Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b6007b69ccdf5c69bf18273ddfe023df.jpg

What are peoples thoughts on NoiseXTerminator ?


Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

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

So, in topaz that works nice, as you can scroll around you pic seeing the effect, and just clicking on it turns it off for as long as you hold mouse down. So it's really easy to find the right results.

Granted, preview takes maybe 3 seconds on my i9 8 core mac, about 1 second on my M1 - maybe it's a lot longer on slower/less core computers. But that sort of idea does work extermely well.

The other thing is, if you use it in a real editing package like affinity or PS, you can easily layer and mask multiple versions with different settings for different parts of the image - a bit more around flat areas, a bit less around nebula detail, etc if required (though of course the filters do this anyway), but sometimes if my integration is particularly noisy, its usually in the Oiii and it really  is just noise - smoothing that all out can help make something out of very poor data (such as the 20 min M16 I did last week).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Stuart1971 said:

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….👍🏼

It removes noise I can assure you. Topaz DeNoise is good as well.

Edited by PeterCPC
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, PeterCPC said:

It removes noise I can assure you. Topaz DeNoise is good as well.

Well, not in my experience and I use it a lot, it’s for gradients and not noise reduction at all, but with gradient removal to the eye the noise will look reduced….but it’s not at all the same as a proper noise reduction tool….

Topaz is very good, but easy to overdo with it, you can’t beat more data at the end of the day…..👍🏼

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Stuart1971 said:

Well, not in my experience and I use it a lot, it’s for gradients and not noise reduction at all, but with gradient removal to the eye the noise will look reduced….but it’s not at all the same as a proper noise reduction tool….

Topaz is very good, but easy to overdo with it, you can’t beat more data at the end of the day…..👍🏼

Agreed it's not primarily for noise reduction but there is the dark noise reduction tool. I find that the noise is definitely reduced after a go thro AFP.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still doing a few trials with NoiseXT and comparing it to MureDenoise.
On the images I have just trialed it on using a Denoise parameter of around 0.6 to 0.7 seems to be pretty identical to using MureDenoise with a Variance of 1 and Spin 8 and if you don't go too mad with the Detail it seems to do a good job of sharpening the stars (I used 0.6 but seemed okay up to 0.75 then you can start to see dark rings around the stars).

I guess these figures may not repeat from image to image but certainly on the image of the Bubble Nebula I think I could replace Muredenoise with this script. Now depending on how much in the linear stage you want to deNoise then these figures may be too aggressive but just wanted to do enough for my eyes to see the change and compare both methods.

Steve

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I've been using NoiseXT in PI on a couple of re-processed images and it seems quite good. Soooo much faster than EZ Denoise, which is what I was using. :D

Like Steve above, I found using a Denoise setting of 0.6 to 0.7 and leaving the Detail setting at 0.15 reduces the background noise nicely, without making it look too smooth and false.

On non-linear images, it also works well to reduce the noise created by some processing, especially on the background. I found an initial setting of 0.4 or 0.5 worked well for this and meant I didn't need to use Topaz Denoise on the final image, which actually don't do the job as well as NoiseXT.

Overall, I'm happy to keep using NoiseXT in place of EZ-Denoise & Topaz Denoise.

Edited by Budgie1
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Version 2 of the NoiseXTerminator AI (neural network) is now released for all platforms. The main intent of this version is to improve the reduction of low-frequency (large-scale) noise, reducing residual "blotchiness" after noise reduction, particularly on very noisy images. Other improvements are better retention of faint detail, including dark structures such as absorption nebula filaments and galaxy dust lanes. AI2 also produces a more "refined" result overall... better star profiles, better management of color noise on stars, etc. While NoiseXTerminator is at its best on deep-sky objects, AI2 also improves performance on lunar and planetary images.
 
PixInsight users will be prompted to update the next time they re-start PixInsight. Running Resources -> Updates -> Check for Updates will also work. Be sure to click the "Select AI" button in NoiseXTerminator after installing the new version. Choose NoiseXTerminator.2.pb (Windows/Linux) or NoiseXTerminator.2.mlmodel (MacOS) from the
library folder.
 
Photoshop users can upgrade to AI2 by clicking the "Download AI" button in the plugin.
 
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and for those who don't know - all PS plugins work in affinity photo, and this is no exception. You do need to reduce the colour depth to 16 bits per channel as you do for all PS plugins (since PS is only 16 bits per channel), but you can flip it back to 32 afterwards, so your pixels don't go out of bounds while stretching, etc.

Doing noiseX and starX in affinity gives you all the benefits of a proper layering/masking system - makes it easy to say, denoise some parts more than others, or pull out stars, denoise, put stars back, etc all with layers so you can easily go back and tweak things.

stu

(affinity photo luver)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

For what it's worth, I've updated my view after trying both Star X and Noise X. I found that noise X seems good at removing the kind of noise created by Star X, though this is based only on processing one image. NoiseX is certainly the most natural-looking noise reducer I've ever tried personally.

Olly

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, my free trial ends in 2 days but I’ve seen enough to justify the purchase, especially as I already have StarXTerminator.

I have seen some artefacts when applying to below par data but you can’t get around the ‘garbage in, garbage out’ mantra.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've tried it on one image so far, just using its default settings, and found it to be excellent. Here's an extreme crop before / after example:

 

Shark_nonoisereduction.thumb.JPG.d24f30ba34cfa1d2773199b62a8779ce.JPG

Shark_noiseexterminator.thumb.JPG.38abae0c9af04667c054aeb29a02150d.JPG

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This was my example of a before and after, and I thought it looked ok, this was with default settings, the crop is not identical but close enough for a test, what do you guys think..? as on another forum I was told it did not look real and looked “plasticky” and that I had lost loads of detail in the reduction, especially in the galaxy….….🤔🤔

before…

B4939B6E-BCF7-46EE-AF4F-C4AEB38915CF.thumb.png.4793bdeac152e042176aed82e17c4e32.png

 

and after….

8C8BB5A5-7443-4936-B144-6D56F9E7BA55.thumb.jpeg.dc8aedab838325c076bebfe12404aa6a.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, Stuart1971 said:

This was my example of a before and after, and I thought it looked ok, this was with default settings, the crop is not identical but close enough for a test, what do you guys think..? as on another forum I was told it did not look real and looked “plasticky” and that I had lost loads of detail in the reduction, especially in the galaxy….….🤔🤔

I think noise reduction to some extent is down to personal taste, and difficult to say exactly but for me I would say the following:

  • The after certainly is by far the better image, but I am assuming this is not immediately after the noise reduction as the colours are far more vibrant, so not sure what else has happened after the noise reduction.
  • In my opinion I would say you have gone a little too far with the noise reduction, or rather that would be my personal choice to do it a little less.
  • It is difficult to say exactly how much detail has been lost but I matched up enlarged sections of the two images best I could in PI and flicked between them to see the difference and on the close up of the outer galaxy you can see some loss of data on the very outskirts of the galaxy dust and gas. See the mp4 below.
  • How much detail is really lost when you stand back and look at the after image is debatable as what is list you probably would not make out by eye without zooming in although you may have been able to bring it out more in the final processing if the detail had not been lost.
  • However, after saying that I still think it is a great image.
  • Maybe see for yourself and reprocess with maybe half the amount of noise reduction using NXT.
  • Remember this is my thoughts and from somebody still learning so take it with a pinch of the proverbial salt. 

 I will see what others (more competent than myself) comment tomorrow but must dash the wife and myself are supposed to be meeting a couple of friends for some beers and an Indian in half hour and Wife is shouting at me to get ready 😞 

Steve

 

Edited by teoria_del_big_bang
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

I think noise reduction to some extent is down to personal taste, and difficult to say exactly but for me I would say the following:

  • The after certainly is by far the better image, but I am assuming this is not immediately after the noise reduction as the colours are far more vibrant, so not sure what else has happened after the noise reduction.
  • In my opinion I would say you have gone a little too far with the noise reduction, or rather that would be my personal choice to do it a little less.
  • It is difficult to say exactly how much detail has been lost but I matched up enlarged sections of the two images best I could in PI and flicked between them to see the difference and on the close up of the outer galaxy you can see some loss of data on the very outskirts of the galaxy dust and gas. See the mp4 below.
  • How much detail is really lost when you stand back and look at the after image is debatable as what is list you probably would not make out by eye without zooming in although you may have been able to bring it out more in the final processing if the detail had not been lost.
  • However, after saying that I still think it is a great image.
  • Maybe see for yourself and reprocess with maybe half the amount of noise reduction using NXT.
  • Remember this is my thoughts and from somebody still learning so take it with a pinch of the proverbial salt. 

 

 I will see what others (more competent than myself) comment tomorrow but must dash the wife and myself are supposed to be meeting a couple of friends for some beers and an Indian in half hour and Wife is shouting at me to get ready 😞 

Steve

 

Thanks for that, much appreciated….👍🏼

Imthink I did tweak the colours a bit, saturation and warmth, but just on my iPad, as I wanted the newly noise reduced image to send to someone….but they are the same images with different crops plus the colour adjustments after the NR..

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stuart1971 said:

Thanks for that, much appreciated….👍🏼

I think I did tweak the colours a bit, saturation and warmth, but just on my iPad, as I wanted the newly noise reduced image to send to someone….but they are the same images with different crops plus the colour adjustments after the NR..

TBH its hard to say anything other than what is really my perception. and what I would do, which is not necessarily the right thing.
As I say I would have done less noise reduction, but then after that your small tweaks after the NR has really brought out the colours and ended up as a great image, certainly one that I would be ,more than happy with. And at the end of the day it is your image and do to it what feels right and what you are pleased with.
 

Steve

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.