• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Noise effects in Lightroom downsized exporting

Noise effects in Lightroom downsized exporting

September 23, 2014 JimK Leave a Comment

In the last two posts, I delved into how well Photoshop (Ps) does in minimizing photon noise when downsizing images using bilinear and bicubic sharper interpolation. Today I’m turning my attention to Lightroom (Lr).

With Lr, you don’t get to choose your resampling algorithm or the gamma of the space in which Lr does the resampling. You just specify the size of the output image and let Lr do its thing. Fortunately, it does some very good things, IMHO better than either of Ps’s recommended downsizing algorithm.

I fed Lr my usual 4000×4000 test image, with a half-scale constant (dc, if you will) and tenth-scale standard deviation Gaussian noise added. The space was Gray Gamma 2.2. Lr can’t export in that space, or, if it can, I exported as uncompressed TIFF with sharpening turned off.. I can’t find that space in the drop down menu in the export dialog. So I had it export in sRGB, which has the same gamma, and I threw away the red and blue planes after I got the image into Matlab for analysis.

Here is the ac rms value (aka standard deviation) of exported images at various magnifications:

rmsnoiseLrGraph

I added orange dots corresponding to ideal noise behavior:

rmsnoiseLrWperfectGraph

The noise reduction is in all.cases slighter greater than the ideal case. This behavior made me suspect that Lr was attenuating some of the higher spatial frequencies. I took a look.

Lrp95 Lrp9 Lrp8

Lrp5 Lrp2 Lrp1

This is great performance. The post-sampling spectra are substantially independent of the magnification. I looked at all the other spectra and they all looked materially the same.

There’s about three dB of high-frequency attenuation. I will experiment with Lr sharpening setting to see what they do the noise level and the spectra.

 

The Last Word

← Noise effects of Photoshop Bicubic Sharper downsizing Lightroom downsizing: export sharpening noise effects →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.