In this tutorial, I examine whether the new AI Denoise that is in Lightroom should be done early or later in one's workflow or if it even matters. Here is the video I did where I went over the new things found in Lightroom Classic 12.3: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jrJnhNt3nLCvY5s.html Please subscribe to my newsletter! anthonymorganti.substack.com/subscribe Check out one of my newer websites - The Best in Photography: bestinphotography.com/ Please help support my KZfaq channel - consider purchasing my Lightroom Presets: www.anthonymorganti.com/ To get more info about Lightroom, go here: prf.hn/l/lGnjDBl Here is the list of my recommended software, along with any discount codes I might have: wp.me/P9QUvD-ozx Here is a list of my current cameras, lenses, etc.: wp.me/P9QUvD-ozG Help me help others learn photography. You can quickly offer your support here, where I receive 100% of your kind gift: ko-fi.com/anthonymorganti You can change the default amount to the amount you want to donate.

I'm guessing that the difference would be: that looking at a denoise image, you may implement different edits or strength of edits compared to what you would do if looking at a noisy image first. For example, since the denoise process changes sharpness, you may apply a different amount of sharpness if looking at the denoise image first.

I believe the results will basically be the same but the processing time will increase if DeNoise is done after using the spot healing and masking tools. That is because after doing the DeNoise it then has to reapply the masks and removals since the pixels may have shifted and impacting the mask results.

From my experience playing with this feature, I think you are correct. I think LR is applying the NR and then copying over your edits. What I have noticed is when you start adding masks, especially AI masks, it slows down the conversion process. So it's possible that the creation of the new file is faster on a minimally edited RAW file compared to a fully edited RAW file.

Hi Anthony, thanks again for your Lightroom demos. I believe the AI Denoise can be done after any basic edits, but needs to be done before any image masking or healing are done. It would be interesting so see if that workflow holds true.

I think you are correct about the AI algorithm working on the original raw file. I just edited an image and healed some areas. The unhealed image is what appears in the denoise preview. Keep up the amazing work by the way.

I love the new noise removal tool in LR. I think it's useful. Good comparison between where/when it is used.

Thanks, Anthony. I appreciate these very practically-oriented videos addressing common questions.

In my work, I photograph sports under very poor lighting conditions. So, noise reduction and face sharpness are critical. I'd be more likely to do sharpening and denoise first, just to make sure the image is acceptable before I start doing a bunch of edits. Also, I always import my images with my own preset, so some editing is already done before I can touch that Denoise button.

Excellent video, cannot believe how good the denoise tool is. As a newbie to LR and now using film noise is a problem, so this video is terrific. Thank you so much

I think it does make sense to do NR early on, especially if you plan to send the file to PS or some other pixel-based editor later. If you're not, then maybe it doesn't matter since you'll always be working with a RAW file (or DNG, which is basically the next best thing to a RAW file), versus soemthing like a TIFF type file, which may make AI noise reduction harder or not possible by LR. Plus I think if you're doing spot removal or cloning, it may be better to do it on a "cleaned" image so that you can get the best chance of a good result from such tools versus waiting until after doing NR and then having to apply NR to the entire image, it could leave some artifacts especially if you use layers and for some reason those might be ignored, among other things. So I think early on make sense, just like how cropping early on can also make sense from an editing perspective.

Would love to see bulk denoise

Thanks Anthony for following up on my question- much appreciated 🙂

On my version of Denoise, there's a warning that any Heals or AI Masks will be updated during the denoise process, and that may change their appearance. I suspect that's why Adobe recommends denoising first.

Thanks for posting! Appreciation from the user who asked the question. :) When you compared the two there was no shift in the histogram, which would suggest the treatment was the same. If you compare to the original raw file prior to Denoise you'll see a shift in the histogram (as would be expected). I would imagine that if you exported and subtracted the two there would be no difference. But, this does bring up a question as to when you should sharpen the image. I noticed your settings had the sharpening at 0 prior any work done. I'll look at that this weekend.

I would think, just my 2 cents, if you utilize masking and other localized edits that doing Denoise first would be best. Your example was all global edits, so that is why I believe you don't see much difference. Thanks for your video to illustrate the latter.

I sometimes use the Y button to pat myself on the back that I've actually done something good in Lightroom. I got a feeling the Y button shows "before" from when you did the denoise - perhaps a reason to do denoise early

Thanks for this comparison. I've been using it last, or somewhere in between. I'll have to do my own comparison but sure looks like it doesn't matter.

Absolutely. Even DXO just references the original RAW file. I normally do the edits on the raw file and then after the edit if I find that the noise has increased due to my editing, I run the file through DXO and then copy the edits over to the new DNG file created by DXO.

I tried denoise on a .nef file after your first video about the new feature and was impressed with the visible results. I don't see any difference in the final images here. It * could * be that doing denoise first reduces the processing time I suppose. Thanks for this video ,always appreciated.

Julieanne Kost said NR first had something to do with masking and local adjustments. Maybe then you see a difference.

I had previously edited an image that I used Masking tools. After I saw your first video, I went back to then use this new Denoise tool. It that situation it did make slight changes and there is a warning message during the process.

Before I came across this video, I did the same before and after test. I couldn’t tell a difference. LR Denoise came out a week after I bought DxO pure RAW 3, which looked better than Topaz AI. DxO is a micro butt hair sharper than LR on one the image I tested. Most people would never know. I’m sticking with LR Denoise, because the workflow is much simpler.

I like to do denoise as I don’t want to edit a noisy image

Thank you!! I have been wondering I finally googled the question today lol. I am confronted with the problem cuz I forgot to bring a tripod to shoot sunset at Glacier Point like an idiot and had to use high ISO...

In video production denoise is done before any color correction and grading. Interesting to see that it doesn't matter much in a photography workflow.

Just tried with a not too noisy pix (NR first). It did a good job, but took way too long actually to be considered a practical option choice for quite a bunch of images to work with. Just usable for those few important ones with a lot of noise badly in need to be recovered, but not for a "normal" workflow.

Brilliant update. Love it!

The rapid improvement in noise removal technology has caused me to change the way I shoot. I have always favored aperture priority for anything but studio work (which is typically manual). Now, I have gone to using auto ISO far more often. I set my aperture, my shutter speed, and let the camera control my ISO. With a max ISO set to about 6400 (give or take), I let the camera do its thing, and if the image is too noisy...not a problem anymore.

Thanks. This has cleared up a doubt I had. One further doubt : is it the same to DeNoise a cropped image versus the non cropped version

looking forward to seeing your comparison LR AI denoise with other Denoise AI applications plug-ins soon. Thanks for this video.

Thanks for going through this, I don't see a difference!

I have found that if there have been any masking, healing, object removal or cloning actions added to an image, that it where it makes a difference,

Thanks for the video. Very interesting that denoising with sharpening applied seems to not affect the final result, as you say this would suggest adobe denoises the original raw file & reapplies edits. If so this is quite cool really. Still I'll try to denoise early & with no sharpening applied, just in case. Thanks!

You could put the two pictures in layers in photoshop and subtract them to test if they are equal

So, I add clearly visible grain in LIghtroom with the Grain tool before I use Denoise and guess what? Denoise removed the grain. This suggest that the Denoise tool should be used first.

Denoising at the end will be good to reduced filesizes. So First edit everything completely, then applying denoise to every photo, so Tons of dublicated dngs which are 10 Times bigger are created, then exporting them to jpg and THEN deleting the dngs to save much space. that way I would Do it with big folders with 1000+ Photos in it

I've found the AI reduction to match my own fine tuning in the classic reduction system. The AI is a a one click solution; it's not better than me, but it's a lot faster than me! I'm very happy with it.

always first. you want to feel good about the image while editing, not bummed that it is so noisy. Also, Lr does the masking before you even start, so if you send to an external editor that also changes the lens correction geometry, then you cannot update the masks.

Anthony! I think Adobe was thinking about local adjustment when recommended to denoise before edit. You should try it! Unfortunately I can't do it because my LR does the denoising in 5 - 10 MIN on Windows 11 laptop! For me is useless comparing with Topaz Photo AI!

Thank you for doing this video. Maybe I'm the weird one but I find it totally strange to do Denoise early in my workflow. Generally speaking, the more I crop and the more I edit colors and exposure the more noise I get. I don't really know how much NR I want or need until I have done those edits. That seems totally logical to me, but I'd love to hear the counter arguments to that.

Great video as always. Thank you Anthony. I do have a question….if you have an under exposed image and bring up the exposure say, 1 stop, my experience is that will bring out additional noise. If you denoise first, then edit last (bring up the exposure) wouldn’t that defeat the denoise algorithm?

What is equally impressive is to process images that are so heavily affected that colors are also lost and to see them recovered along with the amazing noise reduction.

Using Denoise first avoids potential issues with certain tools like the healing brush, although I'm not seeing much of a difference.

Wonderful video, Anthony! I'm finding that if I apply 40% vibrance to an image, then Denoise (40%) that the image seems to have the equivalence of 80% vibrance added after Denoise. So I have to move Vibrance back to 0% after Denoise to remove this effect. So I'm in the boat w/ you (and Adobe) to use Denoise first, then apply edits to the image to avoid any additional effects being added (other than Denoise)....

Anytime I try to spot differences, I load the images into Photoshop and for the upper layer I choose Difference blend mode and do a 100-200 % pixel peep.

I had a problem with my computer getting slower as a processed images in Lr. When looking for a remedy I found an article on Adobe's site that was very helpful in which order you could do edits to minimize slow processing speeds. Maybe that is their consideration.

@Anthony, Thanks for another great video, I always look forward for these. Regarding the default Denoise amount, I am seeing it as 50 not 100, could you please confirm. TIA

I've learned a lot about when to bring Denoise into my workflow. When should I bring Defunk?

In my tests so far, I found Denoise applies to the Raw file directly and not to the edits. The edits are then copied over to the new DNG file. This new workflow in LR is quite different from say how we work in Topaz Denoise - where Topaz creates a file with LR settings and then denoises the file. DXO PureRAW IMHO also follows the same process as LR - apply denoise on the base RAW File without any LR edits. Believe your conclusion is the same as well.

can't see any different, thanks for showing this to us.

I need to do some more testing, but I had one picture that when I clicked on denoise my computer crashed with a brief BSoD, and then rebooted.

I would think that when you use Denoise would be somewhat dependent on the edits you're going to do, since some of them (mostly exposure increases of one kind or another) increase the amount of noise. So wouldn't it be better to hold off on Denoise until you've finished adding whatever noise you might be?

Does anyone know if Denoise or RAW Details includes sharpening? I know the images look sharper after removing the noise, but is that the result of an actual sharpening process?

If I repeat your method and then subtract the AI first from the AI last, it shows that they are not exactly identical. However, if I copy the development settings from the original to the AI first image, they become identical. That shows that the AI denoise is applied to the original RAW image, but the development settings might not be copied exactly from the original to the denoised image in the process.

A lot of us... birding photographers crop (at times A LOT), should cropping be done before or after DeNoise (and Sharpening)? Or does it not matter?

I experimented with some previously edited High ISO pics and found that the AI Denoise preview ignores the "manual" noise settings but includes the sharpen settings. If the sharpening is set very high, the noise is exaggerated in the preview. This results in the denoise setting being set unnecessarily high in an attempt to minimize the exaggerated noise. It seems the Sharpening settings are not applied to the image until after the DNG file is created. I found that by turning off sharpening, AI denoise works well with a lower setting. I then reapply sharpening to the DNG file and the result is significantly better. (hope this makes sense)

As long as you do all your edits in LR it doesn't seem to matter when you do it. If you edit in Photoshop then you will have to run it through the AI denoise right away, because photoshop will convert the raw file to a Tif and you can't use AI denoise on a tif when you return to LR.

Well, you didn't try to apply any edit like healing brush "content aware remove" on the photo first before denoise, which seems to be causing issues that some of those edits are not 'reapplied' properly. The denoise dialog actually gives you a warning about it as well. So far I am not impressed with denoise on human skin. Over 50% the skin looks plastic and at 50% it is not better than the old slider, different, but not better. Having to do it before edit is stupid which means I can't adjust the strength before outputing, which is all that matters.

As the edit is non distructive and the raw file on the HDD is not touched at all and as the result is a DNG, so Lightroom must work on the RAW file and not on a Tiff with the edits on ot I think. So I think your right, and it do not matter.

Maybe to do a more accurate comparison you can open both dng files as layers in Photoshop and change the upper layer's blending mode to Difference?

I agree - I can't see a difference!

Good explanation and demonstration. But try if you can with masking, healing ect. Only basic adjustments maybe it did not matter

I have a million old processed RAW files that could stand to have DeNoise run on them so good to know I can just go ahead and add it after the fact. DxO PureRaw also says to use an uneditied RAW file and I also can see no difference if I don't.

Has anyone found a preference setting to alter the embedded "Enhance-NR" character string that is part of the returned file name. In my mind a personal choice such as E-NR would be sufficient for file names that have shoot related meaningful character strings.

Adobe says order has an effect when you have healing and masks. Since you didn't use either I would not expect to see a difference. If you would have analyzed that use case the video would have made more sense.

I don't know if AI Denoise is similar to DXO PureRAW 3, but DXO suggests that you not crop before removing noise. Apparently, the AI works best with the most number of pixels to work on.

I have the feeling that the LR Denoise is using the same AI as Topaz, takes the same long time and even crashes the GPU the same way on my laptop.

I have found that Lightroom AI Denoise has been far more effective than Topaz in retaining detail in dark coloured (Black and Navy Blue) than Topaz. In a couple of examples, bird with black feathers and a person with a dark blue sweatshirt, Topaz did not retain the same level of detail as Lightroom. The feathers were extremely indistinct in Topaz with virtually no detail, just a dark area. On the sweatshirt, folds and creases were much more evident in the Lightroom version, in Topaz much of the fine detail was missing.

Great Video thank you Anthony. If you want to remove noise just from the sky since it appears there’s no masking feature tide to the AI denoise yet, how would you go about just removing the noise from the sky, if you wanted to use the LR classic AI denoise feature?

I think it does matter. I would do the following: 1. Exposure 2. Denoise AI 3. Sharpness 4. Everything else

What about in a photostacking process? On individual images or the final stack?

Should we go to zero for "sharpen" before "denoise" ?

I tried LR Denoise and Topaz Denoise on few of my images, and I am surprised at how good Adobe Denoise is. It depends on the image and lighting, but it is pretty good compared to Topaz and the best part, it's included in the product itself. I will wait for a few updates on it and may it I can cancel topaz subscription. (I use Topaz Clear mode for most my images and that's what I compared it against.)

Have you tried overlaying the two images with blend mode of difference in Photoshop? Also, if you do something like transform, patch, clone, heal, etc, it might make a difference.

Then do you blend them all together?

Cannot see a difference. But would cloning make a difference?

Hello Anthony thank you for what you do, is there a way for when we use denoise it do not make a second copy. Just one finish copy so at the end of your edits you don't have to go through all your edits to delete the extra copies? Thank you.

It does not matter for the simple linear edits and in fact makes you better capable of judging the noise problem before you chose the sfenght inside NR. (although I side it shows with a version without the linear edits, so this dies help your judgment inside NR. Several people mention valid reasons to do it early, e. g. better judgenent/functioning of non-linear actions. Adobe also has an interest to get your unedited pictures in NR as they probably exploit this by using your picture and your choice of settings as input for their Ai improvement.

15 seconds processing time. I need a new PC, mine takes 40 minutes. The results are great, and quite a bit better than my 2021 version of Topaz, but that only takes a few minutes. That being said, my Topaz plugin appears to have degraded after this update. Placebo or Adobe tampering? :)

Given that to apply Lightroom AI noise reduction just takes only one click, to simplify your workflow, could you run Lightroom Denoise against all the images you process. this would ensure that further editing would work against the best possible image. As long as it does not have a detrimental effect on an image with little or no noise.

I wonder if cropping early or late makes a difference.

I believe it may have to do with with pc resources use. I used a lot of AI mask, portrait enchance etc. just to try them out. Then tried to use the new denoise. I have a 16 core 7950x3d and a Nvidia 4090 and it said it would be 72 minutes to denoise process🤯🤯🥴

So if your wanting to sharpen a photo for detail is super resolution better than noise reduction? I tried it both ways on a photo and although the super resolution has a bigger file size I felt like the noise reduction one actually looked clearer and sharper. What say you? Thanks for another great video as always. I learn so much from you.

I've noticed that the Denoise Amount is sticky. Instead of the AI engine making a recommendation, it dials in the "amount" from the previous use. Am I wrong?

Hi Anthony does LR Denoise at 100% effect the detail od an image?

I shoot, process, and store a LOT of photos. I like the results when I use the RAW model for noise reduction (Topaz Denoise/Photo AI) and now in LR. BUT ... the intermediate DNG files are so large. With my Sony A1 compressed raw files (52MB), the DNGs are 290MB. With new LR Denoise, the DNGs are about 215MB. I assume similar disparities with other manufacturers raw files. Why do the DNGs need to be so large??

Does this new Lightroom denoise program do away with the need to continue to pay for Topaz Denoise?

Hi Anthony I'm 70 and easily confused. I work exclusively in RAW within lightroom, until I need to print or email an image. If the denoise element creates a dng file at the end of the process, how does this affect the original .nef file? Do subsequent edits need to be done to the RAW or DNG or both?😢

Interesting results. I expect this would also apply if using Topaz ?

Thanks as always, Anthony. The question i have is why did Adobe say NR should be done first? Was it to improve the final image or possibly reduce the processing time?

Couldn't you load both images as layers in Ps with a difference mode and see if there is any pixel level difference? The real question is, would the difference matter in your work anyway if the majority is posted at social media resolutions...

Denoise takes long time, more than 2 minutes per picture. Does it require fast processor?

I noticed that after denoise and conversion to a DNG file the file size is reduced from 45 MP to around 6MP. Is there any way to preserve the MP's from being reduced.?

Will only use this new denoise feature in very specific photos. If I can handle it with the ‘old’ tool I save a lot of time and avoid files four times as big…

My denoise in lightroom takes 38 minutes to process. Can you help me?

I have a sony a7rv 61mp camera. Is there a workaround in the deniose ai if your computer keeps crashing? Intel i7 _8565u, 16gb ram

My Denoise seems to have stopped working in LRCC. It creates a new DNG, but I click and compare and can't see any difference..Suggestions?

I think you are assuming right - I see no difference either. Maybe there would be a small difference in used processing resources and Adobe recommends the cleanest.

Thanks for the video and the advice. But I'm having real problems using the new LR AI DENOISE. I would very much like to know what is going on with the new DENOISE feature in LR and if there is something I can do to optimise the performance. My computer has the I7 12 Gen CPU and NVIDA RTX 3060 Ti GPU. When I try to do heavy editing on the AI DENOISED file in LR the system is painfully slow, to the point of not being useable. I can't beileve that my computer does not have enough muscle to process the images, so I must be doing something wrong or my system is not set up right or my workflow is not right. I should also say that I tried optimising my LR catelogue just in case this is what is slowing down the system, but this does not help. My original image is a SONY RAW out of camera file, which starts of as a 37 MB ARW file (I'm now using L lossless compression hence the smaller size) and after the LR AI DENOISE process a new 102 MB DNG file is created - so I now have two files after the LR processing, my original SONY RAW 37 MB ARW file and the LR AI DENOISED 102 MB DNG file. Actually, I have three files, as I then produce the JPG file which comes in at 3.6 MB. So, the extra large DNG that AI DENOISE is a bit of a problem, but not my main issue. The problem is the painfully slow processing of the DENOISED image. Perhaps its my workflow that is contributing to the very slow performance? My workflow is: 1) Import SONY ARW file into LR 2) Crop ARW image to desired size 3) AI DENOISE image, creating the very large DNG file. This process is a little slow but tolerable 4) Edit AI DENOISED image which includes heavy editing such as adding a number of masks to touch up various parts of the image. This is the painfully slow part of the process. Working with the AI DENOISED image is painfully slow to the point of not being useable. 5) Export final image as jpg. Exporting from the edited DNG file is also slow (in comparison to exporting from the edited ARW), but tolerable. What am I doing wrong? Why does editing the AI DENOISED file take so long? Any advice welcome.