have to dedicate to your photo's after an outing. I know I can go out and get over 600 shots and if I had to work on each one doing what you have done I would be unable to go out for a week and I would be seated infront of my computer. It to me seems overwhelming in the post process to get a postable image. So for me I think I would far prefer the lower ISO over the extra work that you are doing. Though I will say I am not trying to sell my images as you are and this could be the biggest to why I prefer the older way of doing things over what to me is a very long and drawn out process to the posting of images. You did say you wanted out thoughts and this is the way I see.
Greetings. Excellent video. When do you use optical corrections? Do you set them on camera? I already saw that you don't use them in DxO, although I'm not sure why. Do you use them in some other part of the editing flow? Maybe in Raw Camera or later in Photoshop. Thank you
Hi Jan, I recently acquired DXO Pure Raw when they had their Black Friday special. I've preciously been using Topaz Denoise but using DXO Pure Raw first in my workflow is an absolute game changer, thanks! Quick question though. Do you not use Topaz Sharpen AI at all in your workflow?
Another very useful video Jan. Have you noticed that PureRaw does some sharpening even with global sharpening switched off? The amount seems to depend on the image content but definitely occurs, as confirmed to me by DxO support. It is only with the even more expensive PhotoLab that the sharpening can be fully switched off and the amount of noise reduction controlled. For this reason, I have reverted to NeatImage which seems almost as effective as PureRaw for NR and does not do any sharpening. Also the amount of NR can be controlled. Have you looked at NeatImage recently? It has been around for many years but now seems unfashionable to for reasons I don't understand!
Cracking video as per usual, but when you say you delete the dng file after you edit them dose that mean you don’t keep a copy of the original raw file .
Amazingly detailed video. Thank you so much Jan. You’re my mentor. One question though. DXO creates extremely large dng files that are 3-4 times larger. than the R5 cr3 files. How do you save the results of your editing or downsize and save those edited files? This is not clear or I missed it. Thanks Jan
I save the file i create in photoshop as a PSD file. That file can be 1-2 GBB sometimes, depending on how many layers I use. I do not keep the dng file DXO Pure Raw creates
Hi Jan, there's another software competitor in this arena called On1 NoNoise AI. I haven't tried DXO, but I have tried Topaz DeNoise AI and I prefer On1. It can batch process raw files and spit out DNGs. It not only does great noise removal, but it also has fantastic detail/sharpening features. On1 is about to release an amazing Resize AI plugin. If it lives up to the samples shown so far, it'll be the best on the market.
@@SEAME7 35 years in photography and 25 years of photo editing/restoration/retouching, I'm no beginner. On1 Photo Raw, I agree is well behind Capture One Pro (my preferred raw processor) and Lightroom. It's mostly a bunch of presets and effects and has poor highlight and shadow recovery. However, I'm talking about a plug-in called On1 NoNoise 2022. It's better than Topaz Denise AI for me, personally. If you can't figure out how to use it then maybe you're the beginner! Enough said.
@@jan_wegener Thanks. I think I am going to purchase it. I have been using topaz up till now. I wish they had a send to from camera raw but no big deal. I did notice on the couple images I tested with R5 files that I have to bring the exposure up about a 1/2 stop to get back to original raw
To FIX DNG file size: I was doing DXO Pure Raw 2 - Topaz Sharpen - Lightroom , but everytime you process the image to a DNG, it saves the previous RAW plus the new RAW into the same file, so the file size grows around 3 to 4 times if you pass it by DXO and then Topaz. Its not that it adds so much information but it contains backups of the previous original file inside of it. So if you process around 100 images you can easily use more than 10 GB on that day session. its a bit too taxing for drives I think. So the way to overcome this is to at the end of your processing, pass all your DNGs trough the free app Adobe DNG converter. That app allows to strip the backup files from inside the DNG and use lossy compression directly on the DNG, sounds bad when you read "lossy" but I very very rarely see artifacts due to compression. At the end you can have a DNG file you can color correct, already sharpened and denoised at just around 10-20MB. Thats Drive friendly, and if you use cloud services to backup your files this is also helpful.
Hello Jan I tried to use Pure Raw following your tutorial but the program does not process Nikon NEF files. Please let me know what I need to do? Many Thanks John
Hi Jan, thanks for the info. It seems you need multiple software packages, either subscription or purchase. Is PhotoLab 5 a good single package from a single company, DXO? Also Photopea might be an option instead of Photoshop. Have you ever looked at it? From what I have read it sounds very similar to Photoshop but free. Which brings me to my last question; Is you Master Class Adobe based, i.e. Lightroom and Photoshop, or does it now include Pure Raw or usable with other editing software. Thanks.
You can download a free trial, there's a link in the description. Maybe that will help you to get an idea. personally I prefer the DXO/Topaz ACR/Photoshop workflow. In my opinion nothing can replace Photoshop. My Masterclass revolves around Photoshop and how you can get great results with it
Are there any settings you need to adjust in faststone image viewer? I seem to not be able to zoom in very far, but when I zoom in its blury. Viewing the images full size is fine though Also im going to convert to this workflow, to do this I now shoot uncompressed RAW because DXO does not support compressed raw. Currently I use photoshop camera raw then run through topaz, but I'm simply not happy with topaz anymore.
In my opinion it does a more consistent job. I have never had a file with DXO that has one area still noisy and another too smooth. Which seems to happen sometimes with Topaz.
Sometimes, depending on the background, I have to leave a little noise or add some grain otherwise I end up with colour banding. Do you ever experience this? I find it really annoying. I have a Z6.
@@jan_wegener Tatsächlich finde ich das Rauschen, wenn es nicht zu krass ist, nicht störend. Für mich wirkt so ein glatt gebügelter Hintergrund unnatürlich.
Post processing apps are only part of the story. Another big part is the modern cameras that have camera/sensor combinations that are ISO invariant over a wide range of ISO. They have intrinsically low noise to begin with and a range of ISO where raising the ISO doesn't raise the noise to signal ratio. It's the ratio you detect in the image not the absolute amount of noise. And no, low ISO doesn't mean low noise in theory. That theory was for film with a fixed ISO based on a layer of silver halides. Higher ISO meant thicker silver halide layer which caused more clumping of silver grains when light exposed the film. The term grainy was based on the resulting grains of silver. In digital cameras the sources of noise are different entirely. It's not rocket science but it is photons and electrons and microelectronic circuitry and modern cameras have improved the signal to noise ratio of high ISO images immensely. Post-processing does the rest but it gets a big head start from modern camera electronics. I say the above because some folks may have cameras that make high ISO images far noisier looking and less fixable with post processing. Perhaps pure raw and Topaz will help them also but it may not come as easily as it does with R5 images.
Thanks for your reply. I enjoy your videos a lot, and didn't mean to seem to be disagreeing. Basically it's a fairly new design criterion to make cameras "ISO invariant," largely because sensor technology has advanced to that level. It's what makes it so fun to use my R5 for photographing Peregrines.
Have you tried using Topaz Denoise as a stand-alone application, drop your raw file into it, and use the RAW option? It will then be saved as a DNG, which you can open in Photoshop. Basically it is the same workflow as you present in your video, but without DXO. I find that the results of using the External Editor / RAW denoising in Topaz is much better than the Photoshop / Topaz Filter route I mainly used before. Mind you, you need a current version of Topaz Denoise, older versions do not have the RAW option.
Thanks for the tip. I have not tried that. My main beef with Topaz is the inconsistency. Pure RAW always seems to have the same strength applied everywhere, whereas Topaz sometimes does too much and at the same time leaves out other spots that remain a bit noisy. So I only want to run it on it's own layer, to be able to even those things out.
The same workflow as with DXO (drop RAW in the external (stand-alone) editor --> denoise (with option RAW in Topaz) --> export to DNG) on Topaz DeNoise yields significantly better results. Especially on 'blurry backgrounds' there is a much more consistent 'creaminess' all over. Going the Photoshop / Topaz Filter way sometimes shows patches of inconsistent de-noising. I also find that working directly on RAW yields much better sharpening results. I do not have DXO available, curious to see what an 'apples to apples' workflow comparison would show.
Hello Jan, Thanks for another educational video! I work with LR and sometimes I do some editing in PS. I tried DXO for a month, but I get an error with about 50% of my photos, so it doesn't work. I've contacted you about this before, unfortunately I can't find what the cause is anywhere. But it does stop me from buying it. I have one more small question, I understand you will throw away the DXO (DNG) when you finish the photo. But for me that is the original file, do you make an export of it??? I know you mentioned it in a previous video but I can't find which video that was :-) I hope you understand what I mean. Thanks in advance for your response! Regards, Karin (Holland) PS I use R5 400 2.8
If you get an error it most likely has to do with the image modules and using gear that they don't support. It should work if you turn them off. The original file is my RAW file. The DNG is just a random copy really imo.
@@jan_wegener Thanks for your response, Jan! I'll give it a try at DXO with the modules off. It's so strange it's not always and I'm using an R5 with a 400 2.8 so that's not the problem either. I hope you are right, then I would like to buy the program. It's not entirely clear to me what your files are about, I'll watch your video again, and I think you also talk about it in your editing course, we have those too so just go and watch it again, always instructive; -) Thanks again, Regards, Karin
Quite the opposite. A talented person knows the best tools for the job and if that involves using multiple tools, then so be it. It's like comparing a jack of all trades with a master of one. Using multiple masters of one trade gives better results than using one program which is inferior in each task.
For "artistic" images, I shoot without much regard to ISO, and use denoising programs. For "record" shots of birds that I intend to contribute to the Cornell Lab of Ornithology's Macaulay Library, I don't use such "AI"-based denoising programs: they add what the AI "thinks" the image would have looked like without noise, which isn't good for scientific observations!
You are a bit young to remember the last days of film photography when shooting with Fuji or Ektachrome 100 ISO meant that in full sun with your 600 mm f4 you had 1/1000 sec. If the smallest, poorest excuse for a cloud drifted over, it was 1/500 or 1/250. Deep forest shooting with natural light was impossible. You could use Ektachrome 400 for a couple of extra stops, but then it looked like you had shot through sand. Horrible.
I purchased DXO Pure Raw one day before they came out with their latest upgrade. DXO refused to give me a free upgrade. I will never buy anything from DXO again!
@@metphmet Jan is a bird photographer. Watch a portrait photographer's channel if you want to see how they deal with noise on people. These noise removal programs work quite well on people and certainly make noisy images look much cleaner. It depends on the texture of the person's skin (how many blemishes they have etc.) and how strong the noise is, as to how much noise removal you can reply before making the image look smudgy. Let's just say that even if you have to leave some noise in the image, it will still look far better than the original image. On1 NoNoise AI 2022 is a good plug-in as it doesn't darken the image like Topaz tends to do.
Is it just me that I respect and like noise... These "topaz" guys are most annoying than everything else before, lol. Noise is the essence of photography that gives a specific look and at some point that might be the biggest reason to go back to dslr (not film because film is for unproductive casual shooters or hipsters with free money for todays overpriced film rolls) and these noiseless standars looks faker than Pamela Anderson's 90s silicon implants... Sorry for the rant but this trend is terrible. Not to mention that as much "cleaner" is your photo the worse it looks in social medias but that's another topic how bad is the programming of Meta 🥴
@@ForrestWest Oh waw, sorry but I won't read all that but I suspect you didn't get the point. I don't hate anybody, that's too negative energy that I don't have, it's all subjective so do whatever you want, don't use brain anymore and let all the camera AI and your PC do all the "photography" 🤷
@@dicekolev5360 What a load of nonsense. We do not live in a grainy/noisy world and don't see noise all around us. If you like noise and think it is artistic, that is up to you... but to some it is just annoying and spoils an image. Also, there is such a thing as "too much noise". You can use these software plug-ins to reduce noise without actually totally removing it. It is up to the photographer what look they prefer. Also, removing noise using AI is not letting AI do it all for you. It did not capture the shot, it merely reduced or removed the noise that you literally could not avoid with all the skills in the world. We are limited to the ISO performance of our cameras and there is no camera that is clean at ISO 12800 out there yet.
Thank you for sharing your workflow. That is a LOT of steps. I guess everyone eventually comes up with their own method. Here is my workflow with similar results and fewer steps. I import, edit in Lightroom, do everything I want to do except sharpening and denoise, then run it through topaz denoise on auto settings unless it selects severe noise, if it does, switch to standard, and then you are done. In standard mode, topaz gets rid of all the noise without messing up your subject. In severe noise mode, topaz messes up your subject. Of course, there is nothing wrong with your method, it just adds many steps that might not be necessary. You have a great channel. Keep up the excellent work and thanks for sharing your method which I might try if my method ever fails to work for me.
Agree with Phil, as I watched this video, (although I always like and appreciate Jan's videos) I am thinking: "Waay too complicated" Did I count 47 steps? Now, of course if you are a pro, and sell your photos, and teach, and only do this, it makes sense as the results are good, but I will take Phil's approach. Just my 2 cents though.
I do the same, but I tried the PureRAW demo and loved what it does. Much more refined / beautiful noise removal than Topaz was my feeling. A bit too much default sharpening, but we all complained in the forum and they added some kind of option to remove it. Still not a simple sharpening level slider, which is why I haven't bought yet.
I switched to using dxo photolab 5 exclusively for raw editing. I love that it's a once off payment so I could get rid of the Adobe subscriptions and the deep prime is a game changer
Well, kinda once of payment once a year
This is almost exactly my workflow: RAW convert and deep prime denoise with mild settings in Dxo Photolab, do the rest of the image in Affinity and denoise the result in Topaz Denoise and merge that as a layer back to Affinity, where unwanted denoising artefacts will get masked out. Basically those two denoisers complement each other: one being the preprocess denoiser, the other being the postprocess denoiser. 👍
Hello Jan,
An interesting piece of education there, thank you. That said, I think that when the bird looked at you and thought, "Hey, Jan, I live in the wild and you expect silence and bright light? Well use Pure RAW and DeNoise and you won't worry so much." You had little choice but to use That picture. 😉
Hi Jan I bought it and just popped a few high ISO images through DXO. I was stunned at how good it made the image, no noise great detail and so very easy to use. Im no longer stopping at ISO 6400 and gettting shots a stop above and DXO maintains the detail. Amazing!
I appreciate your videos on this stuff! I do the culling with FastStone and then do raw conversion with DPP (R5 here). Just lens correction and export to tiff. DPP is slow, and the tiffs are huge, but it converts the raw files very well IMO, which is what I really want. It's free and consistent at least. From there, it's LR usually for me. I can apply a touch more noise reduction in LR with masking, but usually not necessary. I continue to watch all of your updates on this subject, as the software options are really playing catchup to the cameras these days. I can't imagine the confusion for new people just getting into this type of photography nowadays - buy an expensive setup and then run into a brick wall when you want to actually want to process a photo. So thank you for continuing to share your thoughts and methods!
Yes, DPP does well, but I could not stand using it long term.
Rick. Thanks for sharing your workflow. I'm curious about DPP. Once a clean . CR3 file is moved from DPP to LR, does the noise reappear?
@@unknownKnownunknowns once you export the .cr3 to .tiff from DPP, LR does a great job with the tiff file, no new noise or color shifts. It's just the .cr3 files that LR doesn't convert well at all. Downsides are that tiff is a large file size, and DPP is painfully slow. But the end result is accurate and clean photos. Cull in FastStone or other fast image viewer first, then only convert the keepers...
@@rickhbg thank you!
Hi Jan many thanks for another great video, I cull my images with Photo Mechanic and then use DxO PR ver 1 but never thought of running them through Topaz as well. Great tip about the graphics card never realised you could do that on DxO and Topaz. All the best Doug
Good you mentioned the darker DNG issue on R5 raws (0.5 stop darker most of the time). It is indeed annoying! It has been reported in DXO forum for a couple times but DXO has yet to give it a look. I hope they see your video and do something. A nicely done video after all Jan!
Yes, they don't seem to be very fast at responding to any suggestions
This is exactly what I needed! Thank you so much. I love PureRaw and after I got it I basically never touched Topaz again
That was what impressed me too. It's not an either or situation, you use both to meld your ideal photographic creation. And, as your skill improves, you may even get the photo that you saw.
Glad I could help!
My 1-2 punch as well Pure Raw and then Denoise if needed .Almost same workflow, file from folder straight into Pure Raw, but I send it to LR library folder when finished, basic adjustments, then onto PS if needed to tweek, additional noise reduction using Denoise if needed. Return file back to LR and then delete DNG Pure Raw file
Thanks for sharing
Thank you Jan,
was shooting with s d4s, had it many years, I called it, "the princess of darkness :),
This year I pulled the trigger on a Z9 with its "bucket full of pixels", soon found out about noise
Currently using Topaz de noise, but will now look at DXO pure raw, unfortunately , not much slack left on the CC right now, 11 year old iMac was not coping with Topaz denoise too well (or video for that matter) and now Have a Mac Studio ultra
................ Gary
.......................AU
I have found that DxO PhotoLab 5 Elite provides far more control of DeepPrime noise reduction and Lens Sharpening, including the brightness of the corners, and I much prefer it over using DxO PureRAW. It also integrates far better with Lightroom (which I use for DAM).
I do the same and for the same reasons. I use the CameraRaw profiles in DxO Photolab, do all of my raw editing, then return it to LR as a TIFF; additional processing is easily done in LR or (of course) also Photoshop.
@@kemerthomson Why Tiff? Why not DNG (having been demosaiced in DxO). Then apply edits in LR as for any other RAW image, and/or send to PS for further processing as required?
@@colinfieldgate4719 Because the DNG produces a color shift if you do anything other than optical corrections and noise reduction. Photolab does much better than LR in raw conversion, as does Canon’s software.
@@kemerthomson Maybe so. But I only apply noise reduction and optical corrections, preferring to use LR and PS for image editing. My point was that DxO PhotoLab is better than PureRAW for pre-processing RAW files as it provides more control.
It could be a decent workflow, but I didn't like having to include a whole new RAW converter in my workflow, so Pure Raw was the more streamlined option. I would hope they include more settings down the track
Thank you Jan !!
As I'm on Mac I don't use FastStone, but I love previewing from the SD card with Adobe Bridge. Beautiful full size stunning previews with easy navigation. Then select the keepers and copy to your preferred destination.
Thanks for sharing!
That sounds a really good option. As a first cull it’s a great idea and saves importing images to my hard drive that would get binned when reviewing them in LR. Thanks
@@davet3530 There's a nice carousel option with ⌘B, even has a loupe magnifier. I usually hit spacebar for the full size preview that can be sized with the mouse wheel / trackpad. Bridge does cache large previews which take space, so I clear out the cache occasionally.
@@belewis Thank you!
Thanks!
Hi Jan, I share your assessment that PureRaw currently provides the best noise reduction. But now, in addition to the RAW file, you have an additional DNG file that is about four times as large. How to solve the problem? My workflow is as follows: after importing the DNG into Capture One and making all the adjustments, I copy all the adjustments to the RAW file. This can be done in Capture One with 2 clicks. This may seem nonsensical since only the edited DNG file represents the finished photo in good quality. But I only use the RAW file as a note for the adjustments. If I delete the DNG and recreate it again from the RAW file using PureRaw, I can simply copy the adjustments from the RAW file back to the newly created DNG and have my perfectly rendered photo back. This way I save a lot of disk space.
Very helpful video. I have both PureRaw 2 and Topaz NR AI. Because I have both Fuji and Nikon gear, I snapped up PR2 when I saw they supported the XTrans raw conversion. I've been neglecting to use Topaz Denoise AI at all since but as you've demonstrated there is a place for both! Thank you, you always bring something of value in your videos!
Thanks for sharing
Thanks for another fine video. I use Topaz and Is have had great results with it so I will stick with it
Good to hear!
the best tutorial !!
Thanks Jan.
Great video mate, we are very lucky to have both options. Cheers, Duade
Absolutely
Thanks Jan for a great video on noise reduction.
You are welcome!
For now, I'm perfectly happy with PureRAW and haven't tried to use Topaz later in the process.
Where topaz shines is when you have an older file you send to a publisher for instance and want to clean that up, years after you edited it. Then it can be quite quick to run Topaz on it with good results
@@jan_wegener That makes sense and sounds like a great time saving option.
Thanks Jan, I have been trying the Pure Raw trial and using it from within LR. Your tips, particularly of putting the files into a folder on your desktop make good sense, I had noticed that the DXO Pure Raw files are quite large so getting rid of them once you have edited and saved the file is going to use less hard drive space. I agree too, turn off the sharpen aspect within DXO. I want to be able to selectively sharpen layer on.
Happy to help :)
hi , i would really love to see your R7 review as APS-c sensors with high megapixel will definitely produce noisy images at high iso .
I will soon
Your every video is very informative...keep it up 🙂👍
Thank you, I will
Jan, Nicely presented and you gave me some good advice. I have a new R5 as you know. I have always in the past using my prior DSLR's used the lowest ISO as possible. I still do with the R5. However I am using auto ISO more so now but have kept the ISO to the max of 3200 and felt better at 1600 ISO. I will today increase the max ISO to 12,800 which when typing this I feel very uncomfortable with doing. I can change back to 6400 or so if need be. I purchased Topaz Denoise last week and I really enjoy it. I also have DXO which has the Deep Prime noise reduction as well. I had not thought of using both programs on the same image. I use Light Room and have not tried Photo Shop. Denoise Sharpen seems to help as well. Thanks Jan!
Thanks for sharing. These very high ISO do feel strange when using them
I use almost the same process you do, almost because I don't use Photoshop (I am not so good in it) but I use Lightroom... (one day I might buy your masterclass and learn something). I also use Topaz Sharpen sometimes to give a little more details, especially when my subject is a little blurry or just little tiny out of focus, I think it does a good job too
Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for yet another excellent video and tutorial on post processing! I found myself saying yes, Yes, YES toward the end and realized it’s all because of You giving me my start in the digital darkroom last year using your Master Class, PROSETS and excellent videos!!! My workflow mimics yours with my evolution of processes as I learn new ways to enhance my images. Pure Raw is a game changer!
Thank you so much and keep up the Great work for others to benefit from!!
Glad I have been able to help you! :)
Perfect timing Jan, I'm just wondering as to whether it is worth the $59usd ?? to update to the new DXO Pure RAW 2? Have you had a chance to have a play with it or heard any reports on it yet?
Thanks for tackling the daily subjects as well as the sponsored 'New Camera Gear' videos. ..
Bruce.
I did share my thoughts here:
ruclips.net/video/eJnIm3idjq8/видео.html
As soon as they support my OM-1 I will be able to use my copies of PureRaw2 and DxOPhotolab5,currently can only use Topaz which allows me to use a Tiff exported from LR.
yes, that can make it more tricky
Awesome video Jan, since trying DXO pureRAW I haven't looked back to Topaz for denoising tbh. Not even is it better imo but it is so much faster. I still use Topaz to sharpen up..
I have used Topaz more lately for images I edited years ago. That's one advantage it has.
DXO PureRaw is amazing tool. However, no idea why it would NOT retain all IPTC data... Title, Caption etc is getting erased. Very frustrating.
Thank you so much. I use Topaz. Your idea helps a lots.
Great to hear!
Hi Jan, thanks for sharing these editing insights. And Yess, I fully agree we shouldn't be afraid of high ISO any more .. at least with DxO and some of those amazing new FF camera's. With my old APS-C DSLR the max supportable ISO was a hell of a lot lower. So I'm really wondering how the unicorn R7 will perform at ISO 12800 and higher.
This high ISO approach also gives me better than expected results when using the EF2x on my 100-400Lii ;-)
From Topaz, I'm not using Denoise often, but rather its Gigapixel (because the mp count is clearly the biggest weakness of my R6) and Gigapixel also applies some denoise to remove some remaining noise in the background.
Thanks for sharing! I think all future cameras will be decent in regards to noise.
@@jan_wegener They shall certainly not downgrade the noise quality .. but still the APS-C sensors will not reach FF level, and m4/3 will not reach APS-C, because with same technology it is directly related to pixel density, and the R5 reaches almost R6 level of low light IQ with higher pixel density but at a much higher (in some regions at least) price. Canon will not make the R7 significantly more expensive than the R6 just to get same low light IQ at a much higher pixel density.
Great excellent video! Does the latest DXO Photolab 5 comes packaged with the Pure Raw? Thank you for your answer.
You don't need Pure Raw if you own DxO. Deep prime is included...
AFAIK Photolab includes the Deep Prime feature
Nice Jan. Do you have an alternative for mac instead of faststone image viewer, as this does not run on mac PCs?
Only really Photomechanic
Hi Jan, thanks for this: I was struggling with whether to use DXO first, then edit in Lr, or the other way around. I like your approach of denoising first. One thing I’m unsure of: what do you do with the dng files afterwards? They’re the new “master”, correct, since they would contain one’s Lightroom edits?
For LR that's likely the case, for PS I use them as my base layer and then I can just delete the dng. I keep the RAW and the psd file.
@@jan_wegener Thanks Jan.
Something you didn’t mention is that can convert DxO file to DNG whereas Topaz converts to a TIFF file. For that reason I’ve always used topaz at end of work flow. I love this combo. Thanks
When I open the DNG file in LR/Camera RAW, I can also save it as whatever I want?
So helpful! Ty Jan! I’ve been playing around with the higher ISOs but wasn’t ever able to get rid of the noise like y’all do - I’m definitely going to have to check out Pure Raw!
Thanks very good information. I am curious what f stop do you use on that photo and where was your focus point? The reason I ask is the bill seems softer then the back feathers. Thanks
I believe 7.1 on the left eye. Beak sticks out a fair bit
Thank you for another informative video Jan. Do you have any idea how DXO PureRaw and your prosets work with other processing software? I'm currently using ON1 Photo Raw, along with the Topaz suite.
The PROSETS work with LR & PS atm. Pure RAW is stand alone, stoat would work with most workflows
@@jan_wegener Thank you Jan. I thought DXO would probably be compatible, plus I can try it for free. I'm disappointed the prosets won't work. Do you know if they would work with Affinity Photo? That's a PS clone with enhancements, so it works in much the same way.
@@steve.hamlin.artist I don’t think they would install there unfortunately
@@jan_wegener Thank you. I also have an old version of PS (CS5). I may take a chance on them. If I do, I'll let you know what my experience is.
Very useful and informative. Thanks and keep doing what you do.
Thanks for watching!
I have no problem with high iso if it's needed to get the shot. I use a combination of pure raw2 and Capture one noise reduction and get excellent results up to iso 104000. There is no difference in brightness between .arw and processed .dng in C1. It may be an LR issue. I also have Topaz, but only use it on older tiff files. Pure raw2 better fits my workflow and does a better job in my opinion.
Thanks Jan. … some great tips
Glad it was helpful!
In DxO PL5 you can set up a preset that mimics PureRAW. Send from LR to PL%, then send back to either PS or LR.
Some people have tested and still preferred what PureRAW does compared to PL. It's not exactly the same
I'll throw this thought out there. When you look at an image at ISO 100 there is grain, subtle but it's there and obviously nothing like it is at higher ISOs. I see a lot of images online that have (obviously) gone through either Pure RAW or Topaz DeNoise which are grain free. I'm not saying this is right or wrong but to my eye a little grain is fine and as it should be. What do you think Jan?
I don't have anything against bit of grain. I never used to use NR until the ACR profiles got so bad for the R5 that you had to use it.
@@jan_wegener Thanks for responding Jan.
Really great and helpful content. Thank you very much!
You're very welcome!
Hi Jan
What was the the name of the first program you used to review your images?
Great video. My thinking is the same as yours regarding high ISOs. Surprising the number of people I speak with who still insist that they won’t shoot above 1000-2000
FastStone image viewer (very faint logo visible top left). Only for Windows though. I use Adobe Bridge love how it previews.
It's their loss ;)
FastStone Image Viewer
Great video!
Glad you enjoyed it
brilliant, as always!
Great tools for pros, are there other perhaps cheaper techniques those of us lower budget wildlife photographers can employ? Other than shooting with low noise!
You can get them on sale 30-50% once a few times a year. There's no other way to remove noise that works as good imo
@@jan_wegener Good call. I was also able to answer my question to an extent. Lightroom has a lot of masking tools built in these days. To the localized edits are far easier to do there than they once were. While Lightroom does an OK job at controlling noise. Dedicated tools are going to be better. That said they are not necessary for us budget hobbyists.
Although this video was about working with High Noise images, I found your edits very useful and re aim to replicate them in my own work.
Great tutorial Jan. My only difference is that I import the dng file from DXO to Lightroom. Does the DNG edit using Lightroom offer the "same" as the capability with camera RAW?
LR and ACR use the same RAW engine, so it's identical pretty much
I use use DXO PhotoLab and turn up the Luminance if I need to remove more noise in the background. I'll push it to 50 or 55. By default its at 40. With DXO PureRaw you can't change the Luminance.
For me DXO PhotoLab is better for reducing noise but DXO PureRaw is better for loading a lot of files up and walking away from the computer. DXO PhotoLab you can still load up a lot of files but its going to take a few extra minutes to load them up maybe two or three extra minutes. It's not a big deal but when you come home from a wedding you just want to load them up and click go and then go to bed.
Could you let me know which version of photoshop you are using? I purchased the prosets and DXO lab 5 and I was considering your masterclass. I am sure your workflow has changed and you are not using DPP anymore. Is your current workflow a part of the masterclass or does the class focus on your editing while in photoshop?
The masterclass doesn't include DXO, but you can see that in this video. The masterclass is focused on the important steps & tricks in Photoshop. These have not changed with the different versions.
@@jan_wegener Thank you. I appreciate all your videos and reviews. You are a huge inspiration for me!
Hi Jan, great instruction, great pics! Simple question: I am an allround nature photographer. ( general wildlife, macro and landscape). Just bought a R6, the Canon 100-500, and a Laowa 2.8 100mm. Wide angle will follow later. A lot to learn for an former analog underwater photographer, pfjew.!! Now i found out I need a better/faster PC, is coming up. so, for the time being, I practice in JPEG.
But: which programs do I need? Luminar? Lightroom? I am confused on this. Luminar A.I is not appealing to me, but what can you advise to get started, and work on the images that deserve it? With all these new noise reduction prgrams mentioned here, I think I should become a full IT/Program software guru. Help!
Keep shooting!
Greetz from the Netherlands, Peter
I use FastStone Image Viewer to look through my images, other use Lightroom and then I edit and convert them in Camera RAW & Photoshop. If they're Noisy I use DXO Pure RAW to remover the noise.
What is the ambient luminance level (i.e how bright) when you use ISO 16,000?
pretty dark ;) Usually after sunset
Thank you Jan
How much time does this add to you posting lets say a days outing of birds. As to me this looks and seems as if there is a lot of time you have to dedicate to your photo's after an outing. I know I can go out and get over 600 shots and if I had to work on each one doing what you have done I would be unable to go out for a week and I would be seated infront of my computer. It to me seems overwhelming in the post process to get a postable image.
So for me I think I would far prefer the lower ISO over the extra work that you are doing. Though I will say I am not trying to sell my images as you are and this could be the biggest to why I prefer the older way of doing things over what to me is a very long and drawn out process to the posting of images.
You did say you wanted out thoughts and this is the way I see.
If I take 600 shots, I might edit 3 of those. NR itself may add 30sec to 1 minute to the workflow when you do it fast
Greetings. Excellent video.
When do you use optical corrections?
Do you set them on camera?
I already saw that you don't use them in DxO, although I'm not sure why.
Do you use them in some other part of the editing flow? Maybe in Raw Camera or later in Photoshop.
Thank you
I have them ticked in ACR, but for longer lenses it almost makes no difference. I almost never use the DXO modules
@@jan_wegener Thanks for your reply. Just to be sure "ACR" is Adobe Camera Raw?. P.S. I await your video with the settings of the R3
Hi Jan, I recently acquired DXO Pure Raw when they had their Black Friday special. I've preciously been using Topaz Denoise but using DXO Pure Raw first in my workflow is an absolute game changer, thanks!
Quick question though.
Do you not use Topaz Sharpen AI at all in your workflow?
No I don’t
Another very useful video Jan. Have you noticed that PureRaw does some sharpening even with global sharpening switched off? The amount seems to depend on the image content but definitely occurs, as confirmed to me by DxO support. It is only with the even more expensive PhotoLab that the sharpening can be fully switched off and the amount of noise reduction controlled. For this reason, I have reverted to NeatImage which seems almost as effective as PureRaw for NR and does not do any sharpening. Also the amount of NR can be controlled. Have you looked at NeatImage recently? It has been around for many years but now seems unfashionable to for reasons I don't understand!
Yes, it does a lot of things a bit funny, but it's the best I found thus far. Haven't used neat image in many years
What was the name of the image viewer you were using at the beginning? Thanks for all of the information and best of luck to you Jan!
i think it's called FastStone image viewer
Yes, FastStone
Cracking video as per usual, but when you say you delete the dng file after you edit them dose that mean you don’t keep a copy of the original raw file .
I always keep the RAW file. The DNG file is an edited copy of the RAW file
Amazingly detailed video. Thank you so much Jan. You’re my mentor. One question though. DXO creates extremely large dng files that are 3-4 times larger. than the R5 cr3 files. How do you save the results of your editing or downsize and save those edited files? This is not clear or I missed it. Thanks Jan
I save the file i create in photoshop as a PSD file. That file can be 1-2 GBB sometimes, depending on how many layers I use. I do not keep the dng file DXO Pure Raw creates
Hi Jan, there's another software competitor in this arena called On1 NoNoise AI. I haven't tried DXO, but I have tried Topaz DeNoise AI and I prefer On1.
It can batch process raw files and spit out DNGs. It not only does great noise removal, but it also has fantastic detail/sharpening features. On1 is about to release an amazing Resize AI plugin. If it lives up to the samples shown so far, it'll be the best on the market.
On1 is good for beginners...no more !
I looked at it a few times, but never tried it
@@SEAME7 35 years in photography and 25 years of photo editing/restoration/retouching, I'm no beginner.
On1 Photo Raw, I agree is well behind Capture One Pro (my preferred raw processor) and Lightroom. It's mostly a bunch of presets and effects and has poor highlight and shadow recovery. However, I'm talking about a plug-in called On1 NoNoise 2022. It's better than Topaz Denise AI for me, personally. If you can't figure out how to use it then maybe you're the beginner! Enough said.
@@cooloox 2nd time : On1 is good for beginners...no more !
@@SEAME7 You're clueless! No more!
you mentioned you put them all in a DXO folder then delete. Can I ask what you end up with? Normally at the end I keep my cr3, xmp, psd, final jpg
I do too
@@jan_wegener Thanks. I think I am going to purchase it. I have been using topaz up till now. I wish they had a send to from camera raw but no big deal. I did notice on the couple images I tested with R5 files that I have to bring the exposure up about a 1/2 stop to get back to original raw
To FIX DNG file size: I was doing DXO Pure Raw 2 - Topaz Sharpen - Lightroom , but everytime you process the image to a DNG, it saves the previous RAW plus the new RAW into the same file, so the file size grows around 3 to 4 times if you pass it by DXO and then Topaz. Its not that it adds so much information but it contains backups of the previous original file inside of it. So if you process around 100 images you can easily use more than 10 GB on that day session. its a bit too taxing for drives I think.
So the way to overcome this is to at the end of your processing, pass all your DNGs trough the free app Adobe DNG converter. That app allows to strip the backup files from inside the DNG and use lossy compression directly on the DNG, sounds bad when you read "lossy" but I very very rarely see artifacts due to compression. At the end you can have a DNG file you can color correct, already sharpened and denoised at just around 10-20MB. Thats Drive friendly, and if you use cloud services to backup your files this is also helpful.
How is DXO handling Fuji Files. Nikon Z9 files work great just wondering?
It only supports lossless Nikon Z9 RAWs.
Very nice video !
Hello Jan
I tried to use Pure Raw following your tutorial but the program does not process Nikon NEF files. Please let me know what I need to do?
Many Thanks John
Which camera? It should support them all. At least Pure RAw 2
@@jan_wegener I am using the Nikon
Nikon Z9
@@dyingtowatch I think dxo only support the full size raw files not the smaller ones
Nikon Z9 raw files are labeled NEF files. Thanks for your help. I will check with DXO support to find out why I am having trouble
Hi Jan, thanks for the info. It seems you need multiple software packages, either subscription or purchase. Is PhotoLab 5 a good single package from a single company, DXO? Also Photopea might be an option instead of Photoshop. Have you ever looked at it? From what I have read it sounds very similar to Photoshop but free. Which brings me to my last question; Is you Master Class Adobe based, i.e. Lightroom and Photoshop, or does it now include Pure Raw or usable with other editing software. Thanks.
You can download a free trial, there's a link in the description. Maybe that will help you to get an idea. personally I prefer the DXO/Topaz ACR/Photoshop workflow.
In my opinion nothing can replace Photoshop.
My Masterclass revolves around Photoshop and how you can get great results with it
@@jan_wegener Jan, no LightRoom?
Hi jan, i dont use photoshop, only LR, can i still use pure raw with just LR?
I think it integrates into LR, just double check
Are there any settings you need to adjust in faststone image viewer? I seem to not be able to zoom in very far, but when I zoom in its blury. Viewing the images full size is fine though
Also im going to convert to this workflow, to do this I now shoot uncompressed RAW because DXO does not support compressed raw. Currently I use photoshop camera raw then run through topaz, but I'm simply not happy with topaz anymore.
What camera are you using? an A9 for instance creates too small jpeg previews to be usable in FastStone
@@jan_wegener I have Sony A7R IV, maybe because its really high resolution might also do the low res preview?
@@KurtisPape I think the A1 is the only Sony camera with full res Jpegs previews, a massive flaw in the Sony system :(
I find Topaz to be very unreliable with feathers. Simple color structures and less busy backgrounds it works well. Do you feel DXO does a better job?
It depends on the situation
In my opinion it does a more consistent job. I have never had a file with DXO that has one area still noisy and another too smooth. Which seems to happen sometimes with Topaz.
Hi
Can this dxo pure raw can edit jpeg photos is that only for raw only
Pretty sure it’s for RAW
Sometimes, depending on the background, I have to leave a little noise or add some grain otherwise I end up with colour banding. Do you ever experience this? I find it really annoying. I have a Z6.
Thanks.....
is it only the background that gets noise?
No, but you see it easier
Have you tried running Topaz DeNoise both on the raw file and then on the processed file?
no, I will give that a go, too
I don`t understand, why everyone wants to deny their photos with all their might. What`s bad about photo with ISO 3200/6400?
Nothing?
@@jan_wegener Tatsächlich finde ich das Rauschen, wenn es nicht zu krass ist, nicht störend. Für mich wirkt so ein glatt gebügelter Hintergrund unnatürlich.
Post processing apps are only part of the story. Another big part is the modern cameras that have camera/sensor combinations that are ISO invariant over a wide range of ISO. They have intrinsically low noise to begin with and a range of ISO where raising the ISO doesn't raise the noise to signal ratio. It's the ratio you detect in the image not the absolute amount of noise.
And no, low ISO doesn't mean low noise in theory. That theory was for film with a fixed ISO based on a layer of silver halides. Higher ISO meant thicker silver halide layer which caused more clumping of silver grains when light exposed the film. The term grainy was based on the resulting grains of silver. In digital cameras the sources of noise are different entirely. It's not rocket science but it is photons and electrons and microelectronic circuitry and modern cameras have improved the signal to noise ratio of high ISO images immensely. Post-processing does the rest but it gets a big head start from modern camera electronics.
I say the above because some folks may have cameras that make high ISO images far noisier looking and less fixable with post processing. Perhaps pure raw and Topaz will help them also but it may not come as easily as it does with R5 images.
Yes for sure, every camera is different in that regards and some handle it better than others. Thanks for sharing
Thanks for your reply. I enjoy your videos a lot, and didn't mean to seem to be disagreeing. Basically it's a fairly new design criterion to make cameras "ISO invariant," largely because sensor technology has advanced to that level. It's what makes it so fun to use my R5 for photographing Peregrines.
thank you so much！
You are welcome!
Have you tried using Topaz Denoise as a stand-alone application, drop your raw file into it, and use the RAW option? It will then be saved as a DNG, which you can open in Photoshop. Basically it is the same workflow as you present in your video, but without DXO. I find that the results of using the External Editor / RAW denoising in Topaz is much better than the Photoshop / Topaz Filter route I mainly used before. Mind you, you need a current version of Topaz Denoise, older versions do not have the RAW option.
Thanks for the tip. I have not tried that. My main beef with Topaz is the inconsistency. Pure RAW always seems to have the same strength applied everywhere, whereas Topaz sometimes does too much and at the same time leaves out other spots that remain a bit noisy. So I only want to run it on it's own layer, to be able to even those things out.
@@jan_wegener Dann benutze mal die Aktuelle Version 3.6.2 und nicht eine Veraltete.
The same workflow as with DXO (drop RAW in the external (stand-alone) editor --> denoise (with option RAW in Topaz) --> export to DNG) on Topaz DeNoise yields significantly better results. Especially on 'blurry backgrounds' there is a much more consistent 'creaminess' all over. Going the Photoshop / Topaz Filter way sometimes shows patches of inconsistent de-noising. I also find that working directly on RAW yields much better sharpening results. I do not have DXO available, curious to see what an 'apples to apples' workflow comparison would show.
Hello Jan,
Thanks for another educational video!
I work with LR and sometimes I do some editing in PS. I tried DXO for a month, but I get an error with about 50% of my photos, so it doesn't work. I've contacted you about this before, unfortunately I can't find what the cause is anywhere. But it does stop me from buying it.
I have one more small question, I understand you will throw away the DXO (DNG) when you finish the photo. But for me that is the original file, do you make an export of it??? I know you mentioned it in a previous video but I can't find which video that was :-)
I hope you understand what I mean.
Thanks in advance for your response!
Regards, Karin (Holland)
PS I use R5 400 2.8
If you get an error it most likely has to do with the image modules and using gear that they don't support. It should work if you turn them off.
The original file is my RAW file. The DNG is just a random copy really imo.
@@jan_wegener Thanks for your response, Jan!
I'll give it a try at DXO with the modules off. It's so strange it's not always and I'm using an R5 with a 400 2.8 so that's not the problem either. I hope you are right, then I would like to buy the program.
It's not entirely clear to me what your files are about, I'll watch your video again, and I think you also talk about it in your editing course, we have those too so just go and watch it again, always instructive; -)
Thanks again,
Regards, Karin
Hate noise. Nice!!
So you are saying that your photography skills are not all that good. You need to use multiple computer programmes ?
Exactly right.......I wish skills could make a rainforest brighter :)
Quite the opposite. A talented person knows the best tools for the job and if that involves using multiple tools, then so be it. It's like comparing a jack of all trades with a master of one. Using multiple masters of one trade gives better results than using one program which is inferior in each task.
Have you always taken in Raw format .. or did you move from CRAW to Raw ???
I do a mix of both
thanks so much.
You're welcome!
For "artistic" images, I shoot without much regard to ISO, and use denoising programs.
For "record" shots of birds that I intend to contribute to the Cornell Lab of Ornithology's Macaulay Library, I don't use such "AI"-based denoising programs: they add what the AI "thinks" the image would have looked like without noise, which isn't good for scientific observations!
neither is colour noise, though?
@@jan_wegener No, but the structural appearance can be changed.
ouch that’s too much NR for my tastes.
I have so far never done any noise reduction.
It's better if you don't have to
You are a bit young to remember the last days of film photography when shooting with Fuji or Ektachrome 100 ISO meant that in full sun with your 600 mm f4 you had 1/1000 sec. If the smallest, poorest excuse for a cloud drifted over, it was 1/500 or 1/250. Deep forest shooting with natural light was impossible. You could use Ektachrome 400 for a couple of extra stops, but then it looked like you had shot through sand. Horrible.
sure was, I can't say I properly shot in film, but I still started with film cameras, which was never really fun.
I purchased DXO Pure Raw one day before they came out with their latest upgrade. DXO refused to give me a free upgrade. I will never buy anything from DXO again!
Yes, that's not a good look
Way too much work … 😢
Where natural colors ???? Big editting kill natural colors !!!!!!!!!
In my experience, DxO deepprime blows topaz out of the water.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Doing such a comparison with birds is not very convincing. It would be more interesting with people.
depends what you shoot I suppose
@@jan_wegener You and I are more sensitive to colours rendition with human skin tones than with birds plumage.
@@metphmet Jan is a bird photographer. Watch a portrait photographer's channel if you want to see how they deal with noise on people. These noise removal programs work quite well on people and certainly make noisy images look much cleaner. It depends on the texture of the person's skin (how many blemishes they have etc.) and how strong the noise is, as to how much noise removal you can reply before making the image look smudgy. Let's just say that even if you have to leave some noise in the image, it will still look far better than the original image. On1 NoNoise AI 2022 is a good plug-in as it doesn't darken the image like Topaz tends to do.
@@cooloox I am sorry we talking about softwares and my point is about colour rendition. It makes no sense to use subjects like birds for such purpose.
Is it just me that I respect and like noise... These "topaz" guys are most annoying than everything else before, lol. Noise is the essence of photography that gives a specific look and at some point that might be the biggest reason to go back to dslr (not film because film is for unproductive casual shooters or hipsters with free money for todays overpriced film rolls) and these noiseless standars looks faker than Pamela Anderson's 90s silicon implants... Sorry for the rant but this trend is terrible. Not to mention that as much "cleaner" is your photo the worse it looks in social medias but that's another topic how bad is the programming of Meta 🥴
@@ForrestWest Oh waw, sorry but I won't read all that but I suspect you didn't get the point. I don't hate anybody, that's too negative energy that I don't have, it's all subjective so do whatever you want, don't use brain anymore and let all the camera AI and your PC do all the "photography" 🤷
🤣🤣🤣
Ideally you don't have to use any of this, but it's good to have if needed
@@dicekolev5360 What a load of nonsense. We do not live in a grainy/noisy world and don't see noise all around us. If you like noise and think it is artistic, that is up to you... but to some it is just annoying and spoils an image. Also, there is such a thing as "too much noise". You can use these software plug-ins to reduce noise without actually totally removing it. It is up to the photographer what look they prefer. Also, removing noise using AI is not letting AI do it all for you. It did not capture the shot, it merely reduced or removed the noise that you literally could not avoid with all the skills in the world. We are limited to the ISO performance of our cameras and there is no camera that is clean at ISO 12800 out there yet.