Embracing the noise!

[jimim]

Ya so I deff use my flash too much. I have been looking at so many people's flickr pages with shots from disney night parades and all are without a flash. sooooo much more natural! So I think I deff got to just start to use higher ISO's and live with it. My eyes are just so drawn to noise and my brain then says. . . bad! I also get so hung up on histograms being centered or a little overexposed.

So here is my question. I was shooting a doll of minnie in my house the other night with just an overhead light. I was shooting at f2.8 and with speeds of 1/40 to 1/60 sec and my ISO was 800 to 1600. I also did like 1/3 and 2/3 exp comp in the camera. On the computer they didn't look too bad on a laptop 15" monitor. But my histograms were deff!! over to the left. not burried mind you. i had a nice bell curve going on but they were deff on the left. Also when I pixel peeped, my brain again, they were just bla! not sharpness and just bla, but zoomed out they looked fine.

I this what I'm to expect? I just don't have any experience here. Tonight I'm going to our italian festival cause we run the pastry stand and I'm going to shoot people and food without a flash to try it out. The only light will be bulbs in the tent and the refrigeration coolers.

Here are some of my shots. Focus point is right above minnie's nose. metering was evaluative. They look in focus. . .is this the world of higher ISO? is this as good as it gets? should I be looking into diff metering or settings? I want ot be able to shoot with as much ease as possible. I don't want to get into manual and all that jazz! P, AV, and TV is fine and all. These are OOTC.

thanks for helping!
with +1 camera exp

Untitled by jimim, on Flickr

with +2/3 camera exp

Untitled by jimim, on Flickr

with +1/3 camera exp

Untitled by jimim, on Flickr

 

[AbbysFamily]

Ok ....

I'm not an expert, but to my brain the last one is best. I think the +1 is too exposed. Part of that to me is not just the minnie, but the "feel" of the picture to me. With the window in the back with the lights being reflected, my brain wants minnie to look more 'naturally' lit. To me the over exposed looks like there was a bunch of false lighting on the scene.

I think they are all fine, but for me the last one looks best.

 

[HPS3]

I agree, the first is too bright for me. The light doesn't look natural. Depending on what camera you have 1600 might look really noisy. You might have to post process noise reduction. Wouldn't it be nice to have a D3S for outrageous ISO capability!

 

[mom2rtk]

What programs do you have available for processing? Lightroom 3 has an awesome noise reduction feature. There is a free 30 day trial online if you want to try it out.

I took a lot of parade photos at MVMCP and MSEP last December. I took some of MVMCP with a dialed back flash, some without. But ALL of my shots benefited from LR3 Noise Reduction.

 

[jimim]

Ok ....

I'm not an expert, but to my brain the last one is best. I think the +1 is too exposed. Part of that to me is not just the minnie, but the "feel" of the picture to me. With the window in the back with the lights being reflected, my brain wants minnie to look more 'naturally' lit. To me the over exposed looks like there was a bunch of false lighting on the scene.

I think they are all fine, but for me the last one looks best.

i agree with u. it does look like the room i was in. but looking at the histogram i was like what the! LOL

actually those are curio's of my wdcc (walt disney classic collection). those are lights which run up and down each side of each curio to light them properly so no self is underlit or overlit.


i just want to learn and make sure it isn't me. cause i have no idea what i should be seeing or looking for with not using a flash and trying to get more of the moment feel.

jimi
thanks alot,
jimi

 

[jimim]

What programs do you have available for processing? Lightroom 3 has an awesome noise reduction feature. There is a free 30 day trial online if you want to try it out.

I took a lot of parade photos at MVMCP and MSEP last December. I took some of MVMCP with a dialed back flash, some without. But ALL of my shots benefited from LR3 Noise Reduction.

hey i actually was looking at ur flickr feed the other night. ur shots are awesome! i was wondering if u can give some more info on how u shot besides what efix was given and the post processing?

when u 100% crop are they blurry? should i be seeing this cause of the higher ISO?

I use LR2. don't mess with the noise reduction much cause i always try to avoid noise. i'm trying to change here! lol

oh btw the outfits u make for your daughter are crazy! i can't even tell u how cool i think they are. u are one serious sewer! i have to show my wife them cause i was going on and on about them the other night!

awesome work.

jimi

 

[mom2rtk]

hey i actually was looking at ur flickr feed the other night. ur shots are awesome! i was wondering if u can give some more info on how u shot besides what efix was given and the post processing?

when u 100% crop are they blurry? should i be seeing this cause of the higher ISO?

I use LR2. don't mess with the noise reduction much cause i always try to avoid noise. i'm trying to change here! lol

oh btw the outfits u make for your daughter are crazy! i can't even tell u how cool i think they are. u are one serious sewer! i have to show my wife them cause i was going on and on about them the other night!

awesome work.

jimi

Many thanks for the kind words!

I'm not a post processing whiz like so many around here. Mostly I just punch up the exposure and sharpenss a little. But many of my shots do benefit from the noise reduction feature of the program. I'm thinking I heard the NR feature was a big improvement in LR3 v. LR2, but someone who knows better will have to chime in on that.

For the night parades, I shot at 3200 ISO. I have a T2i so the noise isn't too bad at that ISO, but it definitely needed the help from LR3.

I think I shot most of those night parades in shutter priority, choosing a speed that would stop any motion blur (maybe 1/125??) but trying to keep the aperture from being completely wide open so depth of field would be a little more forgiving.

 

[GvilleDisneyDad]

The images don't look particularly noisy to me but rather I think you missed your focus point. Look at the text on Minnie's foot. That looks fairly sharp and in focus to me. You're getting pretty shallow DOF at that aperture; enough that her face is slightly out of focus compared to the foot.

While I don't think noise is an issue here, I can tell you that the noise reduction in LR3 is outstanding.

Hope that helps and good luck!

 

[jimim]

Many thanks for the kind words!

I'm not a post processing whiz like so many around here. Mostly I just punch up the exposure and sharpenss a little. But many of my shots do benefit from the noise reduction feature of the program. I'm thinking I heard the NR feature was a big improvement in LR3 v. LR2, but someone who knows better will have to chime in on that.

For the night parades, I shot at 3200 ISO. I have a T2i so the noise isn't too bad at that ISO, but it definitely needed the help from LR3.

I think I shot most of those night parades in shutter priority, choosing a speed that would stop any motion blur (maybe 1/125??) but trying to keep the aperture from being completely wide open so depth of field would be a little more forgiving.

thanks for that info. we just got home. the baby is beat. gone are the days that we were able to stay until close with my parents.

anyway, i got 1 nice shot of an italian flag in one of the yards next to our stand. i hope it comes out nice cause i want to get it blown up for her.

I'll have to mess with the noise reduction in LR2 tomorrow. and read up on LR3. I get it for next to nothing so I'll have to look into that this week.

The images don't look particularly noisy to me but rather I think you missed your focus point. Look at the text on Minnie's foot. That looks fairly sharp and in focus to me. You're getting pretty shallow DOF at that aperture; enough that her face is slightly out of focus compared to the foot.

While I don't think noise is an issue here, I can tell you that the noise reduction in LR3 is outstanding.

Hope that helps and good luck!

huh i just noticed that too. it kind a front focused i think. on all my test shots actually. i had the focus spot on her eye cause i didn't want to front focus on her nose. wonder why that happened.

i guess I was asking about noise cause I wasn't sure if the histograms were suppose to be so pushed left with shooting in darker areas. cause when i try to push em center and right they look blown out like the first pic.

thanks,
jimi

 

[SrisonS]

Many thanks for the kind words!

I'm not a post processing whiz like so many around here. Mostly I just punch up the exposure and sharpenss a little. But many of my shots do benefit from the noise reduction feature of the program. I'm thinking I heard the NR feature was a big improvement in LR3 v. LR2, but someone who knows better will have to chime in on that.

.

I used LR2 quite a bit before finally jumping to LR3. And I can definitely say that the noise reduction in LR3 is A LOT better than LR2.

 

[jimim]

Here is something quick before I went to bed. Let me know what U all think.


IMG_5683-dfine by jimim, on Flickr

NR was done in Nik DFine.

Thanks everyone for all the input!

 

[mom2rtk]

You know, if you can learn to deal with the noise, then you'll be able to shoot a stop or 2 off of wide open, and your depth of field will be larger.

I really have to say that 2 things I did over the past year or so made a huge difference in what I am able to do in low light:

1) stepping up to the T2i and being able to shoot past 1600 and

2) adding LR3.

 

[photo_chick]

I am totally for embracing the noise. It's a part of the medium, just like grain is with film.

Some things to think about, and I'm not saying you're doing them, just to think about them.. pushing up the exposure in post or adding fill light can increase the appearance of noise. Sharpening will increase the appearance of noise. Some lenses have a gritty look to the image that makes noise appear worse. It's just a characteristic of certain lenses and there isn't anything wrong with it, you won't even really see it on lower resolution DSLRs or film cameras most of the time, but if you're nit picky on noise you want to check that out. And along those lines, glass makes a difference. There's a reason L series glass is what it is. And I am not saying you need L series glass to make great images here... I'm a big user of entry and mid grade glass. But if you are nit picky an anal about pixel peeping you will notice a difference in the clarity, and subsequently the noise, of your images with L series glass.

Now.. the biggest thing with these images is the focus. They feel like their focused on her foot (especially the first one). Minnie's face is far enough beyond the depth of field that she'll probably look like a big, mushy mess at 100% even at lower ISO settings.

And lastly.. don't sweat not shooting in manual mode. It's not the end all, be all, pinnacle of photographic prowess. Should you know how to do it? Absolutely, and all that takes is a basic understanding of how an exposure is made. But there is no need to shoot in it really in most cases. Av and Tv usually work fine for most situations. You're controlling 2 out of 3 variables with them, and you can change the exposure value if you don't like what the meter gives you so really you have complete control if you want it.

 

[jimim]

I am totally for embracing the noise. It's a part of the medium, just like grain is with film.

Some things to think about, and I'm not saying you're doing them, just to think about them.. pushing up the exposure in post or adding fill light can increase the appearance of noise. Sharpening will increase the appearance of noise. Some lenses have a gritty look to the image that makes noise appear worse. It's just a characteristic of certain lenses and there isn't anything wrong with it, you won't even really see it on lower resolution DSLRs or film cameras most of the time, but if you're nit picky on noise you want to check that out. And along those lines, glass makes a difference. There's a reason L series glass is what it is. And I am not saying you need L series glass to make great images here... I'm a big user of entry and mid grade glass. But if you are nit picky an anal about pixel peeping you will notice a difference in the clarity, and subsequently the noise, of your images with L series glass.

Now.. the biggest thing with these images is the focus. They feel like their focused on her foot (especially the first one). Minnie's face is far enough beyond the depth of field that she'll probably look like a big, mushy mess at 100% even at lower ISO settings.

And lastly.. don't sweat not shooting in manual mode. It's not the end all, be all, pinnacle of photographic prowess. Should you know how to do it? Absolutely, and all that takes is a basic understanding of how an exposure is made. But there is no need to shoot in it really in most cases. Av and Tv usually work fine for most situations. You're controlling 2 out of 3 variables with them, and you can change the exposure value if you don't like what the meter gives you so really you have complete control if you want it.

Thanks for all that. I want ot touch on the focus aspect with Minnie. I was focused on her eyes. This whole foot thing has me thinking. I have to mess with some focus points today to see if there is something wrong. Might be lens or camera. I'll throw that lens on my wife's rebel and I'll try it on my 7d and then switch out lens and see also.

I tried so hard last night in LR to not do any sharpening after I did my NR. I also stayed clear away from the fill light cause I knew that would only hurt things. PLus I knew it would make the flag look unnatural kinda like the Minnie with a +1. I do have to keep those things in mind though cause it is easy to forget.

Thanks so much for all those points! I greatly appreciate it.

jimi

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I think you focused on her nose. The focus points shown in the viewfinder aren't exactly the same size as they appear. If you had the center spot on her eye, it is possible that part of the focus point was on her nose. The camera may have focused on the contrast difference between her eye and nose.

I'm pretty sure that there is a way to see which focus points were in focus at the time of shot using the software that comes with your camera.

 

[C&B Young]

I used LR2 quite a bit before finally jumping to LR3. And I can definitely say that the noise reduction in LR3 is A LOT better than LR2.

Agreed! We just upgraded from LR2 to LR3 and I was FLOORED by the noise reduction. Worth the upgrade for that feature alone, IMO.

 

[jimim]

I think you focused on her nose. The focus points shown in the viewfinder aren't exactly the same size as they appear. If you had the center spot on her eye, it is possible that part of the focus point was on her nose. The camera may have focused on the contrast difference between her eye and nose.

I'm pretty sure that there is a way to see which focus points were in focus at the time of shot using the software that comes with your camera.

Really diff than just them showing up in the preview window on the camera? Meaning it would be actually what was in focus rather than where I put the point?

thanks,
jimi

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Really diff than just them showing up in the preview window on the camera? Meaning it would be actually what was in focus rather than where I put the point?

thanks,
jimi

It will just show you which points were in focus when the shot was taken. It looks like you are looking through the viewfinder with the focus point rectangles lit up in red.

 

[jimim]

It will just show you which points were in focus when the shot was taken. It looks like you are looking through the viewfinder with the focus point rectangles lit up in red.

ok i'm doing that now on the camera in the review mode. just so i know when i go into LR if i want to check back on the camera. Correct?

Thanks,
jimi

 

[photo_chick]

Thanks for all that. I want ot touch on the focus aspect with Minnie. I was focused on her eyes. This whole foot thing has me thinking. I have to mess with some focus points today to see if there is something wrong. Might be lens or camera. I'll throw that lens on my wife's rebel and I'll try it on my 7d and then switch out lens and see also.

I tried so hard last night in LR to not do any sharpening after I did my NR. I also stayed clear away from the fill light cause I knew that would only hurt things. PLus I knew it would make the flag look unnatural kinda like the Minnie with a +1. I do have to keep those things in mind though cause it is easy to forget.

Thanks so much for all those points! I greatly appreciate it.

jimi

The AF confirm light will lie to you just like that LCD screen will. If you're having trouble telling if your images are in focus through your viewfinder you might want to adjust your diopter. If that doesn't help enough you might consider getting a better focusing screen for your view finder. (I love my split focusing screen) To me the auto focus system is a lot like your light meter. It's often right on the money, but it's still gonna miss sometimes so you need to really be able to tell in the view finder what's going on.