Using F35 in camera denoiser vs neatvideo

eddavid

eddavid

Carbonite Member
Has anyone tested the in camera denoiser (noise suppression) vs using a plug in in post like neat video.

I'm curious the difference in terms of resolution etc. I assume using post tools for noise reduction like those in Resolve or Nuke is better than trying to do this in camera.

I always assume its best to shoot without any desharpening and wait for post but sometimes there are tight turnarounds on projects. So who knows right?

thanks all
ed
 
Last edited:
From my experience the best method is to de-noise in post. Part of the detail the camera picks up is contained within the noise.
When we remove it too early, I think it makes the noise algorithms in the software less effective because it has less 'real' data to sample from.
Doing noise reduction in-camera, is like adding adding a lens filter. You're removing some detail, baking in the look, and potentially adding some compression artifacts, which the software needs to account for.

The best results have typically come from shooting 444 uncompressed, and de-noising with Neat Video in Davinci or AE.
Neat allows for camera profiles, and yields pretty noiseless imagery if that's the look your after.
Typically if your still looking for grain, it can be added after you de-noise. By taming the noise, you invariably have to add a little sharpening to counter the softening from the de-noise.
 
No answer other than Test. Easy really just shoot something without NR, with NR, and then apply Neat video to the first footage to see if it looks better or worse than the in-camera denoiser. Hope someone does this simple test.

My experience with in-camera noise reduction in lowend cameras is that they work better than in post. The a7s, 5D mk iii, GH4, D810, they all have a noise reduction algorithm that reduces noise without affecting detail at all. I believe it has to do with these cameras applying the noise reduction to the 14bit raw data before compressing to 8bit 4:2:2, thus it works better than trying to denoise compressed weak images in post, but with a camera that outputs such high quality data it might be just as good or better to do it in post.

Anyway after testing all noise reduction software Neat video is the magic wand. It can turn almost any camera to a lowlight monster if you shoot well and expose to the right. It's that good. The other secret power of Neat video is that it removes any type of compression artefacts, any macroblocking, colour noise, specks, noise, grain, even significantly reduces banding and jagged edges, applying a layer of neat prior to grading almost triples how robust the codec is. It's also the best skin softening tool for the ladies. Actresses absolutely love the look (I don't though but hey, it's their work)

Test the f35 internal NR, if it works without detail loss like in other cameras, use it, and apply neat video too in post for cleaner results. I would only turn NR in low-light situations just to be sure I don't lose any information in well-lit scenes when I don't need NR.
 
Its test time for me. Thanks guys. Cause neatvideo took 36 hrs to clean up the ftg on my computer and it was 9 hrs of sht footage. Thats a little too much processing time.
 
i tested the in camera de-noiser a while ago when i first got the cam and was unimpressed by it. seemed to just turn the high frequency noise into a more smeary noise. didn't reduce the noise at all.... just looked like compression artefacts to me.

Neat video on the other hand is f-ing amazing! works wonders on red footage. a little bit less well on f35 for some reason but it's the only way for me!! :)

one thing i am keen to test is the denoiser in davinci. any one used it? i'm still on the lite version at the moment.
 
eddavid said:
Its test time for me. Thanks guys. Cause neatvideo took 36 hrs to clean up the ftg on my computer and it was 9 hrs of sht footage. Thats a little too much processing time.
Click to expand...

Is your project run-time 9 hours?

I think a more sensible workflow is to use neatvideo as a filter on the timeline, cleaning the selected clips, not the raw footage.
 
I never liked the in-camera denoiser. To be honest, once you start compressing the video I find most compressors de-noise anyway as part of improving compression efficiency.
 
Thanks guys yes problen is agency is editing ftg soon and they wont do a good color correct.
 
I did a lot of testing with NR in cam and it sucks. Neat is fantastic and the only way to go.
i used the ofx neat for resolve, on the shots that made it to final approved by edit tho. To Denoise the actual full length rushes is madness bro!
 
There is a thread a few pages back:
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?328336-how-to-get-rid-of-your-f35-footage-noise-easily

Periferic writes:

Another point about noise reduction:
There are 2 ways to reduce noise in the camera:

-Page 15 of the PAINT menu: NOISE SUP.
I tested the 4 different settings: 30%, 60%, 90% and MAX.
These % do not represent the "Strength" of the noise removal but the "width" of the noise frequency it removes.
30% = only high frequencies
MAX = all frequencies
I find this menu quite useless because high frequencies are not the worst visually because they look like grain.

- Page 08 of the PAINT menu: DETAIL1
there, you will find a line called CRISP with adjustable values from -99 to +99.
It also remove noise and in a much more pleasant manner than the NOISE SUP menu. At least, for me it works great.
I set it to +35 and I do not see any loss in details while the noise suppression is pretty effective.
You should really give it a try!


I have to agree that this 2nd method works very well. I do not know how it compares to neat video, this would need side by side testing. But his statement about the4 Crisp in the paint working much better than the Noise Sup menu is true. Try this before you give up on in camera.
​

 
thanks wow I have short term memory loss - I responded to that thread that I was going to try out crispness. man thanks for that. Memento every day for me.
 
I did a shoot on Monday and for half the day I had it set to +12db (2000asa). I honestly think the footage looks awesome when graded. It's a bit grainy, but in the most pleasant way possible. Sure the 450 stuff looks clean as a whistle in comparison, but I was surprised as I was almost sure the footage was gonna be unsavable.

I did however over-expose most of the stuff by like a stop or so, had I under-exposed I'm sure it would have looked grosser.
 
revisiting this for a project, I am trying to shoot cleanest possible output from F35. I also will be delivering the raw footage so they do not want SLOG or to have to process through neat video. It will be outside interview and I will have PLENTY of light. The 7Q 6X Magnification in the newest firmware is great, i zoom in on a black spot in the frame and it's clear to see how noisy the grain is. Even 0 dB is quite noisy when looking at 6x magnification. ISO 250 is good, but there is still a little bit of color dots appearing in the blacks.

the crisp option seems to help a bit with this, but it also needs to be turned up quite high to have noticeable results. Noise Reduction is just like everyone has said, it turns the noise into smears, and looses detail along with it.

I have been noticing the skin detail page also helps reduce noise, I worry it is loosing resolution also. But this difference is very small, maybe I'm imagining it.

the gamma makes a huge difference on the noise in the blacks also. Hyper gamma's are noisy because the color is very flat still with these settings. I actually like some of the regular rec709 color space standard gamma settings.

black gamma turned on is noisier than off. I also kind of like black gamma on because there is more contrast.

extended dynamic range also introduces more noise but clearly looses detail in the highlights when off.

Has anyone else experimented trying to get cleanest possible image from F35? Are there any other settings to take into account? It's funny because I loose all the control of these settings, but the burned in MLUT is still my preferred method of recording a burnt in look. I still haven't found a custom camera setup that looks exactly the same as that. It is also clear to me that the MLUT looses a lot of detail and information in the highlights, I'm not denying the advantage of SLOG. But in this situation, I would like to use the F35 like those burning in the "Alexa" LUT on the F55, its a quick way to delivery a good grade out of the camera.
 
The F35's picture is never clean in the blacks. The best way you would deliver a truly clean black is by affecting the master pedestal or black gamma. You are playing with fire when you do so though.

The easiest way is to hook the camera up to a waveform with the camera capped. You'll see the noise floor sits above 0%. You just need to adjust it so it falls below 0. But you will be losing detail in the shadows.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top