Noise Reduction Battle! - Lightroom vs Topaz vs DXO Pure RAW

Thanks for the onformative and helpful video. I have the same style of workflow that you talk about. I was on the fence about noise software options. You saved me a load of time comparing them.

HOW MUCH ADOBE PAID YOU ?! ..........

Great info. Thanks.

Can't remember if I commented on this video or not, but in my findings it seems that DXO does a slightly better job overall. I mean Denoise AI is nice if you don't want to spend the money to buy an extra program or plug-in to do the job, and Adobe's denoising is pretty good, but I Felt that on some high-ISO images with a lot of details (textures) I lost some, whereas with DXO I retained a bit more, but DXO for example, costs $70 for the plug-in (PureRAW) or more if you buy Photolab and run it as a plug-in to LR. Topaz I haven't used for some time now. Ran into some issues in older versions where it wouldn't read RAW files correctly and not sure if this got resolved yet or not, but I have settled on DXO PureRAW (which is part of PHotolab basically). I did hear that their latest PR release (as of this writing, Version 3) is very good. But again, it's $70 you have to spend, versus "free" with Adobe. I will say that in my tests, for the texture retention between Adobe and DXO, most differences were visible only at 50% or higher (although if you were denoising a night sky with stars, it may be more obvious as some stars may go missing in some cases -- get removed by the denoising alogirthm).

Excellent non-biased view with the best work flow.

great video (... as usual) but have a question. I use LR for general & high level adjustment and then I go to PS to make all necessary fine editing (also with use of TK luminosity plug in). I see that noise reduction can be my last step after I save image from PS in LR. Then the noise reduction can be the last step in the workflow. Is this this the right thinking ?

Thank your for your work. Well done!
Is there a difference to see beween the results of Topaz Sharpen AI / Denoise AI and Topaz Photo AI?
(Maybe I missed something in your video.)

Very interesting... I've been debating about getting DXO Pure Raw, but now I'm putting on the breaks. At this point in my photo editing, I think I can get at least 90% of what I need from my Topaz Denoise or Adobe. Options are always nice, but maybe when I'm in a better justifiable situation. I'm glad you pointed that out.

compare lightroom to darktable's noise reduction

you got some Gretsch stop sign badges there? Nice! my setup also. 3 racks on top and only 1 floor, but I have to bass drums. I love 3 racks

Dang I spent bread on DXO lol

Gosh Nick, when I use Topaz AI, I love the fact that there is so much variability through the combined de-noise and the sharpening, you have sliders and softness/hardness choices. I still prefer to use Topaz. And just to say - I love watching your videos, you're just a well informed brother on the other side of the screen, thanks!

You know you can adjust the strength of topaz and also where it's being applied based on many options from masks, to colour range etc...Sounds like you haven't played with it very much yet if you think LR’s NR is better.

Great comparisons Nick. Maybe the lesson from these examples is that Adobe effectively separates the noise reduction from sharpening whereas we turn over more control when we use either of Topaz or DXO. I don’t have DXO, I use Topaz Denoise AI, mostly for birds and wildlife. Up until this Adobe update I was very pleased with Topaz, still am. But my own comparisons on ISO 10000 shots of Brewers blackbird show LR Denoise looked better than Topaz.

And it’s only going to get better with updates, the big advantage of Adobes subscription approach, including your bugbear of application to smart objects.

Cheers, Nick. Best review of the new feature of the many, many I’ve seen so far.

Also - I noticed that when you opened up Photo AI it said you had 5 updates waiting - Topaz makes tremendous strides in a myriad of areas with each of its updates, which occur on a weekly basis, so it is possible that on that score too you were not being totally fair, though I KNOW you were trying your best to be, to Topaz's product.

And no, I don't work for them! LOL I just really like their programs and would hate to try to do without them!

Aside from these mentions, I liked your review, sincerity and the comparisons - except re Photo AI.

I was just about to say I thought you made a mistake by using Photo AI, which is pretty good but, usually I find only "close but no cigar", which is why I rarely use it on anything that I consider critical that I want to be the best of the best I can produce.

I was going to suggest you do what you did, and use Topaz DeNoise which I find gives me much better fine-tuning control and better results.

In fact, I have also found, based on a suggestion from way back when by Dave Kelly that putting an image through Topaz Denoise AI can make a marked improvement in the quality of it - without introducing artifacts.

I follow the same - use the separate programs - almost always as stand-alone programs - not as plug ins - on any image - starting with Denoise, the Sharpen AI and finally, if I am going to upscale something seriously - then I would use Gigapixel.

Photo AI is a quick, one-stop shopping experience but not yet ready - in my opinion for Prime Time.

I've noticed that in super-high iso photos like 50k, DXO seems to perform much better, beacuse at this ISO, when noise is as high that noise becomes a texture of photo, topaz AI has a problem with detecting very big noise as a noise, and then, DXO makes his job here.

It does look like there is some Lightroom halos along with the Topaz on the rocks on my screen.

I've been happy with Topaz Denoise on high ISO documentary and photojournalism photos. I seldom use a higher than 400 ISO on landscapes, and usually only 100, so Topaz works fine for me.

Really helpful!

I wonder if you use specific Linear camer profiles with Adobe deNoise, would you get better results? I have read that the best time to do any clean up in PS is in the beginning and not a stamped layer. I use LR for basic edits and then move to PS as there is specific area control. I have Topaz DeNoise AI which is unfortunately going away. Do you have a video on your preferred noise reduction workflow in PS, paid or otherwise. I now use a Sony A7r3a paired w a Sigma 16-28 F2.8 lens. Certainly less noise than canon or Fuji. Thanks for an excellent video

Great video Nick thanks for your thoughts they are genuine and respected and give the viewer a true perspective from a real and continuous user of these plugins. Cheers!

I actually disagree that noise removal is better post processing than at the starting, well at least for high ISO/very noisy images. The more manipulation you do on noisy images, the more that noise is amplified and I found the less effective the noise reduction is or more aggressive you have to apply post manipulations. I certainly found this with my aurora images. I tried processing them in Topaz DeNoise AI both on the initial RAW then adjusting the resultant dng and running images through DeNose AI post LR edditing. In all cases so far the former produced better results. I can see why the software companies suggest this too, as it's much better to edit a cleaner image than a noisy one. I know this perhaps won't be aplicable to all images, but it certainly has been a game changer for my high ISO noisy image workflow.

DxO say that their AI de-noise process is "before" the de-mosaicing process. I think that also applies to how Adobe is doing it, and that might explain why you have to do it as a first process in Lightroom. However, DxO Photolab Elite lets you add the Deep Prime AI de-noising when exporting the image, so it is obviously possible to do it as a final step.

I have used DxO Photolab 4 Elite (which includes their Deep Prime AI noise reduction) and never seen those sharpening halos that you see. I think these may be introduced with the lens softness correction option you seem to add. In DxO Photolab it is also possible to control the level of noise reduction, apparently unlike in Pure RAW.

Anyway, I am looking forward to testing out the AI noise reduction in Adobe ACR versus the one I used so far (DxO Deep Prime).

I found the same. For me a product like Topaz even turned down always added sharpness to the subject which seems to appeal to many wildlife photographers BUT I can always spot the "topaz look" when those photos are shared and to me gives a cut and pasted look. Adobe seems to have done a great job allowing us to be more in control and still use some NR.

Great review and comments!

Also doesn't work on jpeg

Thanks Nick, however I believe this isn't correct. Both Topaz and Adobe manufacturers suggests denoise before anything else for good reason. You can't just say it's my opinion it's not the best place to do it, without the strong justification, I feel you may well intentioned but sending people in the wrong direction with this one. All the best M

Nick, have you ever noticed that topaz seniors changes the color temp or you image after processing. In some setting I get alone of green or cyan added. Just wondering if you’ve noticed a similar thing.

Great video!!

Not a great photo to test results, in my opinion. I find denoise in lightroom to be very slow, and the results aren't very good.
I much prefer Topaz denoise. Hopefully the LR version will allow Jpegs eventually.

The denoise is the first step in your workflow, because if you do it at the last, the characteristics of the noise will change making more difficult to remove, I don't agree with you to make the denoising the last step where after retouching you will make the denoise even worse.

I did some test with very noisy images (astro shot from Nikon Z7) and ISO 6400 from Canon M6mkII with Camera RAW (in Lightroom and PS) vs DXO Pureraw 3.1, if you use Pureraw XD in heavy noisy images, the result is not better, but much better compared with Camera RAW at 70 in noise reduction doing pixel peeping at 300% with smudged details and noise remaining in Camera RAW. Regarding halos, I choose images with borders like yours and there was no halos with Pureraw.
The images I've got from DXO were much cleaner and with good amount of sharpen not creating artifacts or other issues in the images, maybe I was lucky with the images I tested, if you plan to print you will still apply much harder sharpen. I like DXO Pureraw but I don't like their Photolab where it does weird stuff with the RAW images, specially with the color.

About the speed with very noisy images, DXO XD 15sec and Camera RAW 18sec, with DXO non XD is even faster near to 12seconds. (RTX 3060ti)
Something very important you didn't mention is Camera RAW becomes really unstable after using denoising, the same issue found Blake from F64 but you didn't mention anything regarding it when PS or LT become unusable after the first denoising.

For now and in my experiencie DXO is the king of denoise with the downside that it should be more configurable, I'm not able to change a folder for example. I expected much better from a company like Adobe that released a very bugged stuff instead to release something more usable with at least some testing in their QA department that looks like non existent.

Really appreciate your taking the time to do this, Nick. I don't have those other softwares, so it great to see comparisons

I really like the fact that Adobe added this feature finally... I was about to buy DXO 3 but now that we have this option I see absolutely no point in it anymore and i`m sure it will improve even more. Thanks for this comparison.

I recently went to see an exhibition of Steve Mc Curry and noticed how noisy most of his prints are; and yet they have character and evoke emotions.
I think AI would technically improve his images but take away their character and soul and make them look like a lifeless piece of computer generated painting.
While AI can help turning a good into a great one it also takes away from the character if not used wisely

More gear reviews please.

Thanks Nick, good run down. I was getting 10sec for a 50mp image with Adobe, but I have a chunky graphics card in a eGPU hooked up to my laptop.

Nick, great video review of new Lightroom & Camera Raw noise reduction feature. You mention that you like to do noise reduction near the end of your post-processing and using PS for your other edits prior negates the ability to use this feature. I like to roundtrip back to LR after doing my PS work since I prefer the easier and comparable printing capabilities of LR. Couldn't you just use this denoise feature AFTER doing yr PS edits by roundtripping back to LR prior to say printing or other output?

Holy crap I just tried it out on one of my f/4 lenses, Astro images. It did an absolutely amazing job. The iso was set at 2500 and with a 36 on the slider it looks almost perfect. Just a hint of noise with extremely sharp details. I am so impressed it’s like real detail not fake sharpness. Good job adobe it’s exactly what I needed, I can’t afford any new lenses and love Astro photography. My world just got so much better!

Hi Nick, great video. I'm finding, on wildlife images at least, that leaving lens softness OFF in DXO PR3 gives a better result - adding the sharpening back in Lightroom. Where the new Lr just steals the edge is on the very finest details, which DXO tends to 'smudge' it.
Thanks again for the great video.

To my taste and personnal try-n-error I really think that Adobe had made a really good job here !

I've decided Topaz doesn't like birds...

Great comparison very helpful, thank you.👍

Thank you for the video. Helpful to save me time when I end up having to do the same comparison for my self.

I agree about your first comment: all the noise is about denoise.... My other favorite feature is curves on selections!

Great video Nick - after seeing this and having just installed a trial version of DXO RAW III I tried my own tests and found that the outcome was variable. In some cases, low light and very high noise I found Adobe to work best. In better light but higher noise I found a mix but typically DXO came out ahead. It tends to suggest to me that if you can afford it then its not bad to have DXO and Topaz in your toolbox.

I have been using DXO PhotoLab Elite for many years. I have never gotten a result that poor when using DXO. Photolab Elite is more adjustable than PureRaw. Regardless, DXO has essentially given my Panasonic G9 and Nikon D850 full Sensor upgrades - very happy!!

Thanks Nick, none of these let you do noise reduction selectively which is my preferred way, noise is more obvious in skies and soft backgrounds where I can apply it far more than detail areas. For high ISO images I now use ON1 NoNoise as it has sliders for the different types of noise and also crucially sharpen sliders as well, so I can tweak between denoise and sharpen for the best result. For my selective noise reduction I would use this programme concentrating on the main subject and then back in Lightroom select those skies and backgrounds for further treatment. Like the programmes you tested it often gets artefacts in out-of-focus areas and it really hates mist so you need to be selective in use.

My luck. Adobe adds Denoise less than a month after I bought Topaz. Bought the full package so will still be using Sharpen AI and Gigapixel.