Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 26 Feb 2017 (Sunday) 17:47
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Noise???

 
Nathan
So boring
Avatar
7,733 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 296
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Boston
     
Feb 27, 2017 11:04 |  #31

It is what it is... Not sure what are the noise characteristics of the Sony, but it's likely due to lifting the shadows. In post, have you already applied a degree of noise reduction?

Side thought: You sure you want to print this photo with some people in shoes and others not? Makes me wonder if the shot overall is worth printing... if anything, crop at the shins or higher and get more of the painting in the background as if it were more of a feature in the composition.


Taking photos with a fancy camera does not make me a photographer.
www.nathantpham.com (external link) | Boston POTN Flickr (external link) |
5D3 x2 | 16-35L II | 35 L | 50L | 85L II | 135L | 580 EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
john ­ crossley
Goldmember
2,639 posts
Likes: 913
Joined Nov 2009
     
Feb 27, 2017 13:56 |  #32

Damo77 wrote in post #18286235 (external link)
This is the problem. You must NEVER resize or crop during editing.
Only crop/resize after all editing is done, and you're actually saving a print file.

Damo77 wrote in post #18286333 (external link)
Just because you, or they, don't know any better, doesn't mean it's not true. You would be GOBSMACKED at how good your prints can be.

Please let's leave the "I've never seen it, so it can't possibly be true" arguments to athiests.

Would you care to enlighten us with a written transcript instead of just pasting links to your website.


Football is a very simple game. Twenty-two players chase a ball and Germany always win.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nathan
So boring
Avatar
7,733 posts
Gallery: 16 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 296
Joined Aug 2007
Location: Boston
     
Feb 27, 2017 15:02 |  #33

Damo and Reichner are arguing tangents. Tom started off simply stating that he'd like to see the how the crop compares to the original uncropped shot. That is, he wanted to get a sense of how much of a crop it was... there was no indication that it was a 100% crop to begin with. It's a question of resolution and whether any resampling was going to happen when the final image is printed. Relevant question because we didn't have enough to go on to begin with.


Taking photos with a fancy camera does not make me a photographer.
www.nathantpham.com (external link) | Boston POTN Flickr (external link) |
5D3 x2 | 16-35L II | 35 L | 50L | 85L II | 135L | 580 EX II x2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
13,081 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 603
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Feb 27, 2017 15:14 |  #34

That particular pattern is caused by the method and amount of noise reduction you've already applied. Different methods of noise reduction (and different noise reduction tools) may help produce a more acceptable pattern.

However, we need to acknowledge that infinite noiselessness is not obtainable. At some degree of enlargement and somewhere in the shadows noise will always be found. Shadows that are dark below the dynamic range of the sensor and actually containing no detail should be allowed to go black.

Tom points out in #10 that fixing underexposure in post might be the cause of undesirable noise in that tone the first place.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
goatruckus
Member
45 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 57
Joined Sep 2011
Location: Chapel Hill, North Carolina
     
Feb 27, 2017 15:43 |  #35

RDKirk wrote in post #18286940 (external link)
That particular pattern is caused by the method and amount of noise reduction you've already applied. Different methods of noise reduction (and different noise reduction tools) may help produce a more acceptable pattern.

However, we need to acknowledge that infinite noiselessness is not obtainable. At some degree of enlargement and somewhere in the shadows noise will always be found. Shadows that are dark below the dynamic range of the sensor and actually containing no detail should be allowed to go black.

Tom points out in #10 that fixing underexposure in post might be the cause of undesirable noise in that tone the first place.

Sorry to disagree, but it's just the Sony JPEG engine. Even if you don't lift any shadows in post the Sony JPEG engine at high ISO's will generate a "mosaic" pattern instead of a a grain that you see in Canon JPEGs. This happens even when you have High ISO NR turned off. You only see it when viewing the image at high magnification or cropping a small section of a photo...both of which the original poster did. I've seen the artifacts on my A6300 and a point and shoot HX90V.

Below are two examples from the A6300. SOOC, 100% crop. The first pic is relatively good light at 2000 ISO and the second is very poor light at 4000 ISO.


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


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




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,636 posts
Likes: 96
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 27, 2017 15:44 |  #36

john crossley wrote in post #18286851 (external link)
Would you care to enlighten us with a written transcript instead of just pasting links to your website.

The links are quite safe, I assure you.


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,734 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3858
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited over 2 years ago by Tom Reichner. (3 edits in all)
     
Feb 27, 2017 15:52 |  #37

Damo77 wrote in post #18286971 (external link)
The links are quite safe, I assure you.

Right, of course they are, but many of us don't want to go visit somebody's website just so see their point.

When somebody posts a link to their site, it seems as though they are trying to direct us to their site, either:

A - because they want to increase overall traffic to the site, or . . .

B - because they think we will be impressed with their work.

These two possible motivations cause me to simply refuse to click on the link. .If all the person wanted to do was to share info and help others, then they would have no problem copying and pasting it right into the body of their post here on POTN, instead of trying to make us go to their website.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,636 posts
Likes: 96
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 27, 2017 15:54 |  #38

*shrugs* You can learn, or not learn. Ultimately, it's not my problem.


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
john ­ crossley
Goldmember
2,639 posts
Likes: 913
Joined Nov 2009
     
Feb 27, 2017 16:01 |  #39

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18286984 (external link)
Right, of course they are, but many of us don't want to go visit somebody's website just so see their point.

When somebody posts a link to their site, it seems as though they are trying to direct us to their site, either:

A - because they want to increase overall traffic to the site, or . . .

B - because they think we will be impressed with their work.

These two possible motivations cause me to simply refuse to click on the link. .If all the person wanted to do was to share info and help others, then they would have no problem copying and pasting it right into the body of their post here on POTN, instead of trying to make us go to their website.

.

Or C - to pay for information which is freely available elsewhere on the internet, which seems to be the case here.


Football is a very simple game. Twenty-two players chase a ball and Germany always win.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,636 posts
Likes: 96
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 27, 2017 16:03 |  #40

Merlin_AZ wrote in post #18286111 (external link)
thumbnail
Hosted photo: posted by Merlin_AZ in
./showthread.php?p=182​86111&i=i114760261
forum: RAW, Post Processing & Printing

It's even on the back wall in the brighter parts of the image, but it wasn't lit well enough by the ambient.
I have to assume at this point that it's because of the ISO I had to shoot at without better lighting.

I can't see anywhere you've mentioned this - what software do you have?


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,734 posts
Gallery: 146 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3858
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
Post edited over 2 years ago by Tom Reichner. (3 edits in all)
     
Feb 27, 2017 16:05 |  #41

.

john crossley wrote in post #18286998 (external link)
Or C - to pay for information which is freely available elsewhere on the internet, which seems to be the case here.

.
Yikes! I didn't want to believe that, but it appears as if your accusation is true.

He appears to be using POTN to try to gather clients to something he charges for. That is wrong, and violates this site's Terms of Service.

Not to mention (although I am mentioning), he makes some statements here in this thread that are inaccurate and misleading, and one statement that was actually non-sequitur ......... just how much should anyone trust the author of such inaccuracies?

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DaviSto
... sorry. I got carried away!
Avatar
1,927 posts
Gallery: 56 photos
Likes: 897
Joined Nov 2016
Location: Abuja Nigeria
Post edited over 2 years ago by DaviSto. (2 edits in all)
     
Feb 27, 2017 16:22 |  #42

Damo77 wrote in post #18286988 (external link)
*shrugs* You can learn, or not learn. Ultimately, it's not my problem.

Sorry ... it is your problem. Whether or not you actually are, you are adopting an approach that seems arrogant.

It comes across as 'look here to benefit from my wisdom and expertise' ... instead of ... 'OK, maybe this could be some help'.

It's easy to believe that what you think you are saying is just what others hear. It often isn't.


David.
Comment and (constructive) criticism always welcome.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Damo77
Goldmember
Avatar
4,636 posts
Likes: 96
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 27, 2017 16:24 |  #43

Damo77 wrote in post #18287002 (external link)
I can't see anywhere you've mentioned this - what software do you have?

I have to go out for a while, but if you have Photoshop or Elements, you should find that ACR will remove the noise nicely. Remember, work on the original-size file only, don't resize it in any way.


Damien
Website (external link) | Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,875 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5766
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
Post edited over 2 years ago by TeamSpeed. (2 edits in all)
     
Feb 27, 2017 18:08 |  #44

john crossley wrote in post #18286998 (external link)
Or C - to pay for information which is freely available elsewhere on the internet, which seems to be the case here.

Yes, and this happened back with a thread with Bassat as well. This forum is much more about each of us helping one another, than is to sell each other services or goods. That activity is for the Services for Sale section on this board, or the member's signature line.

Of course in that thread, it was much less veiled than it was here. :)

Damo77 wrote in post #18268250 (external link)
https://www.damiensymo​nds.net/trainingsharp.​html (external link)
It will change your life, I promise.


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TeamSpeed
01010100 01010011
Avatar
36,875 posts
Gallery: 111 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 5766
Joined May 2002
Location: Midwest
     
Feb 27, 2017 18:15 as a reply to  @ goatruckus's post |  #45

Now back to this particular situation, that is quite ugly from the Sony JPG engine?! There is little you can do with that, as the detail is already destroyed by the mosaics. There are a few techniques available to try to blur contrast points around the noise a bit, then do an overall slight reduction, but when you sharpen back, there won't be anything left really to sharpen, at least not in the crops you posted from your sample.

It sounds like the camera was shot in JPG mode only, so there are no raws to go back to. I have no idea if it is possible, but is there any way to coordinate a re-shoot with everyone? This way you can go with raw, and also recompose the scene a bit differently, so that people are wearing footwear, and there aren't decorations coming out the back of peoples' heads. These are easy traps to fall into though, I still do that often. I go back to a pic, and go "WTH?" because there are these things in the background placed in very terrible places in relation to the heads. :D


Past Equipment | My Personal Gallery (external link) My Business Gallery (external link)
For Sale: 2x Teleconverter
For Sale: Sigma USB Dock

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

8,889 views & 46 likes for this thread
Noise???
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is UncleDanny
1047 guests, 338 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.