Whatever regarding to my researches here is the result after turning the adaptivity off: The HD success rate raised to 41 and the noise is almost gone after 100 passes which gives about 30 % performance. I do not want to trick the result, the render should be clean without using denoisers as they are cleaning picture by blurring pixels which is not accurate( for different purposes though). tBut the reason I have raised this questions Again I am not going to go in comparison Corona VS Neat or REd Giant or anything, these are too different products with different purposes to be compared to. There are much more powerful denoisers for still images like Imagenomic Noiseware, I just mentioned Neat for instances as it is powerful cleaning the noise in Video sequences. For the images 600X600 or thumbnails probably it is ok but for prints like 8000 this is not a solution. As I have mentioned below I am not considering the denoiser serious untill I could prove this really. Sorry I can not attach the full image and the scene due to copyrights and NDA. I don't want to use denoiser as this is bluring the image and washing the clean sharp details, after testing I did not find any difference between Corona denoiser and Red Giant denoiser or Neat video plugins, except is fully integrated in Corona and doesn't need to buy additional expensive plugins. Whatever I will really appreciate for some advise /help. What could cause that? What is the relation between success rate and amount of geometry/lights/reflections? The number of rays is ok IMHO 6.5 mln is ok isn't it? For the moment I have AA/GI on 20/4 MSI 11 Still there is noise mostly in the GI pass. Trying to cut render time down to a reasonable one, something like 1hour on 2Xeon 32 cores. It is an interior but very heavy one with heavy proxy the polygon amount is almost 40 mln in already optimized scene. It's up to you to learn to manage the trade-offs when this occurs.Hi, Guys! Congrats with new version of Corona renderer. When there's a lot of detail, and a lot of noise, even the best package has to make some guesses as to which is which. It’s also integrated with Mask AI, so when different elements in your photo need different. Simply click the option you need and remove noise from your photo. The various included 'pre-sets' produce doggone good turnkey results for their respective image types, and you can tweak and tune to your hearts content with an array of controls, and built-in bracketing.īut keep in mind that, no matter how good these tools are, they can only do so much. Based on deep photo analysis, Noiseless AI determines the level of noise and suggests one of three configurations to reduce it: low, middle, and high. Events Guidelines Staff Imprint SD Cards More.

Premium Membership (English) Premium Mitgliedschaft (Deutsch) Classifieds Forum Content. With Noiseware, within the first hour I was producing results as good as (or better) than I could with years of NI experience, and with considerably less effort. Leica Wiki (English) Leica Wiki (German) Activity. I've recently been experimenting with Noiseware, and based on what I've seen over the past week, I'd enthusiastically echo the recommendation for it over NI and Noise Ninja. In short, NI is a tool which requires practice, and can produce very good results with care, but the defaults are generally waaay too aggressive, and a less than optimal profile will always lead to less than optimal results. Whenever possible, I custom profile each individual image before de-noising, and I'm willing to experiment with the controls and to mask in PS and selectively de-noise with optimized selections.

Does anyone have any input to which is better or easier to use Neat image seems to have been most recently updated and Nik seems to have the oldest version. I've also used Neat Image for years, and also get very good results, but. neat image Showing posts 1 - 19 of 19 Balloonguy I need to get a noise reduction plug in for CS4 and have looked at the above three as well as Nik Dfine 2.0.

Noiseware vs neat image