11

The technique used by Cortex Camera is called Median Blending. Astrophotographers have been using this concept for years to combine multiple photos of dim objects in the night sky to reduce the noise and increase contrast and color. It is often referred to as image stacking in which hundreds of images of the same piece of sky are overlaid and the values for ...


6

The moon is really a special case, because it is mostly grey. So you can remove chroma noise by just picking a channel (green, usually). This also removes some of the chromatic aberrations on the edges (when they are sharp, which isn't he case here). You can also average the three color channels: copy the image to obtain three layers, and using the channel ...


5

There is a way to do this in Photoshop (I'm using CS5 Extended) Shoot multiple exposures. In Photoshop, go to File > Scripts > Load Files into Stack. Click Browse and select the exposures to be used in the Stack and check Attempt to Automatically Align Source Images and Create Smart Object after Loading Layers. This will create a single Smart Object from ...


4

Diffraction and noise You basically used a 3000mm f/30 lens, so heavy diffraction is expected. You simply cannot obtain sharp results with this lens and teleconverter, even if you manage to focus the lens properly. On top of that, the lens itself might be soft. With the teleconverter, you won't get any sharp result, without, you might. Finally, you have ...


4

It sounds like you want to use an alternate noise reduction algorithm integrated into Lightroom's RAW conversion, as an alternate for or addition to the built-in noise reduction. I don't think there are any plugins that work that way. Everything I can find uses Lightroom's external editing functionality — which sends a processed TIFF or JPEG to the other ...


3

My guess is you're using denoise (profiled). If so, then you should read darktable's manual section on profiled denoise, where it is clearly stated that you should use a blend mode to avoid that effect you've shown in your examples that look smeared and painterly. To summarize: Use non-local means for luma noise, combined with blend mode ligthness or HSV ...


3

Many of darktable's algorithms are significantly different from those typically used by other image processing programs. If you cannot get the results you want from darktable, consider trying other raw processing software, such as RawTherapee or UFRaw. The images are consistent with the use of noise reduction filters with different "strengths", where the ...


2

scottbb has more than adequately covered the pure photography side of things, so I'd like to add another aspect. Bouncing a camera repeatedly over a bumpy field on a hard mount & expecting it to last more than a week is going to be an expensive learning curve. I'd see the three main points of potential failure to be - The lens elements being shaken out ...


2

While the actual questions you asked aren't very broad in scope ("should I use Av/Tv/Manual mode?", and "Is the 18-55 STM lens useful for my application?"), I think the details of your use-case open this up to a HUGE range of considerations. Should I use Av mode, Tv mode or manual mode? You should use manual mode, with automatic ISO. Your primary goal is ...


2

Denoising is a vast subject, there are a lot of methods and a lot of research papers about it in the literature. A simple and efficient algorithm that you can take a look at is called Non Local Means. Basically it aims at averaging pixels that look similar as there are a lot of redundancy in an image. You can do it on the bayer (by taking into account the ...


2

Which is the main subject in these cases? Which did you, the photographer, mean to be the main subject? You need to decide what you're trying to say with your photo and ensure that the photo communicates that. If that means stopping down so that you have a greater depth of field, that's what you need to do. (I appreciate that with a D5600 and the kit lens, ...


2

Here is my process in RawTherapee: We start in the Raw tab. The first thing I notice is that you have horizontal banding. RawTherapee can deal with this using the "Line noise filter". Set the direction to "horizontal" and the value to something that seems to work (around 400). Note: this is not perfect, there is some residual banding. I think you'd need to ...


2

In general you can always remove noise, but you might not have much detail left in your image if the signal to noise ratio was poor to start with. State of the art these days are filters based on a non-local means algorithm. This tends to do better than most previous algorithms in terms of not making textures look like smooth plastic, if there is some ...


2

I think your image would have turned out much better without the 3x teleconverter. With a 18MP or 24MP camera, cropping the image would probably be sharper and you could have used a more reasonable ISO. I use a free program by Imagenomic called Noiseware and here is a sample of how it works on a jpeg.


1

Focal length is not everything. You made a mistake by using 3000mm focal length. The truth is, 400mm is plenty. I took this picture of the moon with a 400mm lens: If you use a longer focal length, you have poorer light collecting ability unless the lens is very huge. Every teleconverter reduces the resolution of the lens system. Also, you start to see the ...


1

As noted in other answers there, is neither going to be a single fix nor a complete set of fixes. It may be worth seeing what the DXO Photolab prime de-noising algorithm can do; it can be be extremely effective. My concern is the possibility of excess smoothing however it may be worth installing a trial to see if you can create a base onto which you can ...


1

A lot of noise can be removed. I used unprocessing to denoise it, which is probably an overkill approach for this. If additional sharpening was applied, maybe this image could be passable. It is however evident that your picture is not entirely sharp to begin with, and as others have stated, going back and reshooting with a stable tripod and a lower iso ...


1

The ISO noise isn't the problem, it's shaking. There's definitely ISO noise but the shaking means that you can't clean it up. You can photoshop an image out of this pic but it won't be the real thing. Here's the picture with saturation blown out. The banding is all bent and distorted from movement and the noise itself is turned into vertical lines. ISO ...


1

I agree with Philip Kendall. That said, the OP asked about setting focus for multiple subjects, i.e., a basic question about controlling DOF. Depth of field (DOF) is the range of distance from the camera that is in focus. It can be shallow or deep. You control it by adjusting your aperture: a small aperture (like f14) gives greater depth of field than a ...


1

The classical solution for edge-preserving noise reduction is to apply a bilateral filter: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilateral_filter . This calculates the average of a group of pixels in the immediate environment, but it ignores the pixels whose difference is too large, like on the other side of an edge. Thus it filters away the differences that are ...


1

The blur is due to heat haze. I have had this exact same issue happen when taking pictures of birds on lakes. Just this winter I had the same issue when taking photos of snow geese. The only way I've found to "fix" the blur was to either close my distance between the subject and myself, wait for the haze to dissipate or increase my elevation so I wasn't ...


1

DxO 9 has a new PRIME algorithm that is marketed as being a very much improved noise reduction algorithm for high ISO images. Here is a link to start you off on the PRIME algorithm. PRIME by DxO I have used it myself and I am happy and quite impressed by the result. But it is very processor intensive and takes a long time to process each image.


1

Here's a link to the User Manual for version 3.12 of Canon's Digital Photo Professional. http://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/1/0300009841/01/dpp312-11w-en.pdf (I don't yet have enough reputation to add comments to someone else' answer.)


1

Yes, you will get noisier images at higher ISO numbers, and the blue specs are also noise. The best ISO for an indoor shot depends pretty much on the available light and subject. For a still life, if you can use a tripod, you can use a lower ISO. But if your subject was a cat, you'd need a faster shutter speed and/or flash, hence reducing the light and ...


1

The blue specks are read noise that is being amplified when you try to pull details out of shadows that are pretty much pure black. Noise is a result of low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). In the case of digital photography signal is determined by the amount of light allowed to hit the sensor. Noise is a combination of constant read noise caused by the ...


1

Here is my attempt : I've used G'MIC filters "Remove hotspots" and "Smooth [Bilateral]" to achieve the cleaning.


1

There are some sophsticated filters that are implemented in software such as the G'MIC plugin of GIMP. You can try this online here. I've never used G'MIC for texture removal and I have not installed it on my present computer, so I'm not sure if it has a good filter that works well for this case. Now, if some standard method doesn't work well, you can ...


1

Yes. Averaging exposures is similar to what you'll see in movies. If you stop on one frame, the grain is visible and often dust spots and scratches. When you're viewing at 24FPS, those aren't as noticeable because the subject is constant, but the grain has a randomness to it.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible