haven't posted something for a while C&C please.

[jamaican_sole]

couple of shots of my buddy jeff. EXIF data is included. any and all input is welcomed :D . don't hold back, i can take it....

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3121/2522628824_82fc4acdd4_b.jpg

Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/800)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 75 mm
ISO Speed: 100

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2376/2521908723_f60ca4f379_b.jpg

Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 45 mm
ISO Speed: 1600

[jamaican_sole]

"bump" before i head out to the mall :D

[qtaran111]

I like them, good composition and interesting backgrounds. I think the first is the better of the two.

They look a bit noisy, but maybe that was the look you were going for?

[LeuceDeuce]

Nice shots. Try taking them with your subjects looking into the frame rather than out of it, and see if you like that better.

[jamaican_sole]

I like them, good composition and interesting backgrounds. I think the first is the better of the two.

They look a bit noisy, but maybe that was the look you were going for?

a noisy image was definitely not what i was aiming for . at this point in my learning process i'm not exactly sure about the proper way to reduce noise in an image. it's as if the image becomes muddy and loses alot of the sharpness that it originally had. could someone recommend a program, or maybe a technique that would help me out?

[chauncey]

LD is correct, you have the dead space on the wrong side of the image with the way your subjects were facing.

You also have different settings for the images with the second one being ISO 1600. What body are you using?

I don't see the noise that concerns qtaran111. To me it looks like you nailed the exposure.

[Broncobear]

number one has good colour and exposure, space is on wrong side for me in terms of composition. I would have reversed it the amount of space on each side.

two has a little bit of noise but that could be easily corrected, for my own personal preference I would have liked the space ahead of the subject as opposed to behind, also I would have kept more of the folded arms in the shot, see if you can bring the eyes out more.

[jamaican_sole]

LD is correct, you have the dead space on the wrong side of the image with the way your subjects were facing.

You also have different settings for the images with the second one being ISO 1600. What body are you using?

I don't see the noise that concerns qtaran111. To me it looks like you nailed the exposure.


the body is a 30d and i was using a tamron 28-75mm f2.8 lense. the drastic change in iso was because of the images being shot about 6 hours apart. in the second image it was late in the evening and i really didn't have much light to play with. that's why there is such a drastic difference in iso speeds.

[Bigbitt8706]

love the second... good work

[jamaican_sole]

number one has good colour and exposure, space is on wrong side for me in terms of composition. I would have reversed it the amount of space on each side.

two has a little bit of noise but that could be easily corrected, for my own personal preference I would have liked the space ahead of the subject as opposed to behind, also I would have kept more of the folded arms in the shot, see if you can bring the eyes out more.

bring the eyes up? is this what you meant bronco? or did i go too far with the eyes.

before: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2376/2521908723_f60ca4f379_b.jpg

after: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3182/2525973026_843ba349f8_b.jpg

[jamaican_sole]

love the second... good work

thanks bud :)

[qtaran111]

a noisy image was definitely not what i was aiming for . at this point in my learning process i'm not exactly sure about the proper way to reduce noise in an image. it's as if the image becomes muddy and loses alot of the sharpness that it originally had. could someone recommend a program, or maybe a technique that would help me out?

OK, ISO1600 explains the noise in the 2nd shot (chauncey, if you can't see it, look at the darker skin tones around the chin and neck).

However, there is also some present in the first (the black stripe in the graffiti behind his head looks speckly i.e. chroma noise). You shouldn't really see this at ISO100, so I guess it has come somewhere in the PP. You could get rid of this by doing selective noise reduction on the background, but perhaps it's best to find out why you are getting this noise in the first place.

I'm not sure how the originals looked, but if they were underexposed and you increased the exposure in PP this will increase noise. Generally the advice when shooting high ISO is to expose to the right and then pull back the exposure in PP, which gets rid of some of the noise, especially in the shadows. I guess it must've been pretty dark in the first shot, being as you were at 1/60, f2.8, ISO1600!

When you say "loses a lot of the sharpness", at which point in PP is this?
Did you shoot in RAW? What software are you using to PP?

[Broncobear]

How's this

[jamaican_sole]

OK, ISO1600 explains the noise in the 2nd shot (chauncey, if you can't see it, look at the darker skin tones around the chin and neck).

However, there is also some present in the first (the black stripe in the graffiti behind his head looks speckly i.e. chroma noise). You shouldn't really see this at ISO100, so I guess it has come somewhere in the PP. You could get rid of this by doing selective noise reduction on the background, but perhaps it's best to find out why you are getting this noise in the first place.

I'm not sure how the originals looked, but if they were underexposed and you increased the exposure in PP this will increase noise. Generally the advice when shooting high ISO is to expose to the right and then pull back the exposure in PP, which gets rid of some of the noise, especially in the shadows. I guess it must've been pretty dark in the first shot, being as you were at 1/60, f2.8, ISO1600!

When you say "loses a lot of the sharpness", at which point in PP is this?
Did you shoot in RAW? What software are you using to PP?


i shoot in RAW, and looking back at it, the images were a bit under exposed, so i did have to increase the exposure value a bit in pp. so it's safe to say that you were correct in thinking that. and yes, i really didn't have alot of light to play with, but i was very impressed with how the camera lense combo handled the situation. but coming from a 300d every little thing about the 30d impresses me :) . now about noise reduction, due to the fact that i really haven't had much success with the process, it's really the last thing that i do in pp. here's an example of what i'm talking about:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3091/2525251855_8f90a4a1dd_b.jpg

Exposure: 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 45 mm
ISO Speed: 1600

(also did the "eye treatment" that i think bronco was referring to.) the image seems just a tad soft to me. i know my shutter speed was a bit slow, but it's still a good representation of what i'm talking about. this was done with noise ninja at a low setting.

[jamaican_sole]

here's the orginals next to the "finished" ones

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2246/2526150330_bbc63bbd13.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3121/2522628824_82fc4acdd4.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2021/2526151702_0c0ae2ca88.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3182/2525973026_843ba349f8.jpg

hopefully this helps

[qtaran111]

Yeah, it is difficult to get rid of noise on skin tones without making it look plasticky. I think you could leave the noise in the first two images as it doesn't really detract from the overall image and works well in an urban style and it gives it some depth.

As an aside I tried some noise reduction on the first, which got rid of the noise, but I actually think the version with noise works better. I just did it on the background, not the subject:

http://www.camdenphoto.smugmug.com/photos/301869695_NzWex-O.jpg


You can see the diff here on this part of the background:

Before: After:

http://camdenphoto.smugmug.com/photos/301887039_NfExS-O.jpg http://camdenphoto.smugmug.com/photos/301887032_eQzKL-O.jpg

[jamaican_sole]

Yeah, it is difficult to get rid of noise on skin tones without making it look plasticky. I think you could leave the noise in the first two images as it doesn't really detract from the overall image and works well in an urban style and it gives it some depth.

As an aside I tried some noise reduction on the first, which got rid of the noise, but I actually think the version with noise works better. I just did it on the background, not the subject:



now i have to ask, how were you able to apply it selectively? did you mask off the subject? or "paint" it on

[qtaran111]

now i have to ask, how were you able to apply it selectively? did you mask off the subject? or "paint" it on

I just made a quick selection of the guy, inverted it, then applied the noise reduction. Alternatively you could paint it on using a mask.