I've been doing redraws for manga for a while and have worked long term on a few series. Sometimes the pages come precleaned(cropped, leveled, rotated, etc) and some times I do it myself when I just get the raws. I got into scanlation after reading manga for several years(mostly online readers).

After having participated in the process of producing scanlations and working with a few groups, I've noticed differences in the way other people clean/edit manga.

One of these things is the use of photoshop's denoise abilities. A lot of the time groups clean their manga using different types of denoise filters to remove dust, make it less pixelated, and to save time. I've noticed this being done especially on lower scan quality raws.

Sure it can make a manga seem smoother looking and not be too much of an issue on manga that don't use toner. However, in the case of manga that do use toner, the over use of denoise filters can be more destructive than beneficial. They can come out looking blurred or blotchy and hurt the overall quality of the scanlation.

After having said all that, I was wondering what other people felt/thought about this. Do you mind the use of such filters? are you even aware of it? If you're also a part of scanlation, then do you use it? If you don't, what do you think of others who do? etc.

Just weigh in on your opinions.

________________
Feed your head.

If done right, I don't mind them to an extent. But I prefer the look of the scans when they aren't used. I guess I like my scans to have a sharper look to them instead of the slightly blurred look that filters tend to give them. I've never used them, and I don't ever plan to anytime soon.

Personally, I just try to make it look decent and keep the quality/style of cleaning consistent throughout the series. Consistency is more important, imo. Though it does get bad when it's overfiltered...

Rather than PS's built-in denoise, you might want to try out using Topaz Lab's denoise/clean tools. They allow finer controls of the action, so you may be able to avoid the "destructive" behaviors.

________________
The Company
[b]Batoto

Denoising of mag scans looks like ass at least 75% of the time, regardless of plugin/program used. I even made one myself that looks better than those, but it too looked like crap, so I scrapped that project.
As a reader, I'd much rather have speckled scans than those where every single tone is smeared, and where there are halos around every edge. Then again, I know some editors are left with little choice, when the friendly neighbourhood group dictator says "20 pages in one hour, no specks".

If you want an alternative, manually cleaning up the black bits gets much easier if you invert (ctrl+i) and dodge, rather than simply go with burn, like most tutorials claim. Well, then invert back after you're done, of course.

And while I say this, there is actually one instance where automatic denoising (in a sense of the term) is useful. If you have good, unleveled, 600 ppi scans, applying a very small (0.5 pixel-ish) Gaussian filter once or twice before you level helps. Both with suppressing shot/popcorn noise, and also the scans tend to end up more nicely sharpened after the level operation. "Nicely" here is highly subjective, of course, and it also depends on which scanner you use. (Mine, a CanoScan 4somethingthousand, seems to be in the middle in terms of how sharp the scans are witout any processing. Your mileage will vary.) Oh, and that will also suppress some jpeg artifacts, if you're unlucky enough to get jpeg scans.

The last time I heard Topaz tool used in conversation, the word was profane.



If I had an option for which image quality I'd see in a release, This would win hands down compared to the denoised version

________________
"Officially, this machine doesn't exist, you didn't get it from me,
and I don't know you. Make sure it doesn't leave the building."

i doubt anyone would denoise that exact page...if they did it was a huge mistake.

there are, however, cases where you can't avoid doing some denoising.

The procedure for one person was to "average" after the de-noised image.

So, yeah...


For me, the one thing good about images like this... is to get a laugh.

This one is actually better in comparison... but still, no.

________________
"Officially, this machine doesn't exist, you didn't get it from me,
and I don't know you. Make sure it doesn't leave the building."

Though it could still be improved that second image is actually better than even the magazine itself. If they just left it alone and did only levels then the result would be seriously ugly.

It's just my opinion. Your first example is seriously messed up(I don't even get what's going on in there)...second is more than decent

You know, now that I actually looked at it, even that first example was obviously "denoised" in some way. Raw pages of a manga that cheap don't look like that straight off the scanner.

I don't care if the image is denoised or not. Myself, I'm a denoise user, only on LQ scans. I actually like the "glossy" look of the denoise program. It makes cleaning so much faster. Additionally, I can't stand bits of dirt and splotches. It's just my perfectionism kicking in. I personally don't understand why others don't haha! My preference.

I think it's just overleveling is the ugly part of cleaning. I detest overleveled scans. It's so pixelated, it hurts my eyes. Glossy scans don't.

Overall, I judge if the scans need denoising. If it increases the quality of it, I'd go for it. Like I said, I only use it on LQ scans.

I really hate denoised images. I think denoise is one of the worst things to happen to scanlations. I read denoised chapters and I think to myself no wonder fans and employees of people such as Viz insult us for our lack of quality and destroying images. Denoised chapters look to my eyes almost like crass vandalism of someone's work.

The blur hurts my eyes; I have to look at pages in a sort of cross eyed way after I've looked at one or two. I would take clarity and dust over blur and gloss any day of the week. The dust isn't attractive but it doesn't do what denoise does which is basically take all the greys and midtones in an image and use them as toilet paper.

I can let a subtle use of denoise slip on a weekly series such as one of the big three. But, when people denoise high quality tank scans cause they are so used to the image looking glossy and blurred; that breaks my heart and drives me crazy cause it looks so bad for no reason.

________________
Deadbeat-Scans are hiring!

For redraws I'm a stickler for making things look like its part of the manga and not out of place in anyway.

Denoise uses a kind of blur to get rid of the spottiness of the noise. It can in the same way "get rid" of the toner's pattern. Sure, if the leveling is off or if the scan quality is bad(with white dots everywhere) it can "smooth" things out and make it less grating but, it makes it look too "computerized".

________________
Feed your head.

Amen brother! I agree with you completely.

If you look at the author's original BEFORE it was printed, it's almost always glossy (since most artists now draw on computer). So, saying that denoised/glossy finish is vandalism is rather pushing it.

________________
The Company
[b]Batoto