Help! Wrong ISO

MISSY127614

Member
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
I have a raw file I shot at ISO 800 (sunny day) - they need a 8x10 and it's soooo noisy!!! What's the best process in Capture? Just levels or do you have other combos that have worked for you???? Is there a Capture/PS7 fix that might work better? I HAVE to make this reprint better!!!!

Thanks!! Missy
 
Missy,

Try downloading and trying Neat Image. I think they have a demo version. It is extremely powerful and is capable of reducing too much detail; but of course you could change the setting and reduce the effect to meet your needs. I haven't found anything which matches it's capability. Caution, it takes a long time to process an image, but very effective. Worth the wait!

Good luck.

Rich
I have a raw file I shot at ISO 800 (sunny day) - they need a 8x10
and it's soooo noisy!!! What's the best process in Capture? Just
levels or do you have other combos that have worked for you???? Is
there a Capture/PS7 fix that might work better? I HAVE to make
this reprint better!!!!

Thanks!! Missy
 
download the free home version of neatimage, it does a great job of cleaning noise.

http://www.neatimage.com/download.html

--
http://pbase.com/ottokalata
(equipment list is in my profile)
I have a raw file I shot at ISO 800 (sunny day) - they need a 8x10
and it's soooo noisy!!! What's the best process in Capture? Just
levels or do you have other combos that have worked for you???? Is
there a Capture/PS7 fix that might work better? I HAVE to make
this reprint better!!!!
 
do a google for it. It's what we use at work. It's taylored to counteract the distinct banding patterns of Nikon cameras. It's also a photoshop plug it and works pretty fast (as opposed to NeatImage which takes years).

It'll cost ya though.
--
Al
http://www.pbase.com/ib1yysguy
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
 
google gives me an endless amount of matches... any keyword to narrow it down?
do a google for it. It's what we use at work. It's taylored to
counteract the distinct banding patterns of Nikon cameras. It's
also a photoshop plug it and works pretty fast (as opposed to
NeatImage which takes years).

It'll cost ya though.
--
Al
http://www.pbase.com/ib1yysguy
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
 
Here's the link:
http://www.camerabits.com/BandAide.html

It looks tailored for the D1 series cameras. Not sure if it'll do a good job for D100 shots. I've never used it myself.

Personally, I'll put in another recommendation for Neat Image. I've used it before for high-ISO shots and it does a great job. You can use the free trial version, and buy/download the full version online if you like the results.
 
For reference, I did a test with several different products on an ISO 3200 image from my D1H. Here is the link:
http://www.walkaboutimagery.com/HighIso/3200/table1.htm

QM - Quantum Mechanics
PS -Various methods
Bib - Bibble with different settings
C3 - Capture 3
Neat - differetnt settings
do a google for it. It's what we use at work. It's taylored to
counteract the distinct banding patterns of Nikon cameras. It's
also a photoshop plug it and works pretty fast (as opposed to
NeatImage which takes years).

It'll cost ya though.
--
Al
http://www.pbase.com/ib1yysguy
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
 
This testing was very non-scientific, very subjective, and should be taken as nothing more than that. For anyone that wants it, I will be happy to supply a copy of the original if you wish to play around with a very noisy image.

It should also be noted that I am by no means a "noise reduction" expert. I did what seemed intuitive and natural, I am sure that I did not use any of these products to their fullest.
QM - Quantum Mechanics
PS -Various methods
Bib - Bibble with different settings
C3 - Capture 3
Neat - differetnt settings
do a google for it. It's what we use at work. It's taylored to
counteract the distinct banding patterns of Nikon cameras. It's
also a photoshop plug it and works pretty fast (as opposed to
NeatImage which takes years).

It'll cost ya though.
--
Al
http://www.pbase.com/ib1yysguy
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
 
Next time bring film camera with you LOL.
 
I don't know what your image was, and it would be best to know before embarking on a Photoshop process. But, for ISO 800 in daylight, the noise should be controllable, and you might be able to get away with the following procedures.

In capture, turn off all sharpening, assuming a NEF file. Minimize any effort to recover detail from shadows or to increase "exposure" by more than 1 stop. (Next time, remember that a good histogram that goes virtually all the way to the right, will capture the least amount of noise.) If the file is an original JPEG, go on to the next step in Photoshop.

In Photoshop, duplicate the image. Isolate on the duplicate each individual channel by turning off the eye symbol in the other channels. Find the noisiest channel, which is usually the blue channel, by inspecting the image at 100% or even 150%. Look for color speckles and black chunks. Both are potentially objectionable noise, unless, of course, the image was of a colorful speckled object with chunky black spots.

Now is the time to try an adjustment layer or two to recover any shadow detail that you simply must have. Try to avoid enhancing the noise. Stay away from Hue/Saturation, a notorious noise producer.

Now, let's tackle the noise directly. With the noisiest channel the only active channel, use Filter> Blur> Gaussian Blur to slightly blur that channel. Try 1 or 2 pixels, but experiment by toggling the preview on and off. When the noise chunks begin to become fairly indistinct, that's probably enough blurring. Don't blur it so much that the noise is "vaporized," That will probably cost you too much in detail. The blue channel may be heavy with important picture details that you want to soften, but not obliterate.

Now do a targeted sharpening that avoids sharpening the noisy areas. There are lots of ways to do this. For example, if there is a prominent face in the picture, and you want it to be sharp, do a selective sharpening via USM on a layer or withing a selection of eyes, brows, mouth, and some hair in the plane of the face. Don't sharpen the rest of the face or the rest of the picture, if possble. Try to paint with sharpening on only the important features. If there are other areas in the picture that must also be sharp, extend the sharpening to them, but avoid sharpening blurry areas and dark, noisy areas.

If the image is fairly sharp to begin with, you may be able to get away with sharpening only the red channel using USM with only the red channel showing (assuming that the red channel had the least amount of detail compared to the other channels. Usually the remaining detail in the red channel consists of edges that you will want to sharpen.

Once sharpened, the red channel should contribute some sharp edges to the final image, including eyes, and other facial features, or other similar types of edges on other types of subjects. Right after applying the USM, you can also try to use Edit> Fade Unsharp Mask, and set the blend mode to "luminosity." This blend mode will minimize the effect of the sharpening on the color noise. If you decide to sharpen the green channel, too, try to use the same settings as for the red channel to avoid strange interactions between the two sharpened channels.

You just might find that these techniques lead to less loss of detail than Neat Image or the other noise reducers. You should also be aware that Yves P. has had good results applying Neat Image in a layer of an image, and then adjusting the opacity of the layer to find the best mix of noise reduction and detail retention. I'm just not patient enough for this, and I can get pretty good results just using Photoshop. That technique also frequently crashes my ram-hungry computer. But remember, the final output is strictly a matter of what pleases your eye, not mine.

I used all of the above techniques in my recent image of naturalist Dr. Jane Goodall at a recent appearance in the S.F. Bay Area. This picture was taken in a very dark auditorium, and I was forced to use ISO 1600 and a slow shutter speed of 1/50 sec. to capture a full stop underexposed image. (I should have used ISO 3200!!!) Despite all the difficulties, the image luckily turned out very sharp, yet ethereal, almost as if I knew what I was doing. Notice that there is no "plasticky" look to the image, which is a tell-tale sign of use of a noise reduction algorithm.


I have a raw file I shot at ISO 800 (sunny day) - they need a 8x10
and it's soooo noisy!!! What's the best process in Capture? Just
levels or do you have other combos that have worked for you???? Is
there a Capture/PS7 fix that might work better? I HAVE to make
this reprint better!!!!

Thanks!! Missy
--
Bill Adams
http://www.pbase.com/bill_adams
 
I have a raw file I shot at ISO 800 (sunny day) - they need a 8x10
and it's soooo noisy!!! What's the best process in Capture? Just
levels or do you have other combos that have worked for you???? Is
there a Capture/PS7 fix that might work better? I HAVE to make
this reprint better!!!!

Thanks!! Missy
Missy: Go to the Olympus SLR forum and check out the NR action written for PS7. I forget who wrote it but a little research will take you to it. It is very, very good. I've used it for very large prints so your 8X10 will be ok.
 
Bill, one heck of a technique. I'm filing this one and will try it out on my ISO 3200 image for comparison.

Thanks for the great detail.

And, last but by no means least, that is one impressive piece of work on the image you have included.
In capture, turn off all sharpening, assuming a NEF file. Minimize
any effort to recover detail from shadows or to increase "exposure"
by more than 1 stop. (Next time, remember that a good histogram
that goes virtually all the way to the right, will capture the
least amount of noise.) If the file is an original JPEG, go on to
the next step in Photoshop.

In Photoshop, duplicate the image. Isolate on the duplicate each
individual channel by turning off the eye symbol in the other
channels. Find the noisiest channel, which is usually the blue
channel, by inspecting the image at 100% or even 150%. Look for
color speckles and black chunks. Both are potentially
objectionable noise, unless, of course, the image was of a colorful
speckled object with chunky black spots.

Now is the time to try an adjustment layer or two to recover any
shadow detail that you simply must have. Try to avoid enhancing
the noise. Stay away from Hue/Saturation, a notorious noise
producer.

Now, let's tackle the noise directly. With the noisiest channel
the only active channel, use Filter> Blur> Gaussian Blur to slightly
blur that channel. Try 1 or 2 pixels, but experiment by toggling
the preview on and off. When the noise chunks begin to become
fairly indistinct, that's probably enough blurring. Don't blur it
so much that the noise is "vaporized," That will probably cost you
too much in detail. The blue channel may be heavy with important
picture details that you want to soften, but not obliterate.

Now do a targeted sharpening that avoids sharpening the noisy
areas. There are lots of ways to do this. For example, if there
is a prominent face in the picture, and you want it to be sharp, do
a selective sharpening via USM on a layer or withing a selection of
eyes, brows, mouth, and some hair in the plane of the face. Don't
sharpen the rest of the face or the rest of the picture, if
possble. Try to paint with sharpening on only the important
features. If there are other areas in the picture that must also
be sharp, extend the sharpening to them, but avoid sharpening
blurry areas and dark, noisy areas.

If the image is fairly sharp to begin with, you may be able to get
away with sharpening only the red channel using USM with only the
red channel showing (assuming that the red channel had the least
amount of detail compared to the other channels. Usually the
remaining detail in the red channel consists of edges that you will
want to sharpen.

Once sharpened, the red channel should contribute some sharp edges
to the final image, including eyes, and other facial features, or
other similar types of edges on other types of subjects. Right
after applying the USM, you can also try to use Edit> Fade Unsharp
Mask, and set the blend mode to "luminosity." This blend mode will
minimize the effect of the sharpening on the color noise. If you
decide to sharpen the green channel, too, try to use the same
settings as for the red channel to avoid strange interactions
between the two sharpened channels.

You just might find that these techniques lead to less loss of
detail than Neat Image or the other noise reducers. You should
also be aware that Yves P. has had good results applying Neat Image
in a layer of an image, and then adjusting the opacity of the layer
to find the best mix of noise reduction and detail retention. I'm
just not patient enough for this, and I can get pretty good results
just using Photoshop. That technique also frequently crashes my
ram-hungry computer. But remember, the final output is strictly a
matter of what pleases your eye, not mine.

I used all of the above techniques in my recent image of naturalist
Dr. Jane Goodall at a recent appearance in the S.F. Bay Area. This
picture was taken in a very dark auditorium, and I was forced to
use ISO 1600 and a slow shutter speed of 1/50 sec. to capture a
full stop underexposed image. (I should have used ISO 3200!!!)
Despite all the difficulties, the image luckily turned out very
sharp, yet ethereal, almost as if I knew what I was doing. Notice
that there is no "plasticky" look to the image, which is a
tell-tale sign of use of a noise reduction algorithm.
I have a raw file I shot at ISO 800 (sunny day) - they need a 8x10
and it's soooo noisy!!! What's the best process in Capture? Just
levels or do you have other combos that have worked for you???? Is
there a Capture/PS7 fix that might work better? I HAVE to make
this reprint better!!!!

Thanks!! Missy
--
Bill Adams
http://www.pbase.com/bill_adams
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
 
It should also be noted that I am by no means a "noise reduction"
expert. I did what seemed intuitive and natural, I am sure that I
did not use any of these products to their fullest.
QM - Quantum Mechanics
PS -Various methods
Bib - Bibble with different settings
C3 - Capture 3
Neat - differetnt settings
do a google for it. It's what we use at work. It's taylored to
counteract the distinct banding patterns of Nikon cameras. It's
also a photoshop plug it and works pretty fast (as opposed to
NeatImage which takes years).

It'll cost ya though.
--
Al
http://www.pbase.com/ib1yysguy
Set low goals and you'll never be disapointed.
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
Just out of curiosity, when you did the neat image noise reduction, did you use the photoshop plugin? I get those crazy artifacts when I use the plug-in, but not when I use the stand-alone program.

Dan L
 
No, I used a fairly old version of the stand-alone product. I didn't even know, until now, that a plug-in existed. As has been pointed out to me by others, I really should try with a newer version of Neat Image. My reaon for doing the test in the first place was to see how much difference I could see between the different techniques. What I found was that they are all pretty darned good, just takes a while to figure out how to best utilize them.
This testing was very non-scientific, very subjective, and should
be taken as nothing more than that. For anyone that wants it, I
will be happy to supply a copy of the original if you wish to play
around with a very noisy image.
SNIP
Just out of curiosity, when you did the neat image noise reduction,
did you use the photoshop plugin? I get those crazy artifacts when
I use the plug-in, but not when I use the stand-alone program.

Dan L
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
 
Thanks, Bill.

I have admired your work and your various tests, so I am glad I can contribute in some way.

I am starting to reach the conclusion that the techniques that I am using on noisy images are not very different from the methods used by the noise reduction programs. The main difference is that I am able to target my cumulative editing and sharpening approaches to the specific needs and contours of the image, while the push button techniques generally operate globally and indiscriminately.
Bill, one heck of a technique. I'm filing this one and will try it
out on my ISO 3200 image for comparison.

Thanks for the great detail.

And, last but by no means least, that is one impressive piece of
work on the image you have included.
Bill Adams
http://www.pbase.com/bill_adams
 
I don't know which of us gets top billing :-). Thanks to you for your kind words as well. I just try to pass along what others pass to me, that Karma thing you know.

What is interesting to me is that this, noise reduction, is something that can be accomplished in many different ways, and it is tough to say which is "the best". As you so correctly point out, sometimes you just want to target one very specific area.

Thanks for a bit of education, much appreciated.
Thanks, Bill.

I have admired your work and your various tests, so I am glad I can
contribute in some way.
SNIP
--
Bill Dewey
http://www.deweydrive.com
 
The URL for the NR reduction mentioned previously is:

http://www.canonians.com/noise.htm

Zorpie
I have a raw file I shot at ISO 800 (sunny day) - they need a 8x10
and it's soooo noisy!!! What's the best process in Capture? Just
levels or do you have other combos that have worked for you???? Is
there a Capture/PS7 fix that might work better? I HAVE to make
this reprint better!!!!

Thanks!! Missy
Missy: Go to the Olympus SLR forum and check out the NR action
written for PS7. I forget who wrote it but a little research will
take you to it. It is very, very good. I've used it for very large
prints so your 8X10 will be ok.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top