phppage
journeyman
Reged: 07/04/2007
Posts: 85
Loc: West Yorkshire
|
|
I am quite new to photography and have tried to landscapes shots on a number of occasions, twice with quite restricted light. I have kept the aperture quite small on both occasions and ISO at 100 but have had to use exposure compensation on the raw image afterwards due to the shot been so dark. A lot of noise especially within clouds can be seen at 100% before I change the exposure level and worst afterwards. I find this really annoying. The pics look fine at a reduced size. I notice noise occurs quite a lot when I even touch pics in PS. When taking landscape shots should I switch to full manual perhaps and increase the shutter speed along with the aperture? Is F18 to small? Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5185
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
sounds like you need to revisit the basics of photography. why not post an example up of the original picture and someone will be along to help.
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
|
phppage
journeyman
Reged: 07/04/2007
Posts: 85
Loc: West Yorkshire
|
|
Many thanks Paul.
Here is a corner of a landscape pic as shot. Very blue and dark but the light was not that bad.
Here is the same cut but rendered a bit in PS.. Warmed it up a bit and added exposure.
f/18 - 1/50s - ISO 100 - 18-55@55mm
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5185
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
Can you post a link to the whole image, un-edited except resizing to a sensible size?
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
|
phppage
journeyman
Reged: 07/04/2007
Posts: 85
Loc: West Yorkshire
|
|
Here it is link
Reduced to 30%
Cheers
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5185
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
Any filtration applied, if not there is a problem with your colour balance. it is so far out that any correction is going to cause problems with noise, and there is no way that blue colour cast is natural. it looks as though it was shot whilst the white balance was set to tungstn.
If you want email the raw file to
- Email Removed. If you want to exchange email addresses please do so via the PM system - and I will take a look.
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
Edited by Fen (30/03/2008 23:07)
|
Adesw
The phantom flasher
Reged: 07/02/2008
Posts: 666
|
|
Also remember that its better to slightly overexpose then underexpose when it comes to noise.
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3387
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
I agree with Burgy that there seems to be something very odd going on.
Why not set the WB to auto, shoot RAW and see what happens.
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
phppage
journeyman
Reged: 07/04/2007
Posts: 85
Loc: West Yorkshire
|
|
Many thanks Paul. I have just emailed the file to you.
Quote:
I agree with Burgy that there seems to be something very odd going on.
Why not set the WB to auto, shoot RAW and see what happens.
Cheers for the pointers. I was shooting in RAW with WB set to auto. I have had this problem in the past but on this occasion I did have polarising lens on if that would cause it. I just finished taking some pictures through water and did not remove it. Should this make a big difference?
|
alanS
Dr Dust
Reged: 30/09/2005
Posts: 3387
Loc: Up North, England.
|
|
A pol filter shouldn't do this. Sorry but I don't understand what you mean about water...
Do your shots look like this in your RAW software before you make any changes? If so there will probably be an option to discard the camera settings.
--------------------
Alan's defence lawyer claimed that "Booze played no part in his typo's."
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5185
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
For some reason on the raw file the colour temp is set at 2150K, which explains the blue cast, changing the white balance to auto, improves the colour balance (it lifted it to 5700, which implies that there was a slightly blue balance). The histogram suggests that it is probably very slightly under exposed, highlight protection bias of the metering may account for that. I will post a couple of images in a minute.
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5185
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
Ok
WB corrected, a little USM
I don't think that the noise is excessive, it is only really noticeable at 100% which is pixel peeping and to be honest the highlights are not that heavily blown at regular print sizes it will be fine. The noise is only just visible in relativel constant areas of grey tone, which is caused by atmospheric haze.
I am prepared to be corrected by others, but something seems amiss, but I am not sure that the polariser wil cause it.
Wb corrected a little exposure boost (2/3 of a stop) USM
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
|
phppage
journeyman
Reged: 07/04/2007
Posts: 85
Loc: West Yorkshire
|
|
Quote:
Ok
WB corrected, a little USM
I don't think that the noise is excessive, it is only really noticeable at 100% which is pixel peeping and to be honest the highlights are not that heavily blown at regular print sizes it will be fine. The noise is only just visible in relativel constant areas of grey tone, which is caused by atmospheric haze.
I am prepared to be corrected by others, but something seems amiss, but I am not sure that the polariser wil cause it.
Wb corrected a little exposure boost (2/3 of a stop) USM
Thanks for looking at that. When you say a miss do you mean with the shot or the camera?
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5185
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
The white balance seems to be out, that could be caused be several factors, but it is unlikely to be the polarising filter. I would double check to see if if your white balance is correctly set.
I would also read up on using histograms as an exposure guide (not a major issue as it was within about 2/3rds of a stop of what I would have judged to right).
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
|
phppage
journeyman
Reged: 07/04/2007
Posts: 85
Loc: West Yorkshire
|
|
Quote:
The white balance seems to be out, that could be caused be several factors, but it is unlikely to be the polarising filter. I would double check to see if if your white balance is correctly set.
I would also read up on using histograms as an exposure guide (not a major issue as it was within about 2/3rds of a stop of what I would have judged to right).
Thanks for your help Paul. I will read up on histograms.
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5185
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
The white balance is this main issue.
I don't know the Rebel XT, does it take the white balance from the sensor or from an external White Balance sensor? (The original EOS1D, as did other early dSLRs, used an external sensor, which could be fooled by standing in the shade, shooting into the sunlight, also wearing a wide brimmed hat could cause similar affects)
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
|
PhilW
Blue Peter Badge Winner
Reged: 14/03/2007
Posts: 886
Loc: Near Wakefield, Yorkshire
|
|
I agree with everything Burgy has said. Could you walk us through your workflow* with this. The WB seems very close to the PS Tungsten setting of 2850 - I am wondering if you had knocked he WB setting to that and it is staying that way if you had WB set to "As Shot" in the raw conversion?
Also what camera is it - that would help identify if that noise level is typical of the model? And also how easy it is to change the WB.
*By workflow I mean something like:
1. Opened RAW file in Adobe Camera RAW
2. Set to auto WB
3. Adjusted exposure by +2/3
4. Opened converted file in PS
5. Aplied a slight S curve
6. USM at 4, 1.9, 85
7. Saved as JPG
--------------------
Phil Winterbourne
http://www.pbase.com/calis
Edited by PhilW (30/03/2008 23:36)
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5185
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
You are right I didn't detail what I did.
When opened in raw the default was "as shot" temp "2150" tint"-2" brightness "+50" and contrast "+33"
The RGB histogram was off the scale on the "B" channel
White balance settings gave Auto 5700, Cloudy (closer to the right value at 6500)
Then opened in CS 3, autolevels, USM (170%, 0.8 radius, threshold 4), (which is unusual for me (normal settings for my 1DmkIIn is 180% 1.7 pix, 0 levels)
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
|
Burgy
Grateful not to have one
Reged: 13/04/2001
Posts: 5185
Loc: This far, from beating 7 shade...
|
|
Quote:
USM at 4, 1.9, 85
are you sure they are sharening settings, I am running a large screen at 100% and they look like settings quoted at random, the sharening percentage and diameter or the effect are completely undone by the threshold settings.
--------------------
Cheers
Burgy BSRIPN, BSc, DSO and Bar (now open 24/7).
it's not what you've got, its who you do it to
|
PhilW
Blue Peter Badge Winner
Reged: 14/03/2007
Posts: 886
Loc: Near Wakefield, Yorkshire
|
|
Burgy - I meant the OP, But what you did makes me even more convinced it was the "as shot" WB that was out - either a custom WB left switched on (I've done thisback before I was confident with RAW) or an inadvertent selection of tungsten. Is there a clue in the EXIF - I just checked an old 300D raw file and it listed the WB setting.
Your edit looks pretty good to me, there is more noise than I'd get on my 5D, but not so much as to be an issue imo.
--------------------
Phil Winterbourne
http://www.pbase.com/calis
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
