mercer Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 Has anyone used this plugin for FCX? I know NEAT and Denoiser II are the big dogs, but I am looking for something a little cheaper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 6, 2015 Author Share Posted June 6, 2015 http://store.pixelfilmstudios.com/plugin/prodenoise-plugin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 I haven't tried that particular one (it seems new?) but I have tried all the alternatives for NR and nothing is as good & consistent & magical as Neat Video.I wouldn't trust any other. Best hundred bucks I've ever spent on my video productions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 Their demo video shows absolutely horrible results, it just softens the noise not even try to remove it and it adds contrast for some reason, and it just works globally on the scene with very limited control. Neat video does a +50x better job than that and is complete customizable and percise in what you want to denoise and what to leave, overally the results and controls on it seem to me very poor and I'd go for neat. This one, from the results, seems just bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 Lost take right? 6400 ISO on a 60D. Colours are 100% clipped, sea of chroma noise and compression blocks floating.Neat video = 100% clean of ALL noise. + Layer of fine Kodak film grain = Shoot saved, hundreds of dollars of actor's fees re-shooting saved.Neat Video makes money it doesn't take money from you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Policar Posted June 6, 2015 Share Posted June 6, 2015 I really like Neat Video. There is some competition now (Dark Energy) that is earning raves, and which I haven't tried, but $100 is pretty affordable for a good product that will pay for itself almost immediately and they have a $75 version for non-commercial use, too, but it's a little pointless because it can't do 2k or 4k. I have used Neat Video on everything... cleaning up static grain from a 35mm adapter, underexposed 35mm film grain, aliasing from dSLRs, blemishes on skin. It's very useful for outputting a clean noiseless plate into Photoshop to build a matte painting with, to reduce flickering--say, from an LED flashlight, and to provide better mattes for keying. It's worth the money.The one caveat is that, while it's not at all difficult to use, it's easy to screw a shot up with the wrong settings and you have to get creative and think about how much temporal noise reduction to use and when. The more you use it the better results you'll get because there is no one preset for every shot. I'd recommend it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 6, 2015 Author Share Posted June 6, 2015 I think the example with eyeball looks pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Policar Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 It looks good to me, too, but macro photography hardly needs as much edge sharpness as a wide shot or something.It's probably decent software. The price is right. You don't need anyone's permission to buy what you want, but Neat Video is absurdly good for the price and you'll consistently hear people raving about it. It's also kinda slow to render and occasionally finicky, but not bad. Worst case scenario you're out $30. mercer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 7, 2015 Author Share Posted June 7, 2015 I recently downloaded the trial of FCX and I am very happy with it. The color options are a little basic, but very simple to use. After I license the full program, I will probably pick up the Color Finale plugin and I was also thinking about a denoiser. Do you denoise every shot in your color correction/grading process? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Policar Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 I haven't done color in a while, but experienced colorists I know avoid noise reduction like the plague, considering it an extreme last measure for unusable footage. Meanwhile, David Fincher uses what amounts to a very high end noise reduction algorithm on all his features. You just have to decide what works for you. It's all subjective. I'm not sure FCPX needs anything else for color. Experienced editors claim it's up there with Avid for built-in tools and that the round trip with Resolve Lite (free!) is the best thing going. And Resolve is not just free but easy and powerful.Neat Video has a free trial, too. Watch the tutorial and give it a go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_David Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 everything is subjective - it's all based on tastes. Some people like grain, some people don't. Some people like sharp looking footage, some people like soft. I use neatvideo as well for certain projects. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 7, 2015 Author Share Posted June 7, 2015 Yeah, I would imagine a denoiser would be a necessity if you're an industrial, or commercial filmmaker, just in case. I don't mind a little grain, or soft footage... I think it looks more filmic. Anyway, thanks for your thoughts, guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 7, 2015 Author Share Posted June 7, 2015 I'm not sure FCPX needs anything else for color. Experienced editors claim it's up there with Avid for built-in tools and that the round trip with Resolve Lite (free!) is the best thing going. And Resolve is not just free but easy and powerful.Neat Video has a free trial, too. Watch the tutorial and give it a go. I am new to post work and I found Resolve to be Greek to me. I am usually pretty good with figuring out programs and how to do effects and such. But with Resolve, it took me a tutorial to figure out how to import footage, I didn't realize I had to input where the source footage was before I could access it. It just seems like a little bit of overkill for my needs. But thanks for the help, it has been invaluable. I'll have to give Neat a go. I have read that people usually do their noise reduction before they correct or grade... Is that true and is there a reason for that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 I'll have to give Neat a go. I have read that people usually do their noise reduction before they correct or grade... Is that true and is there a reason for that?Tested that and doing the NR after grading gave me markedly better results than NR first then pushing the colours and exposure. I do all me destructive business than clean up then re-add imperceptible amount of film grain just for texture and for removing the ''plastic'' look NR gives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefonia Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 There is a third - or it might be a fourth - option for FCPX. It is called Photon Pro, $29 on Apple App Store. I don't do much noise reduction, but this plugin works pretty well for the few things I use it for. The noise reduction experts may be the judges to how it compares the Neat.Here is a demo and comparison with Neat (auto profile, which is comparable to Photon Pro) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsFaeH1OeXs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi Posted June 7, 2015 Share Posted June 7, 2015 He used Neat video incorrectly, in the -values of reduction but most importantly in the -noise profiling step, he picked an area without noise basically. So this comparison is an only valid comparison between the plug-in vs incorrectly-used neat video. The way neat video works is that you need to manually choose an area where there's the most noise but without detail. Using manual neat video is something anyone/noob master with one trial. I'd never personally use a NR software that works just globally, I need to precisely control the kind of noise it work on, the place and the amount. That's why I even use neat video in my photography because all the other software pieces even in the photo world work in a global way and never give me good results. Just buy neat video really, I tried them all and the quality advantage it has over everything else is more than worth the premium. Better pay 100$ for something that will work for years & years than pay 40-50$ to experiment and even end-up going with neat video after all. I know I sound like an employee at Neat but what this piece of software does is pure magic and the amount of production value it puts to your final results vs not using it, is staggering to look at. It's one of these technologies in modern filmmaking that make me smile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mercer Posted June 8, 2015 Author Share Posted June 8, 2015 Tested that and doing the NR after grading gave me markedly better results than NR first then pushing the colours and exposure. I do all me destructive business than clean up then re-add imperceptible amount of film grain just for texture and for removing the ''plastic'' look NR gives. Thanks Ebrahim, I'll have to test that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.