Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better?

Get answers to your questions about color grading, editing and finishing with DaVinci Resolve.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

JoshMallett

  • Posts: 96
  • Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:45 am
  • Location: Madison, WI

Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better?

PostMon Jan 27, 2020 9:27 pm

DaVinci Resolve Noise Reduction vs Neat Video. Which is better....and why??
My video work: https://www.JoshuaMallett.com
Offline

Dermot Shane

  • Posts: 2754
  • Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 6:48 pm
  • Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon Jan 27, 2020 9:51 pm

nether, DVO clairity defines the word "better"

i think of a scale between 1 and 10, DVO Clairity being 10, median filter being 1

we are discussing 5.1 -vs- 5.2 on that scale... they are not really all that diffrent, and Resolve native is faster by a long shot

that said i use Neat in software that does not have any other options
use the native in Resolve, Neat is just too slow for cleint supervised use
Offline
User avatar

Marc Wielage

  • Posts: 11188
  • Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:46 am
  • Location: Hollywood, USA

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostTue Jan 28, 2020 2:49 am

@Jason Bowdach just did a fantastic half-hour 2-part video comparing and contrasting Resolve 16 TNR/SNR with the latest Neat Video v5 over on MixingLight.com. (Note that this is a pay site, but I think the information they provide is worth the investment.)

Short version: I think Neat does a better job overall but a) it costs more money, b) it takes more time, and c) it's very tweaky and has a lot of settings you have to carefully adjust for best results. Their latest version is the best they've ever done and is made especially for Resolve.

In truth, the SNR Enhanced mode in Resolve -- which they give you free with Resolve Studio -- is almost as good and is already included. The trick for me is to adjust it on a scene by scene basis, consider doing NR on one color channel only (like Blue, which tends to be noisy), and also adjust Luma and Chroma separately. The more Luma NR you use, the greater the risk of softening the picture. I tend to have a couple of settings for day scenes / day interiors, and a couple of settings for night scenes, and I usually wind up using more NR for night, taking care to avoid artifacts.
Certified DaVinci Resolve Color Trainer • AdvancedColorTraining.com
Offline

George Deierling

  • Posts: 338
  • Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:26 pm

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostTue Jan 28, 2020 4:13 am

Neat can rescue extremely grainy shots.
Resolve NR doesn't work beyond a certain noise level.
Offline
User avatar

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 22130
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostTue Jan 28, 2020 5:38 am

If you are working on paid jobs and have some clients bringing in very problematic shots, I think it‘s worth having both. With the new, lower pricing it’s even easier to go for it.
It can fix a few things that don’t work so well in Resolve alone, like the pulsing noise from drones or flicker induced by critical light sources.
Now that the cat #19 is out of the bag, test it as much as you can and use the subforum.

Studio 18.6.6, MacOS 13.6.6, 2017 iMac, 32 GB, Radeon Pro 580
MacBook M1 Pro, 16 GPU cores, 32 GB RAM and iPhone 15 Pro
Speed Editor, UltraStudio Monitor 3G
Offline

Travis Ward

  • Posts: 106
  • Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 7:05 pm

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostTue Jan 28, 2020 2:24 pm

Marc Wielage wrote:@Jason Bowdach just did a fantastic half-hour 2-part video comparing and contrasting Resolve 16 TNR/SNR with the latest Neat Video v5 over on MixingLight.com. (Note that this is a pay site, but I think the information they provide is worth the investment.)

Short version: I think Neat does a better job overall but a) it costs more money, b) it takes more time, and c) it's very tweaky and has a lot of settings you have to carefully adjust for best results. Their latest version is the best they've ever done and is made especially for Resolve.

In truth, the SNR Enhanced mode in Resolve -- which they give you free with Resolve Studio -- is almost as good and is already included. The trick for me is to adjust it on a scene by scene basis, consider doing NR on one color channel only (like Blue, which tends to be noisy), and also adjust Luma and Chroma separately. The more Luma NR you use, the greater the risk of softening the picture. I tend to have a couple of settings for day scenes / day interiors, and a couple of settings for night scenes, and I usually wind up using more NR for night, taking care to avoid artifacts.


This has been my experience as well.

Neat Video is a very powerful tool and I used it to recover some dark images I had shot, where we had little choice with the lighting given. Being able to capture a noise print from your specific camera and use it as a starting point in Neat, is fantastic--but it did take me a long time to tweak, trial & error, etc. to get it to where I wanted. And noise is one of those things you really have to see in motion to get an idea of its impact, which sometimes means needing to render out at least a portion of the timeline to see where you're "at".

The Spatial NR Enhanced mode is fantastic for a lot of noise reduction scenarios, provided you're not careless with it.
Travis Ward
Offline

Sam Steti

  • Posts: 2532
  • Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:29 am
  • Location: France

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostWed Jan 29, 2020 4:26 pm

Hey,

I'll give my opinion too here (I did it last year in a very interesting thread but don't have the guts to search now) : making it very short, comparing different situations/projects involving different types of noise to solve and taking price, time and efficiency into account, I came to the conclusion that Neat wasn't worth buying it for those who are not owners yet in 2020.

Ok, maybe a bit radical, I could understand complaints but I made it short, that's all.... If you really make the greatest effort to tweak - separate luma/chroma, analyse the noise of your clips, making the best node tree needed - inside Resolve, you can really reach a very satisfying point now...

For the purpose of this post, I found again this super basic post on the web : https://www.premiumbeat.com/blog/post-p ... tion-tips/ . Just doing it combined with smart efforts with Resolve Studio tools can honestly lead you to amazing results.
Of course, no answer is always accurate, it depends on clips, but we have a great % of chance to make it fine in Resolve only now...
*MacMini M1 16 Go - Ext nvme SSDs on TB3 - 14 To HD in 2 x 4 disks USB3 towers
*Legacy MacPro 8core Xeons, 32 Go ram, 2 x gtx 980 ti, 3SSDs including RAID
*Resolve Studio everywhere, Fusion Studio too
*https://www.buymeacoffee.com/videorhin
Offline
User avatar

mastix

  • Posts: 187
  • Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 10:13 am
  • Location: Spain
  • Real Name: Cristian Baitg

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon Mar 02, 2020 9:29 am

Using both I have to say that Resolve Studio NR gives more natural results, Neat Video is way to aggressive even with low settings. Plastic looks becomes evident quickly. Now if you have very noisy footage like drone at night shots at 1600 ISO Neat Video can save the day. I prefer now DR. results are more pleasing to the eye.
Windows 10 64 bits
Davinci Resolve 18.6 Studio
INTEL 8700
32 RAM
NVIDIA RTX 3090
Offline
User avatar

AndreeMarkefors

  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2016 11:41 am
  • Location: Zürich, Switzerland

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon Mar 02, 2020 12:52 pm

Even though I own Neat Video 4 I never use it.

I find Resolves NR to be easy to use, configurable and always within arms length. Even a single Vega FE plows through at an OK pace. Cache early and forget.

Neat Video might make sense for people to do lots of NR on footage for which they have custom profiles that have been prepared in advance, but for day to day NR I'm very happy with what Resolve already offers.

Make note of the tips from Marc above, like doing NR on an isolated channel to remove most of it, while retaining some of the original texture from one of the better channels.
Current camera: Canon R5C
Mac Pro 2019: 12c | Dual W6800X Duo | DeckLink Mini Monitor 4K + LG 55C8
MacBook Pro M3 Max 16" 16/40, 64GB
Offline

Leonardo Levy

  • Posts: 484
  • Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2020 7:45 am
  • Location: San Francisco Bay Area
  • Real Name: Leonardo Levy

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSat Mar 07, 2020 11:24 pm

I've used Neat quite a bit over the years in FCP 7 and Premiere but am just getting started with Resolve as my editing platform. So far only the free version, so I've wondered whether it was a better use of my money to buy Neat for Resolve at $159 for a version that will run UHD or just spring a little more for Studio Resolve at $299.
So a couple of questions come to mind:

1- One of the coolest and least talked about uses for Neat is that its a fantastic sharpening tool for slightly soft footage. I've used it to fix footage where I just missed the focus point and it can be pretty much invisible. I don't know if there is any other tool in Resolve that can do that, but i certainly never found anything in FCP7 or Premiere that didn't artifact terribly. I also have never found it hard to find settings that worked well for me. Very fast to set up.

2 - Is Resolve noise reduction that much faster say on my machine (specs below) 2017 iMac 27" Retina 4 core i7 with 8GB VRam and 64G Ram?

3 - Is it much more complicated to find settings that work for each project in Resolve NR?

3 - Any other cool reasons to upgrade to Studio for a light user of Post? (I doubt I'll need anything larger than UHD.)

Thanks - This is a great forum.

Lenny
2021 16" Macbook Pro M1MAX (18,2), 64G RAM, 8T internal SSD, 10 Cores CPU, 32 Cores GPU, Apple Display Pro XDR, Apple Thunderbolt Display, BM UltraStudio Monitor 3G , Flanders Scientific BM211
Offline
User avatar

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 22130
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun Mar 08, 2020 1:27 am

I got pretty much the same machine. If I set Resolve's "Motion Estimation Type“ to „Better“ (which you should to get close to Neatvideo) it will be only about 20% faster than Neatvideo 5. If you add spatial denoise at „Enhanced“ it can be three times slower without showing that much of an improvement.

But both denoisers don't have a "one size fits all" setting. Neatvideo can be tuned very fast if you print and record their chart for noise profiles, use only one camera and have such charts recorded for your typical ISO setting. Resolve's NR needs fine-tuning for the scene.

OTOH, Studio has much more to offer than just the NR.
Now that the cat #19 is out of the bag, test it as much as you can and use the subforum.

Studio 18.6.6, MacOS 13.6.6, 2017 iMac, 32 GB, Radeon Pro 580
MacBook M1 Pro, 16 GPU cores, 32 GB RAM and iPhone 15 Pro
Speed Editor, UltraStudio Monitor 3G
Offline

Sam Steti

  • Posts: 2532
  • Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2014 7:29 am
  • Location: France

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun Mar 08, 2020 10:07 am

Leonardo Levy wrote:2 - Is Resolve noise reduction that much faster say on my machine (specs below) 2017 iMac 27" Retina 4 core i7 with 8GB VRam and 64G Ram?
Uli answered it all. Resolve NR is handy, but you cannot have one regular global speed for any specific test you'll run... However you will certainly quickly understand what you want to choose for each clip profile

3 - Is it much more complicated to find settings that work for each project in Resolve NR?
As written above, not one fits 'em all but using it a bit will show you whay to do in what situation. For example, I personally didn't have satisfying results (sometimes no result at all) with TNR on interlaced footage, this on every interlaced footage I had... I finally found out that a few clicks on spatial NR solved 95% of what was needed there. I think this is what's going to happen for many users : just remember specific actions depending on clips profiles.
And then this (understanding it > choosing the parameters for it) is very fast in Resolve, therefore for me the whole workflow is faster in Resolve than with Neat.

3 - Any other cool reasons to upgrade to Studio for a light user of Post? (I doubt I'll need anything larger than UHD.)
Sure. When I switched from FCP7 to Resolve 9, I already owned Neat, and thus had no specific need for NR. My main personal reason (which won't be yours) was the double GPU to compute and don't regret it.
But in the end, you'll I found great stuff too (camera tracker, motion effects, face refinement, deflicker, ...). And I think this is what happens to a lot of users, I mean switching for a couple of solid reasons and finally finding a lot more...
*MacMini M1 16 Go - Ext nvme SSDs on TB3 - 14 To HD in 2 x 4 disks USB3 towers
*Legacy MacPro 8core Xeons, 32 Go ram, 2 x gtx 980 ti, 3SSDs including RAID
*Resolve Studio everywhere, Fusion Studio too
*https://www.buymeacoffee.com/videorhin
Offline

2D3D4K

  • Posts: 126
  • Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:29 am
  • Real Name: Barry Chall

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun Mar 08, 2020 3:22 pm

I've just discovered that after upgrading to 16.2 from 16.1.2, that after applying Neat 5, my system is crashing very frequently and using more GPU resources than it did on the same test clip on 16.1.2. So, just rolled back to that version. On the 8K timelapse sequences I work with, Neat will work well, but unfortunately the native NR in Resolve will crash the program almost immediately. Sort of surprising, as I would have expected Neat to he more resource hungry.

System:
AMD Threadripper 3960x
Nvidia 2080ti
128GB ram
NVMe drives
Windows 10 Pro
Offline
User avatar

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 22130
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun Mar 08, 2020 3:36 pm

Well, even a 2080ti might be challenged by 8K with NR. What's your frame radius?
Now that the cat #19 is out of the bag, test it as much as you can and use the subforum.

Studio 18.6.6, MacOS 13.6.6, 2017 iMac, 32 GB, Radeon Pro 580
MacBook M1 Pro, 16 GPU cores, 32 GB RAM and iPhone 15 Pro
Speed Editor, UltraStudio Monitor 3G
Offline

2D3D4K

  • Posts: 126
  • Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2020 1:29 am
  • Real Name: Barry Chall

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun Mar 08, 2020 6:36 pm

Yes, clearly there are some functions which I realize I'm underpowered for when doing 8K. Ideally for all functions to work in all cases, I probably should have about 20GB of Vram as opposed to the 11GB on the 2080ti, and perhaps more than the 128GB of ram I presently have. However, for my current 8K workflow, the current system appears to be quite adaquet. I should point out that I don't do anything in Fusion mode, and all compositing and related tasks are done in Color Mode. Fusion is MUCH MORE GPU intensive, and I'm not a big fan of it anyway, for my projects.
Offline
User avatar

MIMMO61

  • Posts: 106
  • Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:15 pm
  • Location: Italy
  • Real Name: Domenico Del Monaco

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon Feb 07, 2022 7:49 am

Good morning
I am not an expert in noise reduction settings, and I have seen this video:


I don't know if the author who posted in this forum:
https://mavicpilots.com/threads/noise-r ... in.101842/

I have made an optimal settin with DaVinci Resolve, but when I see the Neat Video movie it seems better to me.
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X | ASUS ROG Strix X670E-F Gaming WiFi | 4X G.Skill Flare X5 16 GB Kit DDR5-6000 CL32 | ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 A-RGB | Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 16GB Gaming OC
Offline
User avatar

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 22130
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon Feb 07, 2022 9:05 am

NeatVideo does a great job on a specific problem with drone footage. See here:
https://www.neatvideo.com/news/neat-blog

That said, general NR comes quite close in Resolve. BTW, I can denoise 12K BRAW in a 4K timeline just fine on my hardware.
Now that the cat #19 is out of the bag, test it as much as you can and use the subforum.

Studio 18.6.6, MacOS 13.6.6, 2017 iMac, 32 GB, Radeon Pro 580
MacBook M1 Pro, 16 GPU cores, 32 GB RAM and iPhone 15 Pro
Speed Editor, UltraStudio Monitor 3G
Offline

cobra427

  • Posts: 80
  • Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2019 8:36 am
  • Real Name: Cors Snijders

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon Feb 07, 2022 3:59 pm

I followed the steps of the premiumbeat blog in the post of Sam Steti (first post). The result was a very washed out image. To me this is no wonder when you turn the saturation to zero in one layernode and turn the Y-sliders down in the other layernode. No color in the top-layernode with full color in the other layernode is half the color in the end, thus a washed out look. I must be doing something wrong, but what? What did I miss?
Intel i7-12700, 32 Gb, Corsair watercooling, 1 ssd for OS and NLE, 1 ssd for projects, 2x harddisk for archiving, NVidia 3080. Windows 11 2x 4k screen. Mainly 4k clips
Offline
User avatar

Igor Riđanović

  • Posts: 1615
  • Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 5:11 am
  • Location: Los Angeles, Calif.

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSat Feb 12, 2022 12:14 am

On a rare occasion when I can't degrain using Resolve's NR I reach for Neat. It does a superior job but it's not real time.
www.metafide.com - DaVinci Resolve™ Apps
Offline

John Spirou

  • Posts: 120
  • Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 3:51 pm

Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better?

PostSun Jun 26, 2022 1:54 pm

Can an rtx 3080 or 3090 play full speed (25 fps) 4k braw in real-time with heavy denoise ?
I have an rtx 3060 and it plays a few fps only….
Offline
User avatar

Jack Fairley

  • Posts: 1863
  • Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:58 pm
  • Location: Los Angeles

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun Jun 26, 2022 9:50 pm

John Spirou wrote:Can an rtx 3080 or 3090 play full speed (25 fps) 4k braw in real-time with heavy denoise ?
I have an rtx 3060 and it plays a few fps only….

With my 3090 I can play back 4K BRAW with 5 frames/better motion TNR in real time on a 4K timeline.
Ryzen 5800X3D
32GB DDR4-3600
RTX 3090
DeckLink 4K Extreme 12G
Resolve Studio 17.4.1
Windows 11 Pro 21H2
Offline

John Spirou

  • Posts: 120
  • Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 3:51 pm

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon Jun 27, 2022 6:09 am

And with spatial denoise, faster option?
Offline
User avatar

Jack Fairley

  • Posts: 1863
  • Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:58 pm
  • Location: Los Angeles

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon Jun 27, 2022 4:18 pm

Also real time.
Ryzen 5800X3D
32GB DDR4-3600
RTX 3090
DeckLink 4K Extreme 12G
Resolve Studio 17.4.1
Windows 11 Pro 21H2
Offline
User avatar

Marc Wielage

  • Posts: 11188
  • Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:46 am
  • Location: Hollywood, USA

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostTue Jun 28, 2022 2:53 am

Igor Riđanović wrote:On a rare occasion when I can't degrain using Resolve's NR I reach for Neat. It does a superior job but it's not real time.

Another plus for Neat is that you can use it on finished shows. With Resolve, there's always the danger that it might let some image "smear" stray across a cut transition because of processing lag. I've never had that happen with Neat, but we tend to manually create cuts and change settings depending on the nature of the material.
Certified DaVinci Resolve Color Trainer • AdvancedColorTraining.com
Offline
User avatar

Jack Fairley

  • Posts: 1863
  • Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2016 7:58 pm
  • Location: Los Angeles

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostTue Jun 28, 2022 5:04 am

I think I have seen Walter detail some bad behavior by the NR tool when using a scene cut workflow, using frame(s) from the previous sequence.
Ryzen 5800X3D
32GB DDR4-3600
RTX 3090
DeckLink 4K Extreme 12G
Resolve Studio 17.4.1
Windows 11 Pro 21H2
Offline
User avatar

MIMMO61

  • Posts: 106
  • Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:15 pm
  • Location: Italy
  • Real Name: Domenico Del Monaco

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSat May 11, 2024 7:18 am

Good morning.
I have noticed an artifact generated by applying DaVinci's DNR, specifically only Temporal NR, in the presence of low light and with candle illumination.
This problem is exacerbated in the presence of flickering light from a candle that appears as if moving blocks of image in synchrony with the flickering light.
Using Neat Video, no artifacts are generated.

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X | ASUS ROG Strix X670E-F Gaming WiFi | 4X G.Skill Flare X5 16 GB Kit DDR5-6000 CL32 | ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 A-RGB | Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 16GB Gaming OC
Offline
User avatar

joema4

  • Posts: 175
  • Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2021 3:26 pm
  • Real Name: Joe Marler

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSat May 11, 2024 12:58 pm

MIMMO61 wrote:...I have noticed an artifact generated by applying DaVinci's DNR, specifically only Temporal NR, in the presence of low light and with candle illumination...


That is a motion estimation artifact. Under Temporal NR if you set Motion Est. Type to "None", and Blend to 50%, it might avoid this. You could also try Motion Est. Type to "Faster", and Blend to 50%.

Neat Video is generally better, especially if you use their Youtube tutorials. However Resolve's built-in TSNR is very good. Like all of Resolve's built-in features, it is great in a collaborative environment because you don't have to equip every editor with the same third-party commercial plugins, then maintain and update them.
Offline

Jim Simon

  • Posts: 30813
  • Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:47 am

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSat May 11, 2024 1:38 pm

I have been playing with the new UltraNR in the 19 beta...and I'm really impressed! Test footage I've been playing with for years has never looked so good!
My Biases:

You NEED training.
You NEED a desktop.
You NEED a calibrated (non-computer) display.
Offline
User avatar

MIMMO61

  • Posts: 106
  • Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:15 pm
  • Location: Italy
  • Real Name: Domenico Del Monaco

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSat May 11, 2024 1:50 pm

Thanks for the advice.
However, I have verified that only disabling (Motion Estimation Type=None) solves the problem.
I would like to try the new version 19 if it has improved DNR.
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X | ASUS ROG Strix X670E-F Gaming WiFi | 4X G.Skill Flare X5 16 GB Kit DDR5-6000 CL32 | ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 A-RGB | Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 16GB Gaming OC
Offline
User avatar

MIMMO61

  • Posts: 106
  • Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:15 pm
  • Location: Italy
  • Real Name: Domenico Del Monaco

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSat May 11, 2024 2:24 pm

Jim Simon wrote:I have been playing with the new UltraNR in the 19 beta...and I'm really impressed! Test footage I've been playing with for years has never looked so good!

I found this interesting video about it that explains how it works the new Ultra NR.
In the comparison, the new UltraNR, perhaps because it is still in beta, is slower and with loss of detail in some areas than Neat Video.

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X | ASUS ROG Strix X670E-F Gaming WiFi | 4X G.Skill Flare X5 16 GB Kit DDR5-6000 CL32 | ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 A-RGB | Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 16GB Gaming OC
Offline
User avatar

KrunoSmithy

  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2023 11:01 pm
  • Real Name: Kruno Stifter

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSat May 11, 2024 8:37 pm

JoshMallett wrote:DaVinci Resolve Noise Reduction vs Neat Video. Which is better....and why??



Generally speaking I find Neat Video to be easier with right amount of noise reduction and offers much more robust set of features, for all kinds of footage than noise reduction in resolve. And I find it a bit faster too when doing serious noise reduction. Its also available as third party plug in in Fusion Studio while in Fusion Resolve, I think both are available. I would say that Neat Video costs almost as much as whole Resolve Studio so there is that. And Resolve Studio has bunch of similar tools in Revival section of open FX for all kinds of situations to compliment Noise Reduction. Overall I find them both useful and good, for many types of situations, and ideally one would have both. But if you already have Resolve Studio with noise reduction, I would not rush to get Neat Video unless you can get it on discount.
Offline

ShaheedMalik

  • Posts: 825
  • Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 5:28 am
  • Real Name: Shaheed Malik

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 4:45 am

MIMMO61 wrote:
Jim Simon wrote:I have been playing with the new UltraNR in the 19 beta...and I'm really impressed! Test footage I've been playing with for years has never looked so good!

I found this interesting video about it that explains how it works the new Ultra NR.
In the comparison, the new UltraNR, perhaps because it is still in beta, is slower and with loss of detail in some areas than Neat Video.



I watched this but didn't like their workflow. The were using NR last instead of first.
Offline
User avatar

Marc Wielage

  • Posts: 11188
  • Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:46 am
  • Location: Hollywood, USA

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 5:15 am

ShaheedMalik wrote:I watched this but didn't like their workflow. The were using NR last instead of first.

I have generally taught my students to use noise reduction last for a few simple reasons:

1) if you pound on the very first clip with NR, you may be stomping detail that you can't get back later on

2) just in the nature of balancing and adding contrast, you're going to increase apparent noise just in the process of adding gain. That alone means the NR should come after this stage, because the gain increases noise while also increasing video level.

3) I generally make the case of doing NR at the very end in a separate node, and tailor the NR specifically for the nature of the shot: for example, one setting for night interiors, one for night exteriors, one for day interiors, one for day exteriors. All of those situations will probably require a different setting for the NR controls. Even with Resolve NR, I'll often make a separate Y (luma) and C (chroma) SNR adjustment, just to hang on to as much detail as we possibly can.

4) there's always the argument that texture is important for final color and if you remove the texture early in the process, you can't ever really get it back, no matter what extra processing you add. If you put the NR towards the end, you always have the opportunity to turn it way down or even bypass it entirely. If it's in the first node, you may be damaging the signals in ways you're not even aware of throughout the process.

5) for film features, I tend to render out the entire first pass as a flattened 444 file (provided there's time), then I use a fairly targeted setting for Neat video based on the 4 parameters above (day int, day ext, night int, night ext), and I use PowerGrades with the appropriate neat setting as required. I tend to use much less aggressive settings than the automatic noise profile and instead turn at least half of the NR off to make sure we're not losing too much detail. A little noise is fine; a lot of noise is not. It's a fine to walk.

6) you can make a case pro and con for adding some mild sharpening after the NR if you feel there's a perceptual loss in edge detail. Neat has a setting for that, and again we try to be conservative and not take it too far.

7) note also that it's possible to target just highlights-only or shadows-only for NR, or even have the NR only affect a specific color channel. I've had cases where the blue channel is kind of "thick" and noisy, so I'll use some very mild NR just on Blue channel to try to tame it a little bit, but not lose any detail at all. So there's a lot of "it depends" to this setting.
Certified DaVinci Resolve Color Trainer • AdvancedColorTraining.com
Offline
User avatar

MIMMO61

  • Posts: 106
  • Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:15 pm
  • Location: Italy
  • Real Name: Domenico Del Monaco

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 6:21 am

ShaheedMalik wrote:I watched this but didn't like their workflow. The were using NR last instead of first.

Whether DNR inserted before or after any processing may also be a personal choice, but the comparison was made for both at the same location and Neat Video was superior.
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X | ASUS ROG Strix X670E-F Gaming WiFi | 4X G.Skill Flare X5 16 GB Kit DDR5-6000 CL32 | ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 A-RGB | Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 16GB Gaming OC
Offline

Michel Rabe

  • Posts: 846
  • Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 8:06 pm

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 8:49 am

MIMMO61 wrote:I found this interesting video about it that explains how it works the new Ultra NR.
In the comparison, the new UltraNR, perhaps because it is still in beta, is slower and with loss of detail in some areas than Neat Video.




Context matters. The guy admits his flawed testing method as he was tryin to "use the least clicks". Which is pretty nonsense imo. E.g. he didn't move the noise sample selection to an adequate area with UltraNR.
Offline

ShaheedMalik

  • Posts: 825
  • Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 5:28 am
  • Real Name: Shaheed Malik

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 10:06 am

MIMMO61 wrote:
ShaheedMalik wrote:I watched this but didn't like their workflow. The were using NR last instead of first.

Whether DNR inserted before or after any processing may also be a personal choice, but the comparison was made for both at the same location and Neat Video was superior.

You're going to get a worse result if you trying to remove noise that you have color graded. And he did not set up the noise profile correctly either.
Offline
User avatar

MIMMO61

  • Posts: 106
  • Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:15 pm
  • Location: Italy
  • Real Name: Domenico Del Monaco

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 10:08 am

For a more reliable test it is better to wait for the stable Release 19.
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X | ASUS ROG Strix X670E-F Gaming WiFi | 4X G.Skill Flare X5 16 GB Kit DDR5-6000 CL32 | ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 A-RGB | Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 16GB Gaming OC
Offline

ShaheedMalik

  • Posts: 825
  • Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 5:28 am
  • Real Name: Shaheed Malik

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 10:14 am

Marc Wielage wrote:
ShaheedMalik wrote:I watched this but didn't like their workflow. The were using NR last instead of first.

I have generally taught my students to use noise reduction last for a few simple reasons:

1) if you pound on the very first clip with NR, you may be stomping detail that you can't get back later on

2) just in the nature of balancing and adding contrast, you're going to increase apparent noise just in the process of adding gain. That alone means the NR should come after this stage, because the gain increases noise while also increasing video level.

3) I generally make the case of doing NR at the very end in a separate node, and tailor the NR specifically for the nature of the shot: for example, one setting for night interiors, one for night exteriors, one for day interiors, one for day exteriors. All of those situations will probably require a different setting for the NR controls. Even with Resolve NR, I'll often make a separate Y (luma) and C (chroma) SNR adjustment, just to hang on to as much detail as we possibly can.

4) there's always the argument that texture is important for final color and if you remove the texture early in the process, you can't ever really get it back, no matter what extra processing you add. If you put the NR towards the end, you always have the opportunity to turn it way down or even bypass it entirely. If it's in the first node, you may be damaging the signals in ways you're not even aware of throughout the process.

5) for film features, I tend to render out the entire first pass as a flattened 444 file (provided there's time), then I use a fairly targeted setting for Neat video based on the 4 parameters above (day int, day ext, night int, night ext), and I use PowerGrades with the appropriate neat setting as required. I tend to use much less aggressive settings than the automatic noise profile and instead turn at least half of the NR off to make sure we're not losing too much detail. A little noise is fine; a lot of noise is not. It's a fine to walk.

6) you can make a case pro and con for adding some mild sharpening after the NR if you feel there's a perceptual loss in edge detail. Neat has a setting for that, and again we try to be conservative and not take it too far.

7) note also that it's possible to target just highlights-only or shadows-only for NR, or even have the NR only affect a specific color channel. I've had cases where the blue channel is kind of "thick" and noisy, so I'll use some very mild NR just on Blue channel to try to tame it a little bit, but not lose any detail at all. So there's a lot of "it depends" to this setting.


I have found that removing noise last is counter intuitive. It's harder to remove noise such as fix pattern noise when it has a color grade on top of it. That's like removing baking ingredients after the cake is baked.
It's easier to remove grain from a log image than a graded Rec709.
You can add a more appealing noise grain at the end.
Offline

Steve Alexander

  • Posts: 4661
  • Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2015 2:15 am

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 11:37 am

NR can soften an image. It removes information. Applying it first is a destructive operation. Of course, sometimes it is better to use it first, but often better to leave it to later in the pipeline. There are no absolutes.
aka Barkinmadd
Resolve Studio 19.0b2 | Fusion Studio 19.0b2 | Win 11 Pro (22H2) | i9-7940x, P4000 (536.96, 8GB VRAM), 64GB RAM, M.2 boot, SSD scratch, RAID10 data | (laptop) 16" MacBook Pro M1 MAX, 32 GPU cores, 64 GB RAM, 2 TB SSD, Sonoma 14.4.1
Offline

RCModelReviews

  • Posts: 1239
  • Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2018 1:39 am
  • Real Name: Bruce Simpson

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 12:48 pm

It seems that there are quite differing views on when to add NR (before or after grading) so I'll just add an NR node in the *middle* of my grading nodes and then at least I know I've got it wrong for sure! :lol:
Resolve 18.1 Studio, Fusion 9 Studio
CPU: i7 8700, OS: Windows 10 32GB RAM, GPU: RTX3060
I'm refugee from Sony Vegas slicing video for my YouTube channels.
Offline

Jim Simon

  • Posts: 30813
  • Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:47 am

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 1:09 pm

ShaheedMalik wrote:It's easier to remove grain from a log image than a graded Rec709.
With RCM, the conversion to 709 would come after the NR anyway, even when it's the last node.

My thinking is the grade does change the noise profile, so I want to do that NR last in line.
My Biases:

You NEED training.
You NEED a desktop.
You NEED a calibrated (non-computer) display.
Offline
User avatar

MIMMO61

  • Posts: 106
  • Joined: Wed Jan 05, 2022 6:15 pm
  • Location: Italy
  • Real Name: Domenico Del Monaco

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 6:47 pm

In the official Neat Video guide, it recommends putting in the first node.
https://www.neatvideo.com/blog/post/nv-rs1
AMD Ryzen 9 7950X | ASUS ROG Strix X670E-F Gaming WiFi | 4X G.Skill Flare X5 16 GB Kit DDR5-6000 CL32 | ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 A-RGB | Gigabyte GeForce RTX 4080 16GB Gaming OC
Offline
User avatar

KrunoSmithy

  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2023 11:01 pm
  • Real Name: Kruno Stifter

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 6:57 pm

My five cents on weather on not to do noise reduction at the beginning, middle or end, I think depends on the specific workflow and needs of the job/clip. Its a relative, not absolute in my book.

Generally if its just a simple grade, Noise Reduction fist can be logical start, although probably you want to turn in on when you finish the grade so it does not slow down the performance too much. If you are keying green screen or keying for color correction, applying noise reduction before hand usually give better key.

But there are sometimes situations where you want very slight noise reduction because the clip has important details you don't want to lose or its not very grainy. But than you do some more heavy handed color grade and you exaggerate the noise, which means you have to either go back and apply different NR settings, or choose to leave it to the end.

Sometimes you can do it almost simultaneously with parallel nodes. Sometimes you are collaborating and you are delivering footage for VFX where you may do base grade, but leave the noise on because you want to VFX team to match the grain to composited elements and they need a reference. Maybe its you doing the VFX and color grade. Etc. So its a relative thing, more than absolute.
Offline

ShaheedMalik

  • Posts: 825
  • Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2020 5:28 am
  • Real Name: Shaheed Malik

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostSun May 12, 2024 8:13 pm

MIMMO61 wrote:In the official Neat Video guide, it recommends putting in the first node.
https://www.neatvideo.com/blog/post/nv-rs1

That guide is great. Thanks for sharing it.
Offline
User avatar

Marc Wielage

  • Posts: 11188
  • Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:46 am
  • Location: Hollywood, USA

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon May 13, 2024 1:06 am

MIMMO61 wrote:In the official Neat Video guide, it recommends putting in the first node.
https://www.neatvideo.com/blog/post/nv-rs1

I disagree, and so do most of the users I work with. A lot depends on your philosophy of just how clean you want the ultimate image to be, and how many artifacts and damage you're willing to put up with. Some people will look at (say) Peter Jackson's Get Back documentary and say, "wow, it looks so clean -- the Beatles have never looked better than they do in this 1970 film!" And yet film historians look at it and say, "oh, my god... the whole thing looks like plastic, like somebody has stomped on every vestige of film grain and destroyed it, along with a lot of detail!"

So it's a subjective call. I'm more in the group that says that "too much noise reduction is a bad thing."

At some point, you have to find a guru you believe in and are willing to follow. If you want to go with putting NR in the first node... then Namaste to you, and good luck.
Certified DaVinci Resolve Color Trainer • AdvancedColorTraining.com
Offline
User avatar

Cary Knoop

  • Posts: 1504
  • Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2017 6:35 pm
  • Location: Newark, CA USA

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon May 13, 2024 1:21 am

I concur with Marc's comments.

If you have to apply noise reduction use it sparingly and mostly in the darker regions.

The Get Back documentary looks awful.
Offline

Dermot Shane

  • Posts: 2754
  • Joined: Tue Nov 11, 2014 6:48 pm
  • Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon May 13, 2024 4:27 am

i also disagree with the guy that yaps for Neat...

NR choices are significantly dependant on viewing enviroment
what looks ok on a 24" monitor looks like crap squared on 60 foot screen

zero imdb credits for the Neat guy, and he mentions doing industrials - likely all his work goes on small screens
80% + of my work goes in theatres, the rest goes to streamers or sometimes networks or studio's for internal consideration / pilots / technical eval etc

i use NR at the end of the pipe, use it as little as possiable, i make decisions in rooms with large screens or in proper gradeing theatres

i have mutiple NR choices to pick from:
- Neat
- DVO Clairity
- DVO Velvet
- Resolve native includeing ultra
- Baselight native

and i'm shakeing my head at that Youtube "expert" - if you want to break NR chose a shot from a dark fight scene with doors / pillars /posts and stunt artists flying around infront of them, see how the NR deals with the boundry layers, and skintones

a car dashboard is just... just... something only a YouTube expert would do to test NR.... his advice is free, and not worth the price IMHO

i test for myself, real world stuff that goes through tier1 QC

i really like Neat for sorting flicker, really the best option i've found, worth the nominal price for that alone

as is Clairty for NR,

in my tests i've found Ultra very impressive

but test for your self, Neat and Clairty / Velvet have demo's avb, find a noisy underexposed fight scene in a basment with a hero's face in frame shot by a splinter unit months after principal wrapped and the shot cuts againt the (well lit and exposed) main unit.. not a car dashboard... duhhhh....

oh, an i have enough horsepower underneath me that i don't need to care about RT playback with either Neat or Native, Clairity is definatly MUCH slower, but well worth the time spent caching
Offline

Michel Rabe

  • Posts: 846
  • Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 8:06 pm

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon May 13, 2024 6:14 am

Dermot Shane wrote:and i'm shakeing my head at that Youtube "expert"


- every actual expert when watching a YouTube 'expert', ever.
Offline

Jim Simon

  • Posts: 30813
  • Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:47 am

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon May 13, 2024 2:31 pm

Marc Wielage wrote:I'm more in the group that says that "too much noise reduction is a bad thing."

T2-4KUltra-Front-515918160.jpg
T2-4KUltra-Front-515918160.jpg (50.36 KiB) Viewed 476 times
My Biases:

You NEED training.
You NEED a desktop.
You NEED a calibrated (non-computer) display.
Offline
User avatar

KrunoSmithy

  • Posts: 242
  • Joined: Fri Oct 20, 2023 11:01 pm
  • Real Name: Kruno Stifter

Re: Resolve Noise Reduction VS. Neat Video...which is better

PostMon May 13, 2024 2:44 pm

Jim Simon wrote:
Marc Wielage wrote:I'm more in the group that says that "too much noise reduction is a bad thing."

The attachment T2-4KUltra-Front-515918160.jpg is no longer available


There was also that wax edition of otherwise gritty and grainy predator movie (as it should be), where they used someone's nephew to "remaster".

Honeyview_predatorc1ab.jpg
Honeyview_predatorc1ab.jpg (284.36 KiB) Viewed 462 times


Honeyview_waxpredatorc1b.jpg
Honeyview_waxpredatorc1b.jpg (185.44 KiB) Viewed 462 times


And latest victim was True Lies. Oh, boy, did they screwed up that one big time.

TRUE LIES - 4K UHD BLU-RAY Review
Next

Return to DaVinci Resolve

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], dgbarar, panos_mts and 184 guests