WTF Happened?

I was helping a friend shoot a cheerleading competition last weekend, and something horrible went wrong. For the life of me I can not figure out why there is SOOOOO much noise in these photos. To view the photos in their original size and see the noise much better click HERE.
I hope somebody can tell me where I went wrong.

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

ISO: 1600

How do these compare to other ISO 1600 images from the same camera?
Are you shooting RAW or JPEG? If JPEG, what is your sharpness parameter set to? If RAW, how/when are you sharpening them?

Yeah, It's a tradeoff--fast shutter speed + noise, or possibly blurry shot with less noise. Looks like you've got a fast lens (f/2.8 ) so you could try and lower the ISO a bit. I just bought a 70-200 f/2.8 and can't wait to go to a hockey game this weekend and try it out (if they let me through the door w/a big, white lens).

Back to you though: These are some nice shots. Try a utility like NoiseNinja or Neat Image and see if that cleans 'em up to your liking!

Joe

brolly wrote in post #2266184
ISO: 1600

I was hoping to get a better explanation, but thanks anyways.

Curtis N wrote in post #2266230
How do these compare to other ISO 1600 images from the same camera?
Are you shooting RAW or JPEG? If JPEG, what is your sharpness parameter set to? If RAW, how/when are you sharpening them?

This was my first time shooting @ ISO1600, but I've seen concert , hockey, and gymnastics photography shot using the same ISO and lens. In those same instances the noise was no where near the same. I did shoot RAW.

2manyPix wrote in post #2266234
Yeah, It's a tradeoff--fast shutter speed + noise, or possibly blurry shot with less noise. Looks like you've got a fast lens (f/2.8 ) so you could try and lower the ISO a bit. I just bought a 70-200 f/2.8 and can't wait to go to a hockey game this weekend and try it out (if they let me through the door w/a big, white lens).

Back to you though: These are some nice shots. Try a utility like NoiseNinja or Neat Image and see if that cleans 'em up to your liking!

Joe

I did try NN, and it barely put a dent removing the noise.

The original looks terribly oversharpened. When you sharpen a noisy image, you sharpen the noise.

My usual workflow for high ISO theatre shots:
Convert RAW to TIFF without sharpening
Run through Noise Ninja
Resize to 300 ppi for printing (example: 1800x1200 for 4x6 print)
Apply USM to taste.

Between Noise Ninja and resizing you will get rid of most of the noise. Then you can sharpen without fear.

Curtis N wrote in post #2266328
The original looks terribly oversharpened. When you sharpen a noisy image, you sharpen the noise.

My usual workflow for high ISO theatre shots:
Convert RAW to TIFF without sharpening
Run through Noise Ninja
Resize to 300 ppi for printing (example: 1800x1200 for 4x6 print)
Apply USM to taste.

Between Noise Ninja and resizing you will get rid of most of the noise. Then you can sharpen without fear.

No sharpening done to these photos. RAW images straight out of the camera. Although I just learned the ACR will automatically adjust the exposure.

Aparently, ACR is doing something to these automatically. I don't use that software so someone else will need to advise.

In the mean time, you could try converting with DPP, making sure not to sharpen, and see what you get.

The other thing that will add noise in a hurry is missing the exposure...these look like they are 1/3 to 1/2 stop underexposed....try dialing in a touch of EC and see if that helps. Also...as Curtis mentioned...these seem to have a lot of sharpening done to them....that will bring out the noise too....check your recipe in ACR and make sure there isn't a big sharpen added in there.

Second and third are just fine for iso 1600. First is a bit too much, even for iso1600. But you get some "extra" noise when you have underexpose photo and then try to correct that in PS. So if this was the case with first photo, then you have your "problem".

ACR sharpens. Watch that with high iso pics.

Also these look a tad dark to be ISO 1600 and straight from RAW. Shoot a bit more exposure and them bring it back in check with raw. See the link in my sig. It will make you shoot this better next time.

Curtis' workflow is a good one. Follow it and reduce sharpening and colour noise reduction in ACR to zero.

...then Noise Ninja.

sonny_c wrote in post #2266153
I hope somebody can tell me where I went wrong.

Well, I don't really know that you "went wrong" .....

You're going to get "noise" at ISO 1600 - I don't think there's any way to avoid it completely. You can minimize how prevalent the noise is with proper exposures, but I'm not sure that shooting in gyms will give you the opportunity to shoot action with proper exposures ....

You were shooting at 2.8 at ISO 1600 at 1/500 .... did the gym actually meter at those settings ? Most gyms I shoot in meter at 2.8; ISO 1600: but at only about 1/250 or so. So if you were shooting at 1/500 but the "proper" exposure was at 1/250 then you were intentionally underexposing those shots. "Pushing" the processing to achieve a more "proper" exposure will introduce (or heighten the effect of ...) the noise in any shot - even if it was taken at ISO 100.

But that's the trade-off with shooting action in high school gyms .... you either expose the shots "properly" and probably wind up with some motion blur (and less noticeable "noise"); or you intentionally underexpose for a faster shutter speed to eliminate any motion blur (and heighten the effect of "noise" in PP).

As I said, I don't know that you really "went wrong" - you're just dealing with the trade-offs ....

If you take a look at the original size version of the first shot, you will know that there is definitely something more going on here than "pushing" a high ISO image.

Like has been said, a combo of high ISO and high shutter speed...

Welcome to the world of shooting in gyms...it takes prctice, but it will get better...

I have the 85 1.8 and the 70-200 2.8 To get the best photo I use the 1.8 cuz it works better in dark gyms and I get less noise..

Whenever I stare down the middle of my 85 1.8 I always call it my light sucking monster.

I have the luxury of being able to use a flash/supplemental light everywhere. Lots of gyms don't allow flashes and that is where Canon makes its' mark.

Let the camera do what it can do by getting the light onto the sensor. Fast lens, expose to the right.

You may find M mode is your friend in a gym. Like cecilc said, 1/250th, 1600 iso and a 2.8 lens. Lock the camera to this and fire away in raw. Reel back the exposure later and have cleaner images.