7

With low light levels your brightest signal will be close to the noise floor, so you only really have three options: a camera with better low light performance (although this can only take you so far) More expensive sensors can give a lower noise floor, allowing you to resolve more detail a faster lens As Jason commented: If the widest aperture on ...


4

Certainly using RAW on ML will help. With 14 bit color, your noise reduction options are a lot more advanced. Traditional noise reduction that you are used to from photos can be used with video as well using either color grading software or editing software. (With RAW video, it would be in the color grading software before mixing down to processed clips.) ...


3

I am the author of the code you are reading. It appears you were an alpha user of Audacity 2.1.0 in advance of its release, which was only days ago. You have a version of the noise reduction effect with many experimental optional controls exposed to the user that are not in the release version. You may be interested in what I wrote here about the ...


3

After a bit of searching, I found an article surveying some of the commercial software noise reduction options. For hiss/hum type noise removal (as opposed to crackles and pops), no approach other than noise-gates in multiple frequency bands was mentioned. The differences between implementations are in the default settings, the control knobs available, and ...


3

More Light You're seeing noise for two reasons. One is the tiny sensor of your webcam, but since you don't want to buy a new one right now, you can't do anything about that. However, the sensor size is only an amplifying factor of the real problem: Not enough light. Webcams are built for video chats, quick and dirty recordings, not really for high-quality ...


2

Forget an app. The truth is that a mic is, not only the best option but also an honest option. It will help the audience to focus on the content instead of making it a pain to hear. I would go for a cable lavalier mic, there are some in amazon, and they are the cheapest alternative. https://www.amazon.com/s?k=cellphone+microphone The other option is a ...


2

Commands are instructions sent from an interface external to the filter, usually an external program using a ZMQ protocol. There is a filter that can execute commands which is what I'll use here. Base syntax is ffmpeg -i in -af "asendcmd=c='0.0 afftdn@n sn start; 1.0 afftdn@n sn stop',afftdn@n" noiseout.wav To use another source for noise profile, you'll ...


2

It sounds like you are using your laptop's microphone, and that your main problem is the lack of a quality mic. If you own an iPhone, especially iPhone 5 or later, I would recommend you use the voice recorder app, and email the audio files to yourself using the Share button. The iPhone's microphone is surprisingly good for audio. High end Android phones also ...


1

Two possible ideas. When writing this answering I'm thinking in terms of the capabilities provided by Audacity but I think the same concept will work with other software. Pick a silent part of the video with only the wind sound but no other sounds that you would like to keep, select that as the noise profile then apply noise reduction whenever there is the ...


1

Answering my question with a no extra cost solution using the Noise cancellation headset I had. Using any Bluetooth headset (even supporting BT 5.0) like Crossbeats and recording with stock camera app or with Open Camera with audio source set to external doesn't work. Solution I had a Bose BT2 Bluetooth headset, which I haven't used in the last 7 years and ...


1

If this is no raw material, there is no additional pixel information to balance your colors and achieve a natural look. Only chance you have is to denoise your video and desaturate the colors. Try to find a good relationship between brightness and noise to get an acceptable result. Unfortunately there is no good, free, build-in or open source solution at ...


1

I think the easiest way is with the Spectral Frequency Display. Sounds like coughs, air conditioners and so on appear as blobs or lines that you can either erase or reduce in volume. Much more effective than EQ, since you can target all the frequencies and the exact timespan. From Adobe: "The spectral display is perfect for removing unwanted sounds, such as ...


1

If you have Audition, try using the background noise removal effect. If you capture a clip of solely the audio you want to remove, Audition will identify that frequency and remove it wherever it appears. Might need manual correction since sometimes it the reduction at those frequencies can be extreme.


1

i would attempt this by trying to find the frequency of the cough and then nuking it with EQ, turning the EQ on and off when needed via automation. You might have to dip the overall level for a moment too if its still too bad. I'm guessing that in future having a second mic might help also so you can cut to that and it might get a better signal of the ...


1

So, you'd be inverting the phase of the noise signal, adjusting its amplification to match the level of the noise in the other clip, and then summing the two to obtain speech minus noise. You might find that adding EQ. to the noise signal as well as amplification might also help. Any audio app that can mix two signals could do this, if you want a good free ...


1

You need a program to download the files from your DVD. Then dump them in a video editor and replace the audio tracks. I believe Windows Video Maker would allow to do everything I am talking about. I sincerely never used vob files straight out of a DVD, but I believe any video editor would be able to support them.


1

I'm not a professional colorist, but I do care a lot about color. (I run a fully ICC controlled workflow.) I would personally start with either noise reduction or color chart, depending on how noisy the footage was. Reasoning being that if it is too noisy, then the samples off the color chart may be impacted. It's also true that the denoise process may ...


1

I'm going to answer this broadly in theory and then get back to your question. Shotgun mics are usually supercardoid or some variant. That means that although a majority of the pickup is in the front (say 70%), there is also some pickup in the back (30%); as well as some pickup on the sides. Outdoors this doesn't matter that much as the closest thing to the ...


1

My two suggestions are: Use a lav mic and don't worry too much about a small mic being visible. Training videos don't have to look like Downton Abbey. Use a shotgun mic, but also use an acoustic absorber behind the talent. It is true that all the ambient noise that comes through the walls will bounce around the room, and if you don't have an absorber ...


1

My general rule is to do as little in the camera as possible (exposure, shutter). Leave everything else for post. It's not expected that the camera will have the best available NR or compression etc, and if you do it while recording you can't undo it later. Of course if you'll never do any post, do what gives you the best result.


1

You can use Audacity for this purpose, and you can follow this link to learn how: http://manual.audacityteam.org/o/man/tutorial_click_and_pop_removal_techniques.html Generally, clicks are little bursts of noise (such as a small scratch on a vinyl record), and pops are larger bursts of noise (such as a large scratch or a plosive "P" hitting a microphone ...


1

Like it is said in a comment, use more light and dial the ISO down. This is how filmmaking has been done for years and years. My guess is on the MK3 5D if you are getting tons of noise, you are underexposing and maybe trying to correct it in post. The MK3 is rpetty good and doesn't generate a lot of noise. If you absolutely have to shoot at a higher ISO ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible