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

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

"bump" before i head out to the mall

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?

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

qtaran111 wrote in post #5599694
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?

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.

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.

chauncey wrote in post #5600127
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.

love the second... good work

Broncobear wrote in post #5600135
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:

Bigbitt8706 wrote in post #5600226
love the second... good work

thanks bud

jamaican_sole wrote in post #5599912
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?

How's this

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

qtaran111 wrote in post #5600369
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:

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

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR