P: Noise reduction not working if image is cropped and export size small

The problem described here is still not solved in LR6. If "Detail" in "Sharpening" is >0 and there is some noise in the image, preview in develop module doesn't correspond to the exported image. Noise in (smaller) develop preview is averaged out and the picture is sharper (I think, that this is correct). In library preview and exported version, noise is exaggerated (I think this is a bug). LR 4 did it correctly.

they look a little green to me

This appears to be the same (or similar) issue I reported 2 years ago:

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photosh...

The workaround then (and now) is to use moderate Sharpening settings in the Develop module and make sure that Luminance NR is set high enough to reduce most of the noise visible at 1:1 view. In addition it is necessary to use the pyramid Zoom View settings (1:16, 1:8, 1:4, etc.) and NOT Fit or Fill, which introduces a 2nd interpolation without sharpening applied. Following these suggestions my Develop and Library previews at less than 1:1 Zoom view look virtually identical in LR5.5. I've observed similar issues inside PS at less than 100% view magnification.

When Exporting with resizing of 1/3 or less most all of the image "sharpness" is determined by the Output Sharpening controls, so it's not necessary to use high settings on any of the Develop module Sharpening controls (such as 100 Detail or Amount). This is most especially important with noisy high ISO images!

It would be great if Adobe can "fix" this issue so that Fit and FIll Zoom view along with the Develop module loupe are always accurate, but only if it doesn't impact LR's performance. For now the workaround I outlined is working fine with my LR processing of Canon 5D MKII raw images.

I do get a brightening in Library at 1:2 zoom:


And if I Export from LR at 50% (3008x2008) and Save Image from ACR 8.4.1 at 50% (3008x2008) without any Export/Save sharpening, then the result I get is lighter like Library. At least LR and ACR are producing identical results.

Develop also shows lighter at 100% zoom.

So Develop when zoomed to less than 1:1 is darker than Library or Exported or Develop at 1:1.

This means that for an image with high-frequency detail that is also very sharpened, as the images are in this example, Develop has to be used at 1:1 Zoom to judge TONING, not just Detail, which can be difficult if the image is large.

I do plan to confirm if my LR acts like your LR, and so far I haven't seen a difference between my Develop and Library. I do understand about letting the preview settle for a few seconds, and why I click back and forth between Develop and Library until there doesn't seem to be a delay in the rendering.

The reason I was investigating the EXIF information using EXIFtool, and noticed the Beta indication that took CR comparisons off the table, was to see if I could discern the settings you had used for sharpening and noise-reduction in the LR Detail area, because there were inconsistencies between the zipped up LR database settings and the screenshots the next day.

Could you send along an XMP file from LR that has been updated with all the panel sections turned on so there is more chance more information gets written.

Your LR/ACR defaults may be different than mine so I'm trying to get as many things the same to what you're doing before I do screenshots.

Hi Steve, thank you for your inputs and your time! I didn't update camera raw until now, because I do not use it at all. I will do it to test this issue.
However, my main problem is, that, as you can see in screenshots, develop and export do not match in LR54. I also tried to delete preview and smart previews but it is same as before.
Could you please send me screenshots of your library and develop screens at 1:2?
Please let the preview image stabilise (it takes up to 5 seconds on my quad core intel cpu to render final preview in library module).
When I will have time, I will try to do some more tests.

My Library and Develop versions of your image are the same. There may be a problem with how things are working in this regard on your computer. We can investigate this more.
--
HOWEVER, regarding the CR vs LR differences, this has been a wild-goose-chase as we say in the US:

You are using Camera Raw 7.2. The D600 was first fully supported in CR 7.3!

Your D600 camera profile in CR 7.2 is a beta profile. The EXIF information as extracted by EXIFtool indicates this for the CR 7.2 saved image versions:

Camera Profile : Beta
Camera Profile Digest : 7233B3A6834D6E88D096D1024C469217

That is why your CR versions are different lightness and colors compared to your LR versions.

If you don't want to update your ACR beyond 7.2 then that is your choice, but your LR and CR versions will never be the same with regard to things that change with camera and lens profiles, since CR and LR keep these profiles in separate locations and updating one product won't affect the other. As you have also seen CR 7.x doesn't have the same resizing options that LR 5.x has, so your Export sharpening won't likely match, either, unless you use the specific sizes CR 7.x gives you.

Is there a reason you're not using ACR 8.4 in CS6? Are you on an older OS that won't support it? The sharpening and resizing options in ACR 8.x are the same as in LR5, now.

Yes, you are right. This was caused by the fact that I exported image from LR at exactly half the linear resolution and than I found out in CR, that there are only preset values and 1:2 is missing. And I was lazy to reexport LR versions.

So please download new comparisons here:
http://dubovsky.changenet.sk/lr54_vs_...
There are:
3072x2051 exports with output sharpening disabled both from CR72 and LR54
1534x1024 exports with output sharpening set to screen/high both from CR72 and LR54

Other parameters including creative sharpening are same (settings transferred by xmp file from LR to CR).

Another thing I notice between the CR and LR created images is that their size is different, so either the images started with a different source original/virtual-copy that had different crops or the resizing parameters in CR were different than in LR, which could result in different handling of the micro detail with an exact 1/2 resizing ratio looking different than something slightly different than that.

We need to be comparing exactly the same things in ACR vs LR, not slightly different variations that could result in the look being different.

I also see more JPG artifacts in the CR export so either it started out smoother (a lack of sharpening applied in the CR Save Image settings) or the quality setting is lower than in LR, which might result in a different look.