RAW profiles. How is it done/effective?

[plevyadophy]

I note that RAW files can be processed for noise if one uses the Plug-In version of Neat Image (NI).

What I fail to understand is this.

The Profiling feature of NI does not accept RAW files (it accepts JPEG's and others). Now, JPEGs, even with the noise present in them out of the camera, have had some image processing/noise reduction applied by the camera. It is from these pre-processed JPEGs that we build profiles, right?

Well, if that is so, how can NI be accurate/do a good job on an unprofiled RAW type file that has no image processing applied by the camera, given that the profiles for a given camera will be based on JPEGs?

Your advice is appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

.

[NITeam]

For any more or less accurate noise reduction, an image (image1) that is used for profiling and image (image2) that is actually filtered using the noise profile produced with image1 should go through the same workflow. That means NO to filtration of RAW images using JPEG profiles.

You know how to process RAW images using the plug-in version of NI: you for example open a RAW image in Photoshop and then invoke NI plug-in.

Exactly the same process is used to build a profile. You open a test RAW image in Photoshop, invoke NI and then build a noise profile (for example, using the Auto Profile with Calibration Target function). Yes, this requires some manual work since you have to do that opening and profiling for every test image.

Another possibility is to convert those RAW images to TIFF files that can be used by Neat Image's Batch Profiler. However, you have to convert them using the same procedure you use to convert regular images that you are going to filter aftewards.

Hope this helps.
Vlad

[plevyadophy]

@ NITeam

Thanks for the speedy response.

As a result of your answer I have an idea.

Would it be possible to, as you suggest, convert all the out of camera Calibration Target raw files to TIFF but then give those TIFF files a name like RAW_ISO1600.tif. After having done that, then profile all tiffs (and of course give the profile names a similar name). When I next shoot a raw file, and want to use NI processing directly on the raw file, I would select one of the previously prepared profiles from the tiff files.

Of course, in oder to make those tiffs a true representation of the raw source file from the camera, I would have to convert to tiff WITHOUT any parameters being set/altered in my raw converstion software.

I think that method would speed up the profiling of raw files.

What do you think of that idea? (Did I explain it clearly?)


Thanks in advance.

[NITeam]

to use NI processing directly on the raw file

If you mean to use NI standalone to process TIFFs converted from RAWs then it all sounds right.

Vlad

[plevyadophy]

No, I was referring to the plug-in version.

What I am suggesting is to take raw shots of the Calibration Target at various exposure setting.

Then to make carbon copies of the unprocessed raw files but save them as tiffs using a fast batch method (as you say that NI is pretty slow at converting/processing raws in bulk)

Then use NI to produce profiles of those tiffs (which are actually carbon copies of the raw files).

So after that, whenever one is in Photoshop and wants to work directly with an unprocessed raw file to do some noise reduction with NI (via the plug in), one would simply call up the profiles prepared from those tiffs (which were files that were saved as carbon copies of the raws).

My suggestion is that this would be a much quicker method than the method you described in your initial reply to me.

My theory is that the profiles would be pretty accurate because they are from carbon copies of the raw files (no processing whatsoever, just convert to tiff).

Have I explained it any better?

What do you think?

[NITeam]

Actually there were two methods described in the original reply.

It should be fine as long as use the same conversion method for both test and work images. However, if you use different converters (reading your description, I cannot see if you exclude this variant) then there will be a difference between noise in test images and noise in work images.

If you build a profile in this way:
Camera > (shoot) > [RAW file] > (convert by Adobe Camera Raw) > [RGB image in Photoshop] > (open and build profile in NI plug-in) > [profile for RAW-ACR image]

or this way:
Camera > (shoot) > [RAW file] > (convert by Adobe Camera Raw) > [RGB image in Photoshop] > (save to TIFF) > [TIFF file] >
(open and build profile in NI standalone) > [profile for RAW-ACR image]

then the resulting profile will be good for work images that come through the following workflow:
Camera > (shoot) > [RAW file] > (convert by Adobe Camera Raw) > [RGB image in Photoshop] > (open and filter in NI plug-in)

The important thing is to keep the parameters of (convert by Adobe Camera Raw) the same for both profiling and actual filtration.

If there is some difference in RAW conversion settings or, even worse, you use different RAW converters in profiling and filtration workflows then there will be mismatch between noise in profiles and images.

Vlad

[plevyadophy]

Excellent, its the second method you describe that I was referring to/trying to explain.

THANK YOU VERY much.

[plevyadophy]

Once I have now got all the profiles ready for processing raw files, is it possible to apply noise reduction (via NI plug-in in Photoshop or other program) to a batch of raw files? Or does one have to work on batch files one-at-a-time?

Thanks

[NITeam]

In Photoshop, yes, batch processing is possible. Photoshop has a special batching facility that uses actions and you can use NI Pro+ plug-in in an action. This described in this section of the user guide.

Vlad

[plevyadophy]

Thanks for answering all my questions.

That's one part of my workflow sorted out now.