I use DxO Pure RAW noise reduction

Ton14Ton14 Posts: 617Member
edited June 26 in Nikon Z lenses
Just some info.

Last month I tested Dxo Pure RAW, a very, very simple working noise reduction program.
It works perfect for me and I get clean images till ISO 12.800 (7 stops).
Tested it with the small NIKKOR Z 24-50mm f/4-6.3.

My free Flickr account, which I use to put some photo's on internet does not allow me to copy links anymore, so you can find some of my test photo's on: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ton1414/
Post edited by Ton14 on
User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore

Comments

  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 982Member
    edited June 26
    I love dxo deep prime noise reduction, it is actually the first noise reduction that I find really useful. Also the colors turn out better after going through dxo. I havn't heard of Pure View though, maybe you mean Pure Raw?
    Post edited by snakebunk on
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 617Member
    edited June 26
    Thanks @snakebunk, I corrected it to DxO Pure RAW.
    Same here, the first useful noise reduction software for me too.
    Post edited by Ton14 on
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 4,438Member
    edited June 26
    That does look good, even those ISO 12,800 shots. Of course those are Z6 files yes? So it's already very good to start with. Be interesting to see how it would handle higher resolution images.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 617Member
    You can install the 30 days trial and wait for a price deal. I love the simplicity of this program. I bought it for the introduction price $ 89.-.
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • retreadretread Posts: 572Member
    Is there a difference between pure raw and deep prime? I use DxO photo lab with deep prime and export to Capture one as a 16 bit .tiff.
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 617Member
    @retread It is the same, no need for you to buy this if you have DxO photo lab.

    It is a quick method to process your images. With deep prime in DxO photo lab you have more possibilities for fine tuning.

    What I like is that I get a .DNG file, that's where the name Pure RAW comes from I think.

    After import in Capture One I select my high ISO images, drag them into Pure RAW and with one click they are processed and I get my ".DNG files" in a map I want.

    Pure RAW add "-NEF_DxO_DeepPRIME" to the file name and I cannot change that, therefore I have to make an extra step to rename the files, but that is very quick and easy in C1.
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • retreadretread Posts: 572Member
    @Ton14 thanks, photo lab just ads the DxO to the file name.
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 617Member
    edited July 6
    Pure RAW has three methods for noise reduction, HQ, Prime and DeepPrime, the last is the best but takes longer. The method you choose adds one of the next three texts to your photo name.

    -NEF_DxO_DeepPRIME
    -NEF_DxO_HQ
    -NEF_DxO_PRIME

    You can choose for 2 output formats, JPG or DNG

    There are 2 options for the Destination folder.
    1. "DxO folder in the original images(s) folder
    2. Custom folder

    My workflow

    1. After import in C1, cull my photos.
    2. Select the photos with ISO 3200 and above.
    3. Drag these from C1 into "Pure RAW"
    4. Click the process button in Pure RAW.

    I made a seperate standard output folder, so I use the "Custom folder" and the "DeepPrime" method.

    5. When ready, I select everything in that folder and rename the photos to remove the added DxO text.
    6. Transfer the photos from the "Pure RAW" folder to my import folder, where the rest is.

    Now I have photo pairs with the same name, the original .NEF and the noise free other with .DNG extension. I check which one I want to keep and delete the other, sometimes the .NEF is good enough, if you have diskspace enough you can keep them both of course.

    I have my photos set for editing now.

    You can also edit your photos first, but Pure RAW process the original photo, you need an extra step to copy your edits and you create extra work for yourself. I hope DxO change this after an upgrade.

    P.S. When you press the process button, you get a popup to install the DxO lens- and camera profiles you did not have installed yet. I use these profiles now, they work great for me.
    I use one "picture control" in my camera for 90% of my photos, where everything is set to zero.

    I have never been able to remove noise from my photos that quickly and that good.
    Post edited by Ton14 on
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • retreadretread Posts: 572Member
    With Phot Lab I export to C1 as a 16 bit .tiff.
  • Ton14Ton14 Posts: 617Member
    Oh yes that is faster, I rarely use 16 bit Tiff and do so in Capture One.
    User Ton changed to Ton14, Google sign in did not work anymore
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,605Member
    What did you guys think of the Dpreview article on noise relating to different resolution sensors?
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 982Member
    WestEndFoto: I couldn't find the article, only a video of which I watched the last minute. If you have the time it is always nice with a summary when you refer to articles.

    In general I think more pixels is better as it gives the software more information to work with, but there has been specific low res cameras with very good noise handling.

    I think the idea that low res cameras give better noise handling comes from people comparing images in 1:1 view, ie not making a relevant comparison.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,450Moderator
    snakebunk said:

    WestEndFoto:
    I think the idea that low res cameras give better noise handling comes from people comparing images in 1:1 view, ie not making a relevant comparison.

    Not too sure I agree with you there, my D750 left my D850 for dead on noise when I shoot night sky shots.
    Always learning.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 982Member
    @spraynpray: I don't argue with your experience, but just to give another reference, photographylife has posted a nice comparison between the D750 and D850 that concluded similar ISO performance. I can't post a link but it is in their D850 review.
  • snakebunksnakebunk Posts: 982Member
    PS. Since the D850 images has a higher resolution than the ones from the D750, I am pretty sure that a program such as DxO Pure RAW would do a better job with the D850 images. I havn't used any of these cameras though, and as always I can be wrong.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,450Moderator
    I can only speak about my (subjective) experience and when I look at my night sky shots, the D750 was far and away better - not a small difference. I don't know the methods photographylife used to conclude no difference. Obviously the fact that I am effectively slating my current expensive camera in favour of my old cheap camera must mean something, i.e. no bias.
    Always learning.
Sign In or Register to comment.