What can be done to improve low available light photos?

I have already done a thread with examples of what I got here

https://photography-on-the.net …php?p=9679154#p​ost9679154

I am wondering what I could have done on the spot or in post-processing to make the pictures better.

Was I right to use ISO 3200 or would it have been better to us 1600 and risk some blurring from camera shake?

Was fixing shutter to 1/125 the right move or would it be better to fix aperture to 2.8 and use negative exposure compensation to "force" the camera to go for a higher shutter speed?

What about post-processing. Any good tricks beyond playing with the noise reduction sliders and sharpening to get back a little definition?

I also seem to have a pixel on my sensor that always lights up when taking dark pics. no matter which pics this one pixel is always white.

Thanks for all the help. I want to do better with those pics next time.

Were you shooting in RAW or JPG? I would think that the 50D should do okay at ISO3200 in RAW (I try to keep my 30D at ISO1600 if possible, but it is an older camera). I think your shots look okay and could probably be fixed some more with noise ninja or some other dedicated NR software.

DStanic wrote in post #9679180
Were you shooting in RAW or JPG?

I was shooting raw and added some .5 to 1 stop of exposure in DPP on most shots to compensate for the fact that I was always underexposed at 1/125

I used 8/20 for noise reduction and 9/10 for sharpness on most shots

Dedicated NR software is better that relying on in-camera NR.
Try shooting manual with ISO 1600, f/2.8, with as slow a SS as you feel is appropriate.

Fastfwd13 wrote in post #9679189
I was shooting raw and added some .5 to 1 stop of exposure in DPP on most shots to compensate for the fact that I was always underexposed at 1/125

Boosting exposure by one stop in PP will always produce more noise than raising the ISO by one stop while shooting.

Fastfwd13 wrote in post #9679165
Was I right to use ISO 3200 or would it have been better to us 1600 and risk some blurring from camera shake?

It is possible to do something about noise in PP. It's impossible to do anything about blur.

Other than just deal with the noise, which I think is something that comes with concert footage, I'd have bumped the ISO up to a minimum of 3200 and kept the lens set on f/2.8

Another option is to convert to black and white, which for some reason looks good, or better when they're grainy.

I know I showed someone some concert images in color and the first thing they commented on was the grain

I converted them to B&W and showed them and they got all excited like it was a completely different image?

With that 50D, you should get usable images with ISO3200

hollis_f wrote in post #9679395
Boosting exposure by one stop in PP will always produce more noise than raising the ISO by one stop while shooting.

I'm not sure I understand. To have the same effect as addind one stop of exposure in DPP I would have add to enable high-ISO and go to 6400 which is probably horrible on a 50D no?

Fastfwd13 wrote in post #9679528
I'm not sure I understand. To have the same effect as addind one stop of exposure in DPP I would have add to enable high-ISO and go to 6400 which is probably horrible on a 50D no?

Ah, just checked and ISO6400 on the 50D is just ISO3200 boosted by one stop - so it should be exactly the same. Sorry!

I just sampled a few threads of concerts pics and it seems that mine are not that bad for a sub-5D camera body.

I am not going to buy a 5D anytime soon but maybe I'll rent a 100mm f2 or 85mm f1.2 next time to see what that does for the pics.

About shutter speed: Anyone know of a sure way to find which is the right minimum shutter speed for the conditions? I was using 1/125 but during pre-show testing I was getting pics that looked OK even to speed of something like 1/30 but I don't trust the LCD review even when zoomed to full so I added a bit of padding.

I know about the rule of focal length but taking average of 200mm(70-200mm * 1.6) on a crop I would have to use 1/200 or more and this would have been way too fast. Even 1/125 was constantly underexposed.

Fastfwd13 wrote in post #9679165
I am wondering what I could have done on the spot or in post-processing to make the pictures better.

Noiseware.

Neat Image.

Noise Ninja.

DC Fan wrote in post #9679614
Noiseware.

Neat Image.

Noise Ninja.

Is it a case of more $$$ = better noise reduction or is one of them better for available light performance photos? I have always been very satisfied with DPP until now but my pics were always in great light with ISO100-200

Also are they considerably better than DPP/elements? It seems to me that a company like Canon should be able to just buy one of those for pocket change and integrate it into DPP.

No exif in the images. What lens were you using? You did say "fix aperture to 2.8", so I suggest the 85mm f/1.8 as your first step if you're going to shoot a lot of this sort of thing.

Generally I'll go for the faster shutter speed, but it depends on how fast they're moving & the effect I'm going for.
Barbara Payton at the Carrick House Concert 11/23/08

I don't use EC or any "auto" mode. Why?
Post #47
Click the "post #47" at the top-right of that post if you'd like more info on the subject.

Blacks will always show more noise & noise reduction will always kill sharpness. Process two different versions of the image & blend them together to get the best of both.
I'd make two raw conversions, one for the highlights & one for everything else, & blend them together. How comfortable are you with layers? Drag one shot into the other pic holding down the Shift key to keep the layers aligned. Add a Layer mask, (Layer> Add Layer Mask), click on the mask in the Layers Palette & Edit> Fill with black, & paint in the image, not the mask, with a white brush to just put the change where you want it.

Masks - everything
For those needing help making selections in Photoshop

Fastfwd13 wrote in post #9679699
Is it a case of more $$$ = better noise reduction or is one of them better for available light performance photos? I have always been very satisfied with DPP until now but my pics were always in great light with ISO100-200

Also are they considerably better than DPP/elements? It seems to me that a company like Canon should be able to just buy one of those for pocket change and integrate it into DPP.

They are certainly more robust and capable than the simplistic NR in DPP. Are you only using DPP or do you use Photoshop/Lightroom?

The ideal thing would be to get faster glass and/or body with better ISO noise handling.

I don't usually shoot concerts but I shot one for a friend a week ago.
Shot with the 70-200 f2.8, so the same speed, but used the MKIV, which I assume has several stops over the 50D. Very, very crappy light. I ran them through my usual workflow which includes a 3-pass NR routine in Photoshop CS4.

f2.8, ISO12800, 1/125

Lots of good info already, so I don't need to say much. Just remember that it's concert photography! Most people understand the fact there will be noise in the shot (especially in the darker areas!). All you can do is try to get the correct exposure on the important areas of the shot (i.e. the people) so the noise isn't terrible in said areas.

I've done a lot of concert shooting, and sometimes it's all you can do to get the action to stop. However, you can also sometimes make that work for you if you can take a creative approach to it.

Fastfwd13 wrote in post #9679603
About shutter speed: Anyone know of a sure way to find which is the right minimum shutter speed for the conditions? I was using 1/125 but during pre-show testing I was getting pics that looked OK even to speed of something like 1/30 but I don't trust the LCD review even when zoomed to full so I added a bit of padding.

I know about the rule of focal length but taking average of 200mm(70-200mm * 1.6) on a crop I would have to use 1/200 or more and this would have been way too fast. Even 1/125 was constantly underexposed.

I would suggest using a mono/tripod and going to a slower shutter speed to get a better exposure. I used the 17-55 IS (check my zenfolio) on my 30D w/ ISO1600 and slower shutter speeds were not a problem. IMO a little motion blur can be a cool effect with concert shooting.

A faster lens such as 85mm f/1.8 or any kind of prime lens will work better then a zoom (unless it has IS).