What are peoples thoughts on NoiseXTerminator ?

[teoria_del_big_bang]

Anyone that has either bought this or using the free trial what are your thoughts on NoiseXTerminator

I have just downloaded it and for sure it seems to work I am just fiddling with the two parameters to see the optimal values as the defaults seem far too aggressive to me.

In PI which is where I am testing it then it is probably easier to use than the usual Mure denoise, TGV denoise and MLT then a bit of sharpening with deconvolution, but will it do the same ?
From what I see there are just two parameters one basically is how aggressive the denoise is and the other it supposed to sharpen the details to some extent.

Steve

[PeterCPC]

Tried it and didn't like it. Went with AstroFlat Pro which is brilliant.

[AstroNebulee]

26 minutes ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Anyone that has either bought this or using the free trial what are your thoughts on NoiseXTerminator

I have just downloaded it and for sure it seems to work I am just fiddling with the two parameters to see the optimal values as the defaults seem far too aggressive to me.

In PI which is where I am testing it then it is probably easier to use than the usual Mure denoise, TGV denoise and MLT then a bit of sharpening with deconvolution, but will it do the same ?
From what I see there are just two parameters one basically is how aggressive the denoise is and the other it supposed to sharpen the details to some extent.

Steve 

I downloaded the trial version at the weekend and was impressed with it for photoshop cs4. 

I tried it on some old noisy dslr data on ngc 7000 from last year (before I knew what I was doing haha) against topaz denoise and photoshop astronomy tools noise reduction. It gave a much better image than topaz denoise. 

I've not really fiddled with the controls much and only a quick stretch of the data, needs a high pass filter doing  (or just add more sharpening in settings) I like the sofness it gives but thsts my preference. I don't really use noise reduction if I can help it but I found it easy to use. Not sure if I'd pay $60 or what ever in sterling but it works. 

I'm only just starting with astrophotography so take what I say with a pinch of salt 😂

 

Cheers 

Lee 

Edited May 17, 2022 by AstroNebulee
addition

[rsarwar]

i think it is brilliant. you have control over how much noise you want to remove and if you have a GPU, it takes about 15 sec vs 1 hr on Ez Denoise. Certainly better results compared to EzDenoise. 

 

have not used topaz denoise as it does not run on linux..

 

[Adreneline]

Hello Steve,

I've been playing with my M13 osc data, this time incorporating the 7 x 120s subs at iso800 - dithered - with the 15 x 60s at iso800. Lack of astro dark, a Moon and clouds conspired to limit what I got but all I was wanting to do was try out the Canon M6 with the RC and see if the colour it collected was any good - if not next time I'll try my 6D instead.

Anyway! I did a comparison of NoiseX, MLT-NR and EZ-NR and this is what I found on the same stack of data (prior to NR I used BackgroundNeutralization and SCNR).

You need to accept that the total amount of integration time here is only 29 minutes so you can't expect too much from the integration - it is noisy! This was all about trying hardware and checking collimation and not about imaging M13 - M13 was just bright and conveniently placed.

I only tried the one setting of NoiseX (0.7). Personally I would not be too quick to dismiss it. As with all of these NR processes and plugins (irrespective of the parent application) the results will differ from stack to stack, target to target, and as with all of these things there is no magic bullet or setting that works on every image.

I get very frustrated by this smash and grab approach to imaging and processing these days; too many images show a marked lack of care and attention to detail - just get it out there. Everyone seems driven by a desire to get an image of a target with minimal integration time using the new low noise CMOS camera, throw the lot into their preferred application and with the press of as few buttons as possible get an amazing image. With AP it is the total challenge that matters and makes the hobby so enjoyable. Too many are too quick to dismiss new things - and I am old and entitled to the view  

Draw your own conclusions from the above.

Adrian

 

[geeklee]

1 hour ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

using the free trial

Still using the free trial here Steve.  

I find its ability to work effectively changes across types and stages of processing - as you'd expect from noise reduction and a "trained AI" of course.

More times than not I've found it can be strong and "broad brush" - even dialed down.  I contacted the helpful author about the use of masks and obviously they can still be used but the AI shouldn't need them (was the rough response).  

Earlier in a workflow, I've found it good on backgrounds and diffuse nebulosity but that subtle detail that I'm tracking through each stage of processing can get lost easily.

More testing required for me.  No doubt a good tool with more development to come.  As always, its key to understand its application and utilise it as carefully as we would other processes.

It's a likely purchase (I believe there's a discount if you own another of the productline).

My NR processes are usually MLT and/or TGV (and occasionally ACDNR).

[Aramcheck]

I've only tried it on one OSC (small) galaxy image so far, but it did a good job in comparison to my regular noise supression methods (MLT + ACDNR/TGVDenoise). I also tried comparing with an old copy of Topaz DeNoise & results were much better with NoiseXterminator.

It is very easy to over do it though & takes some trials to avoid the over-sharpened plastic look.

Cheers
Ivor

[powerlord]

I want to give it a go. I imagine like StarXterminator (which I have) its another tool in the box - I tend to use starnet2++ by default, but if the results are poor, I try starXterminator and often they are better there (not better all the times of course, or I'd just use that).

I'd imagine this might be the same vs topaz (which I also have) - I like the configurability of topaz - I can do as little or as much as I want: it's pretty easy to tune the settings to pull the noise out but not add detail, etc I find but with big large blocks of noise with lots of colour noise topaz struggles to remove it all until you push the colour noise removal up really high, then it starts removing 'good' colour from your nebula/galaxy too.

I think it might come down to AI data sets - I am sure topaz has a bunch of astro images in there, but NoiseX is gonna be all astro so will probably be better for a lot of stuff.

[Sp@ce_d]

Still trialing it.. my NR use of choice has been EZ suite & Topaz for pretty much last couple of years or so. I need to do a side by side with them but with the time I've had so far I'm very impressed, it's really quick too. Only really used it properly at linear stage so far but I think I'm sold on adding it to the toolset. I have StarXTerminator so the discount will help decision but expecting the AI to improve as has been done with that so it can only get better. Only 2 sliders! Sometimes less is more.. the more I have to fiddle with the longer it tends to take & worse it gets in my experiance 🤣

[teoria_del_big_bang]

It certainly does remove the noise. Noise reduction is something that is very subjective and dependent very much on the data and what the person processing wants to do.
I think with any of the denoise and sharpening tools you can go mad and totally remove anything remotely looking like noise and the background ends up  almost one colour or shade but that is really not the objective and does not help the final image.
In fact, if I am honest this is probably one of the steps in processing I am not really confident with and got to grips with yet. Yes I can do it, it's not hard, and I can follow any tutorial on it but you can watch two tutorial with the same target and different people doing the processing and the amount of noise reduction varies massively.
I think I too used to denoise far too much and maybe then lost some detail and so recently I tend to go quite light on the denoising.

I guess all that just sort of emits an aura of I don;t know what I am doing here, which might well be true, but getting there I think 🙂 

Steve

Edited May 17, 2022 by teoria_del_big_bang

[ollypenrice]

It's worth remembering what noise reduction is. It works on the basis of pixel to pixel communication, to the best of my knowledge, which means it is a form of blurring. How much blurring do you want in your image? And where do you want it? It's not a very appealing word to my ear, blurring.

The best noise reduction is to be had by shooting more data and background sky noise is better dealt with by compressing the pixels values without getting them to talk to each other. NR should surely be a last resort?

Olly

[teoria_del_big_bang]

6 hours ago, PeterCPC said:

Tried it and didn't like it. Went with AstroFlat Pro which is brilliant.

Anything particular that you didn't like ?
 

Steve

[tomato]

I agree dark skies and more data will work better every time, but alas they tend to be not so easy to come by as a new piece of noise reduction software.

I saw the reference to a discount if you already have another RCA product,  but can’t seem to find a mention on the website, any idea how much the discounted price is?
 

Thanks

[teoria_del_big_bang]

It certainly does seem to sharpen stars somewhat.
The image used is just a simple RGB image that has had calibrated Ha, SII and OIII images combined and nothing else done, it is still in its linear state.
Here it blinks between two images, both have had NoiseXTerminator applied with 0.5 Denoise parameter but one had 0 Detail Parameter and the other 1.0.

Now I think 1.0 is a tad too much though but just to see what the parameter did and it does seem to sharpen without adding too much in the way of artifacts.

Below is same but one image has not had NoiseXTerminator applied and the other as above has had NoiseXTerminator with 0.5 Denoise parameter and 1.0  Detail Parameter.

 

And finally this is flipping between an unchanged image and one with 0 Denoise parameter and 0.75  Detail Parameter. So with no denoise and just the detail slider seems to give a decent result.

 

Steve

[teoria_del_big_bang]

30 minutes ago, tomato said:

I agree dark skies and more data will work better every time, but alas they tend to be not so easy to come by as a new piece of noise reduction software.

I saw the reference to a discount if you already have another RCA product,  but can’t seem to find a mention on the website, any idea how much the discounted price is?
 

Thanks

Its $60 to buy but $40 to buy if you already have StarXTerminator or other product.
Click on Buy and then the platform required and its there.

 

Or follow THIS LINK

Steve

[PeterCPC]

8 hours ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Anything particular that you didn't like ?
 

Steve

Long time ago now but I just did not give me an acceptable result whereas AstroFlat Pro does.

[powerlord]

13 hours ago, Sp@ce_d said:

Still trialing it.. my NR use of choice has been EZ suite & Topaz for pretty much last couple of years or so. I need to do a side by side with them but with the time I've had so far I'm very impressed, it's really quick too. Only really used it properly at linear stage so far but I think I'm sold on adding it to the toolset. I have StarXTerminator so the discount will help decision but expecting the AI to improve as has been done with that so it can only get better. Only 2 sliders! Sometimes less is more.. the more I have to fiddle with the longer it tends to take & worse it gets in my experiance 🤣

Didn't know about that discount. thanks! no brainer now - just bought. 🙂

 

[scotty38]

38 minutes ago, PeterCPC said:

Long time ago now but I just did not give me an acceptable result whereas AstroFlat Pro does.

It's not available for PixInsight though is it?

[teoria_del_big_bang]

1 hour ago, PeterCPC said:

Long time ago now but I just did not give me an acceptable result whereas AstroFlat Pro does.

Are you sure it was NoiseXTerminator ?
The Beta version was only released this year end of April and the production version 1st May 2022.

Steve

[PeterCPC]

28 minutes ago, scotty38 said:

It's not available for PixInsight though is it?

Probably not but it can be a stand alone.

[PeterCPC]

4 minutes ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Are you sure it was NoiseXTerminator ?
The Beta version was only released this year end of April and the production version 1st May 2022.

Steve

Got me wondering now. Not sure - it's an age thing.😟

[teoria_del_big_bang]

1 hour ago, PeterCPC said:

Got me wondering now. Not sure - it's an age thing.😟

Tell me about it, 🙂 

Steve

[powerlord]

Justr trying it - one thing I don't like.. with starXterminator it's on or off so the fact there is no preview is fine.

But with noiseX, it's not.. you are twiddling in the dark so to speak. It'd be great if Russell could make it work with previews. Otherwise it's set settings, apply, close. undo, open, tweak setting, apply, close, undo.. again and again till yer happy.

One area where topaz has it much better - I can have 4 different AI models side by side, select my favourite and make a tweak, and see results, and repeat.

[teoria_del_big_bang]

9 minutes ago, powerlord said:

Justr trying it - one thing I don't like.. with starXterminator it's on or off so the fact there is no preview is fine.

But with noiseX, it's not.. you are twiddling in the dark so to speak. It'd be great if Russell could make it work with previews. Otherwise it's set settings, apply, close. undo, open, tweak setting, apply, close, undo.. again and again till yer happy.

One area where topaz has it much better - I can have 4 different AI models side by side, select my favourite and make a tweak, and see results, and repeat.

Yes that seems to be the way with PI's inbuilt noise reduction tools as well so you end up making a small preview to speed things up.
A preview of some sort would be great.

It is a difficult one though if you just want some subtle noise reduction or sharpening as a straight preview you probably struggle to see the difference so need to toggle between before and after, a bit like the way it as now done in NSG script. Only issue then is usually noise reduction and sharpening take quite a bit of computing power so unless you have a fact computer you end up waiting for the preview to be computed anyway.

Steve

[Stuart1971]

19 hours ago, PeterCPC said:

Tried it and didn't like it. Went with AstroFlat Pro which is brilliant.

Hmmm, astroflat pro is nothing to do with noise reduction, it’s for removing gradients and light pollution…I think you are mixed up with Gradient Xterminator….👍🏼

Edited May 18, 2022 by Stuart1971