I would decide based on how bad the capture conditions are. If the scene is genuinely dark, better processing at capture can be more valuable than trying to rescue a very noisy file later.

The trap is judging low-light quality from a single bright storefront. Look at shadow texture, moving detail and color consistency. Noise reduction that looks impressive on a paused frame can smear badly once the camera starts moving.

I also separate exposure from grading. If PureVideo gives you a cleaner, properly exposed starting point, you can still make creative color adjustments afterward. The choice is not necessarily “processed footage with no grading” versus “raw-looking footage with full control.”

What you should avoid is stacking aggressive denoise twice without checking what the first stage already removed.

In VSDC I would make a short A/B test: one PureVideo clip and one standard clip from the same location, then normalize exposure and white balance before adding any creative look.

Compare moving pavement, foliage, faces and fine lights. If PureVideo preserves the details you care about while reducing noise, use it as the cleaner acquisition mode and keep the grade modest. If it introduces artifacts you dislike, that tells you where manual post work is worth the effort.

For travel videos I would rather have a slightly processed night clip that cuts cleanly with the rest of the story than spend an hour on every dark shot.

I only keep the difficult night scenes that contribute something. That also reduces the temptation to over-process footage that was never strong enough to begin with.

That sounds sensible. I will treat PureVideo as an acquisition choice, not as a finished look, and then grade it gently alongside the other clips.

The A/B test should also tell me whether I am gaining real moving detail or just seeing a cleaner paused frame.