Overexpose to reduce noise

This is one of those "for what it's worth" kinda posts.

Please toss in your two cents worth.

Lately I've been working on a shooting and PP work flow for high ISO shots. I've been utilizing ETTR or as it's also knownHAMSTTR, for a few years now. I've found that I can substantially reduce noise by overexposing 2/3 of stop then pulling back in post shots where I have the latitude without clipping anything important.
I metered the initial shot with a Sekonic L358, then bumped the exposure by 1/3 then 2/3 stops, pulling them back in ACR.
40D
ISO800

A) 1/400
b) 1/320

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

C)1/250

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Got one at 1/250 & ISO 400?

Not yet. I'm going to add to this with both 400 and 1600 in a few days when I get some time.

But over exposing by 1 stop is essentially shooting 1 stop slower ISO (which usually has less noise that the ISO above it).

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #12969208
But over exposing by 1 stop is essentially shooting 1 stop slower ISO (which usually has less noise that the ISO above it).

I understand what you're saying.
But lets say you're shooting at ISO400 at 1/60, but it's to slow. What would be the gain going to ISO800 overexposing by 2/3 stops (the amount that showed a difference in lower noise) then pulling back the exposure in post. That gives you 1/80 instead of 1/60. It sounds like splitting hairs, but you know, inquiring minds

I'll be back after I give this a go.

40D again
No NR applied in or out of camera
No sharpening

1) ISO400 exposed per Sekonic L358
2) ISO800 overexposed 2/3 stops, pulled back in post
next page
3) ISO1600 overexposed 2/3 stops, pulled back in post

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

3)ISO1600

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

It's a good technique if you can "get away with it", that is if you can avoid blowing highlights. With using flash/strobes in portraits, the thing that makes me nervous is "hot spots" on the skin and then, like with your shots, the danger of blown highlights on the lipstick. I hate it when my attemts to tone highlights down result in just gray smudge!

So, were you able to deal with those things effectively in post processing?

I'm not a studio/portraiture shooter, though, so my level of experience/understandi​ng is not up-to-speed in those areas.

I do shoot in a range of ISOs when doing indoor flash stuff. ISO 800 seems to work fine if I'm getting a good overall exposure for the flash and the ambient (that's a big part of my exposure considerations, I like a good "chunk" of ambience). But, like the OP, you want enough good light to overcome noise considerations.

Hi Tony,

Specular highlights are going to be there no matter what, so as long as no channels are clipped in the skin or other important areas I'm good to go.

The "enough good light" is what I thought I had in many shots with a "proper" exposure, but I've not been satisfied with that whether shooting my 40D, 7D or 5DII. Everybody says that noise winds up in the shadows, but I find most of the annoying noise to be in the transition areas where there is not a lot of detail, that's the reason I've been going down this path. Maybe it's a little over the edge, but I like to push the boundaries to know what works.

Anyway, thanks for your thoughts. I appreciate your posts.

Ralph

For me, the only time it would make sense to use ETTR is when the camera is already at ISO 100. At the higher ISO settings, if you can ETTR, then that mean you can also shoot at a lower ISO equal to however many stops (or fraction, thereof) of ETTR you are applying, and expose normally.

Just a quick clarification, ETTR and HAMSTTR aren't the same exact thing, there is a distinct difference between the two.

PacAce wrote in post #12970030
For me, the only time it would make sense to use ETTR is when the camera is already at ISO 100. At the higher ISO settings, if you can ETTR, then that mean you can also shoot at a lower ISO equal to however many stops (or fraction, thereof) of ETTR you are applying, and expose normally.

Okay, ruin all my fun If nothing else, it shows the importance of not underexposing.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #12970056
Just a quick clarification, ETTR and HAMSTTR aren't the same exact thing, there is a distinct difference between the two.

Ooooo. You're one of those. Symantics, Shcymantics

On what are you basing the overexposure information...if it's the LCD histogram, that can give you only a ball park semblance of accuracy as it's based on a jpeg rendition of the image which, to a large part, is controlled by the picture style settings that have been inputted.
Your RAW converter, whatever it may be, is a much better indicator of exposure.

windpig wrote in post #12970276
Ooooo. Your one of those. Symantics, Shcymantics

Well, one just moves exposure to the right at the current ISO, the other exposes properly, then all you do is shoot the ISO up one stop. Different ISOs are used between the different methods, they yield slightly different results as well, but not too noticeable unless pixel peeping.