Noise Reduction - Picture-cooler
 

I've been running some of my pictures through Picture-cooler to reduce noise. I'm not sure that I've quite got the hang of it yet even though I do like the program. I'm definitely getting better. I probably should use it on most shots but I don't have the PS plug-in only the free version and sometimes I get lazy about having extra programs to go though. It would be more convenient to use as a plug-in, I suspect, instead of having to open a seperate program each time. Is anyone else using Picture-cooler for noise reduction and if so how about some tips?

Hi Snowy owl
I have to say I cant help you with picture cooler as I have only ever tried neatimage. With neat image I find the results very hit and miss. Sometimes results look good and othertimes they look awful. I also dont have the skill to use the manual settings so for that there is probably someone who can help you.
Having said that I am puzzled as to why you think it should always be used? I rarely use neatimage or any noise filter in my photos using the theory that prevention is better than cure ;)
Dslr cameras are pretty forgiving when it comes to using them at relatively high iso. Which camera do you use? Maybe you should look to your camera settings before noise reduction software.

Someone on a thread recommended do so.
I'm not using a DSLR (wish I was). I'm using a Coolpix 4500 that i bought for digiscoping. Sometimes I wish that I could go back to my good, old (very old) SLRs. Taking pictures seemed simpler. Too bad film photgarphy is so expensive.

Snowyowl. I use Picture cooler and find it absolutely brilliant I have the full version its only $15 hardly anything. It doesn't have a true plug in for photoshop I have to have picture cooler minimised on the taskbar. Once I have done most of my editing in CS I save, then click on the minimised program and then do final adjusting in Picture cooler. It can be very simple to use and very effective I have used it today on Christines Kingfisher she maybe posting in the Gallery when she come on so you will be able to see what it can do once you get used it. I think in the demo version it won't save large files not sure plus its a lot slower.

Saphire ,I have posted a copy of one of your pics in the thread I started.It is a reduced file size,though,as BF ,even though it was re-sized to 800,would not accept the large file.I could try one of the larger ones in the Gallery here.

I tried to download a larger file pic in the Gallery,but it would not accept.So the image is on the original post.

Annette it looks like you have got used to the improved noise performance of the 350D and have forgotten how much noiser the 300D was.

From Bob Atkin site - As I am from an electronics background I would of said exactly the same.

"You can't make a noiseless sensor and the smaller the pixels, the higher the intrinsic noise. There's a lower limit to noise which is determined by fundamental physics and includes things like photon shot noise which is determined by the statistics of photons hitting a pixel, plus various forms of thermally induced noise. At some point you'll hit a limit to the number of usable pixels on an APS-C sized chip (24mm x 15mm). It's probably in the 10-12MP range. People like more pixels and will usually pick a 12MP camera over a 10MP camera over an 8MP camera. At some point the only way you can up the pixel count without lowering image quality (by increasing image noise) is to go to a bigger sensor. That's why 8MP DSLRs outperform 8MP consumer digicams with 5mm x 7mm sensors. Size matters."

By understanding the physics engineers can reduce the noise but will never be totally rid of it. Another technique to improve the signal to noise ratio is to design the light sensitive part of the sensor pixel to be nearer to the surface of the CMOS so that less light is lost in reaching it. Again there will a limit to what they can do.

If you avoid under exposing this should help keep noise levels low. You will notice with consumer digicams which have a small sensor the ISO range is limited for the very reason to keep noise levels acceptable.

I will often use a noise reduction program - in my case neat image.
firstly to reduce any apparent noise in the image. I either use the auto method or apply a camera noise profile that matches the ISO setting. I may also tweak the default setting such as sharpness and noise in the luminance channel. The other reason will be purely to get the file size down for up loading to the web.

Noise and image can only be 100% separated if you know exactly what one of the components is. As the program has no idea what your image looks like it can only work on the characteristics of camera noise. Noise by definition is random. Techniques can be used to work on truely random noise. Unfortunalely camera noise is not truely random. The noise tends to fall into defined patterns dependent on the source of the noise. Thermal noise (temperature of sensor and electronics) - hot days will give you more noise than cold days. Even Gamma rays from outer space can create noise. The sensor amplifiers can produce their own noise plus amplify the sensor noise. The camera noise profiles have models (information) of strenght and shape of these patterns so that the program can try and find a match and then reduce or remove them.

Their web site does say that it now comes as a PS plugin. I think I'll have buy the full version soon.