I inserted only with raw images in lightroom and still can't use denoise ...receiving the message that Denoise is not compatible with this photo format
Im sorry but i see the ai denoise as a total lot of rubbish , adobe have actuly added noise to your image as its imported ,iv compared images on two computers with lightroom on them one the previous lightroom and this update, two cameras used canon r5 and leica m10 r and its even adding noise to the leica dng , if i put the same files into capture one guess what no noise untill high iso , do adobe think photo editors are stupid ! do the comparison for your self you will see this update is adobe clutching at straws as its become so bad at handling certain manufacturers raw files ,
Anyone have problems the photos is not compatible to this new lightroom denoise I use sony raw and than convert to dngstill not work Please explain what is correct step
Not at this time. Your workaround is to run the individual files through denoise first, and then stitch them into a pano. You likely could then just sync your previous edit to the new pano file. More file support - including DNGs for panoramic and HDR files - will hopefully be coming in a later update.
The Update AI settings for me makes me redo it every single time I click off and click back to the photo and when you have to bulk edit, its extremely annoying.
@@MichaelRungPhotography yeah, I'm actually editing right now lol. The changes save but each time I click back to the photo, I have to go back to each individual mask and click "update AI settings".
That’s odd. It may be a long shot, but maybe try optimizing your catalog. If that doesn’t work, I’d contact Adobe support to see if they can figure out what’s going on.
As powerful as iPads are, I assume it’s a matter of computing power. The AI tools lean heavily on the GPU, and I’m not sure the iPads are suited for that just yet. Or, they’re trying to strike a balance between supporting older models and rolling out more power hungry features.
I appreciate the feedback, Jules. Unfortunately, I’ve found it’s impossible to please everyone: others have said I need to speed up! I try to pick a pace in between and figure viewers can use the TH-cam playback speed options to speed up or slow down if they prefer. 🙂
Michael talks too much before showing. I suggest that he talks and shows at the same time and limits his coverage to fewer topics and/or side comments per video.
You don’t actually. Any content aware healing will recompute automatically as part of the process (along with AI masks), although you may want to look them over afterwards to make sure they don’t need further refreshing. Content aware healing evaluates the image as-is, so any healing performed before the denoise process will be accounting for the noise level, too.
Nice video; thanks. But I'm not sure about your comment that it doesn't work on DNGs. The AI noise reduction works fine on my DNGs, which are generated by several cameras I own. Perhaps it doesn't work on some types of DNG?
What are the file extensions on your camera files? It only has an issue with actual .DNG extension files, not camera raw files (for instance my Canon .CR2/.CR3 raw files).
While I understand your dis-satisfaction with a 200% zoom on the new AI Noise reduction tool for landscape photos that are very grassy, my photos of a volleyball match seem to be just fine with a 200% zoom preview. The difference, of course, is that in some areas of a photo of a volleyball player, there's not much detail (solid blue jersey, relatively solid skin tones) while in grass there's huge amount of detail. And so a 200% preview works fine in that case.
A better term would probably be machine learning, but that’s even less known in the general vocabulary. If you want the technical details of how they trained the “artificial intelligence” for the new denoise tool, they get into the technical details in this blog post: blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2023/04/18/denoise-demystified
Great video! Am I right saying the AI Denoise needs to be applied on a file by file basis? That's what I love about DxO, it processes a batch of images and gets clean results without any fiddling around.
You can run it in batch, but they’ll all have the same amount applied. It would work well for a series of similar shots (in theory… I haven’t tested batches).
Great job Michael. Wish NR were not an "all-or-nothing" tool (ie, tie it into masking, so can mask out areas of its artifacting, limit it just to skies, smooth water, glass, etc.). I'm finding artifacts (in Adobe NR) in shadows with chaotic foliage (not the "tails" it's adding to stars, but clunky Midjourney v3 style extended/made up branches and leaves). It's also struggling with some of the more subtle edges (eg, icebergs floating at twilight). I agree with you that sure do hope they continue to develop it and let it languish! I also strongly agree with you about their very small, modal, non-resizable dialog. Hard to believe they wouldn't make it resizable, incrementally zoom, and have a before/after comparator like tools such as NIK had for a decade)!
It would definitely be nice if it could work with masking! Unfortunately for now, the only workaround of course is to open the new DNG and the original as layers in Photoshop and mask as needed there. They have said they hope to get it working natively, without needing to create a DNG… so one can hope that if they pull that off, they’ll update the currently very limited masking noise tool, too (or add a masking brush to the Denoise window similar to Topaz and others). It’s interesting to hear you’re running into artifacting. I’ve run probably 10-15 files through, including some very noisy files with high ISO on an old crop sensor, and was impressed by the results. Nothing will be perfect, though!
Thanks for the comprehensive cover of the updates. I am currently a DXO user for noise and a quick look at some files suggests this is on par at least. The advantage is that I can stay in the eco system without having to send it to DXO and back again. I still end up with a dng as an extra file so hopefully Adobe can implement within the existing RAW file going forward which would be their point of difference with DXO. In a nutshell, I am happy with this first look and no need for me to use DXO for noise going forward.
Yep, I agree on all points. If they do pull off doing it natively in the Lightroom app without a DNG, that will be even better. The main benefit of other software is they may allow applying masks as part of the denoise process, but it’d be easy enough to do that by opening the original and the denoise DNG files in Photoshop as layers (clunkier than, say, Topaz… but doable if needed).
Extremely detailed coverage of the changes. Thank you Michael.... and welcome back. (I've added a post to a DPreview thread on the new version of LR with a link to this video). Off topic: is that a print by Adam Gibbs behind you (in the centre)?
Hey Peter, thanks so much for the kind words and sharing the video. Truly appreciated! And yes it is. Ben Horne on the upper left, Matt Payne lower left, Adam, and then two of mine on the right. I love that whole series of images by Adam from that location… it was tough to pick one for print!
@@MichaelRungPhotography I have a different print from that series. I'm also a fan of Ben Horne's work but I didn't know Matt Payne so thanks for bringing him to my attention.
Great. I did a comparison with Denoise AI and it shifts the color quite a bit, which causes more work. The Denoise in ACR doesn't shift color and the results are superior. Great to be able to stay within one product for my workflow
The color shift is a big deal! I have noticed an occasional shift in luminosity but I can work with that. Color shifts are far more problematic and annoying to fix.
@@MichaelRungPhotography I didn’t notice it before, but on a recent project are started with tar files instead of jpgs. The resulting DNGs are just bad. Thanks for your video. I didn’t know about the new AI until I watched it
Excellent and helpful Video thank you. I actually learned some things I didn’t know whilst learning about the new changes, so really really useful. Much appreciated !
@@MichaelRungPhotography I’m a very new Lightroom user, well let’s say more into learning the deeper parts of it now. The ability to click and drag up and down I did not know about so this is really useful to find. Thanks again !!
I inserted only with raw images in lightroom and still can't use denoise ...receiving the message that Denoise is not compatible with this photo format
What’s the file extension for the files you’re trying to run? Some raw formats - such as Canon’s old .mraw format - are not compatible.
Im sorry but i see the ai denoise as a total lot of rubbish , adobe have actuly added noise to your image as its imported ,iv compared images on two computers with lightroom on them one the previous lightroom and this update, two cameras used canon r5 and leica m10 r and its even adding noise to the leica dng , if i put the same files into capture one guess what no noise untill high iso , do adobe think photo editors are stupid ! do the comparison for your self you will see this update is adobe clutching at straws as its become so bad at handling certain manufacturers raw files ,
Can’t say I’ve seen that all. I also use a Canon R5 and there’s no difference in image quality upon import.
Anyone have problems the photos is not compatible to this new lightroom denoise
I use sony raw and than convert to dngstill not work
Please explain what is correct step
It should work with the default Sony raw files. Converting to a DNG won’t work with the new denoise function for now.
can the AI denoise not work with stitched images? I went to re-edit a panorama i made and apply the AI de-noise and it says file type not allowed
Not at this time. Your workaround is to run the individual files through denoise first, and then stitch them into a pano. You likely could then just sync your previous edit to the new pano file.
More file support - including DNGs for panoramic and HDR files - will hopefully be coming in a later update.
The Update AI settings for me makes me redo it every single time I click off and click back to the photo and when you have to bulk edit, its extremely annoying.
So if you update an AI mask and then switch to a different photo, it “loses” the updated mask if you back to it again?
@@MichaelRungPhotography yeah, I'm actually editing right now lol. The changes save but each time I click back to the photo, I have to go back to each individual mask and click "update AI settings".
That’s odd. It may be a long shot, but maybe try optimizing your catalog. If that doesn’t work, I’d contact Adobe support to see if they can figure out what’s going on.
Love these features! Would love them to finally update the LRC on iPad. We havent gotten any of the new masking features since 2021.
As powerful as iPads are, I assume it’s a matter of computing power. The AI tools lean heavily on the GPU, and I’m not sure the iPads are suited for that just yet. Or, they’re trying to strike a balance between supporting older models and rolling out more power hungry features.
Slow down … 🏃🏽
I appreciate the feedback, Jules. Unfortunately, I’ve found it’s impossible to please everyone: others have said I need to speed up! I try to pick a pace in between and figure viewers can use the TH-cam playback speed options to speed up or slow down if they prefer. 🙂
Michael talks too much before showing. I suggest that he talks and shows at the same time and limits his coverage to fewer topics and/or side comments per video.
I appreciate the feedback, Wayne.
The fact that you might have to go back and re-spot older photos AGAIN is a terrible implementation!
You don’t actually. Any content aware healing will recompute automatically as part of the process (along with AI masks), although you may want to look them over afterwards to make sure they don’t need further refreshing.
Content aware healing evaluates the image as-is, so any healing performed before the denoise process will be accounting for the noise level, too.
Nice video; thanks. But I'm not sure about your comment that it doesn't work on DNGs. The AI noise reduction works fine on my DNGs, which are generated by several cameras I own. Perhaps it doesn't work on some types of DNG?
What are the file extensions on your camera files? It only has an issue with actual .DNG extension files, not camera raw files (for instance my Canon .CR2/.CR3 raw files).
While I understand your dis-satisfaction with a 200% zoom on the new AI Noise reduction tool for landscape photos that are very grassy, my photos of a volleyball match seem to be just fine with a 200% zoom preview. The difference, of course, is that in some areas of a photo of a volleyball player, there's not much detail (solid blue jersey, relatively solid skin tones) while in grass there's huge amount of detail. And so a 200% preview works fine in that case.
Makes sense! And reinforces why they need to allow us to choose the zoom level that works best for each image. 🙂
AI AI AI is a marketing buzz term. What does it even mean?
A better term would probably be machine learning, but that’s even less known in the general vocabulary. If you want the technical details of how they trained the “artificial intelligence” for the new denoise tool, they get into the technical details in this blog post: blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2023/04/18/denoise-demystified
Great video! Am I right saying the AI Denoise needs to be applied on a file by file basis? That's what I love about DxO, it processes a batch of images and gets clean results without any fiddling around.
You can run it in batch, but they’ll all have the same amount applied. It would work well for a series of similar shots (in theory… I haven’t tested batches).
Great job Michael. Wish NR were not an "all-or-nothing" tool (ie, tie it into masking, so can mask out areas of its artifacting, limit it just to skies, smooth water, glass, etc.). I'm finding artifacts (in Adobe NR) in shadows with chaotic foliage (not the "tails" it's adding to stars, but clunky Midjourney v3 style extended/made up branches and leaves). It's also struggling with some of the more subtle edges (eg, icebergs floating at twilight). I agree with you that sure do hope they continue to develop it and let it languish! I also strongly agree with you about their very small, modal, non-resizable dialog. Hard to believe they wouldn't make it resizable, incrementally zoom, and have a before/after comparator like tools such as NIK had for a decade)!
It would definitely be nice if it could work with masking! Unfortunately for now, the only workaround of course is to open the new DNG and the original as layers in Photoshop and mask as needed there.
They have said they hope to get it working natively, without needing to create a DNG… so one can hope that if they pull that off, they’ll update the currently very limited masking noise tool, too (or add a masking brush to the Denoise window similar to Topaz and others).
It’s interesting to hear you’re running into artifacting. I’ve run probably 10-15 files through, including some very noisy files with high ISO on an old crop sensor, and was impressed by the results. Nothing will be perfect, though!
Awesome review! Thank you.
Thanks for watching!
Excellent! Non destructive!
Glad you liked it!
Thanks for the comprehensive cover of the updates. I am currently a DXO user for noise and a quick look at some files suggests this is on par at least. The advantage is that I can stay in the eco system without having to send it to DXO and back again. I still end up with a dng as an extra file so hopefully Adobe can implement within the existing RAW file going forward which would be their point of difference with DXO. In a nutshell, I am happy with this first look and no need for me to use DXO for noise going forward.
Yep, I agree on all points. If they do pull off doing it natively in the Lightroom app without a DNG, that will be even better. The main benefit of other software is they may allow applying masks as part of the denoise process, but it’d be easy enough to do that by opening the original and the denoise DNG files in Photoshop as layers (clunkier than, say, Topaz… but doable if needed).
Agree!
Extremely detailed coverage of the changes. Thank you Michael.... and welcome back. (I've added a post to a DPreview thread on the new version of LR with a link to this video). Off topic: is that a print by Adam Gibbs behind you (in the centre)?
Hey Peter, thanks so much for the kind words and sharing the video. Truly appreciated!
And yes it is. Ben Horne on the upper left, Matt Payne lower left, Adam, and then two of mine on the right. I love that whole series of images by Adam from that location… it was tough to pick one for print!
@@MichaelRungPhotography I have a different print from that series. I'm also a fan of Ben Horne's work but I didn't know Matt Payne so thanks for bringing him to my attention.
Great. I did a comparison with Denoise AI and it shifts the color quite a bit, which causes more work. The Denoise in ACR doesn't shift color and the results are superior. Great to be able to stay within one product for my workflow
The color shift is a big deal! I have noticed an occasional shift in luminosity but I can work with that. Color shifts are far more problematic and annoying to fix.
@@MichaelRungPhotography I didn’t notice it before, but on a recent project are started with tar files instead of jpgs. The resulting DNGs are just bad. Thanks for your video. I didn’t know about the new AI until I watched it
@@jaybillups2063 I’m glad it helped you out!
Excellent and helpful Video thank you. I actually learned some things I didn’t know whilst learning about the new changes, so really really useful. Much appreciated !
Great to hear!
@@MichaelRungPhotography I’m a very new Lightroom user, well let’s say more into learning the deeper parts of it now. The ability to click and drag up and down I did not know about so this is really useful to find. Thanks again !!
I had a feeling that may have been one of the tricks you learned! It’s definitely a useful tool. 🙂
@@MichaelRungPhotography absolutely!! I’m using it right now !!