ISO 800, no flash, concert shot

That's a nice shot. I'm not sure I don't like the first one better even thogh the second one is probably more accurate.
This pic was, as you might imagine, dreadfully noisy. Even Neat
Image couldn't begin to fix it.

So . . . in CS RAW, I increase shadows, lowered the contrast . . .
then gave it a gaussian blur to soften it, and darkened everyone
except the subject. Not exactly an accurate shot, but the end
result is pleasing.

http://www.pbase.com/image/24551602/medium
 
Bruce,

Could you load the file straight from the camera so we could see what you were working with. I would like to see how much noise there was. Great job!
Steve Sheppard
This pic was, as you might imagine, dreadfully noisy. Even Neat
Image couldn't begin to fix it.

So . . . in CS RAW, I increase shadows, lowered the contrast . . .
then gave it a gaussian blur to soften it, and darkened everyone
except the subject. Not exactly an accurate shot, but the end
result is pleasing.

http://www.pbase.com/image/24551602/medium
 
This is what the RAW file looked like when I first pulled it up.

http://www.pbase.com/image/24561046/medium

PS CS RAW plugin can kill some of the noise, but by no means all of it. Neat Image can do better, but I've still got a evaluation copy and don't know that much about it (just started taking pictures and working with PS a few weeks ago . . . talk about a learning curve, sheesh). I'm sure someone with more Neat Image experience can do a great job with it.

I was actually close enough at the concert that I could have used a flash to some effect, but I would have annoyed everyone for sure. The hall was quite dark, but I couldn't use too slow of a shutter speed for obvious reasons. If I had known what I was trying to do, I probably wouldn't have bothered to bring the camera!

Anyway, most of the fixing I did was in the photoshop RAW plugin. Though I don't know too much about photography (from what I hear on this forum) and from my limited experience, RAW is the best. The files are big, but even when I have the drive set to continuous, I can put 5 of them in the buffer, vs. 3 JPEGS.
This pic was, as you might imagine, dreadfully noisy. Even Neat
Image couldn't begin to fix it.

So . . . in CS RAW, I increase shadows, lowered the contrast . . .
then gave it a gaussian blur to soften it, and darkened everyone
except the subject. Not exactly an accurate shot, but the end
result is pleasing.

http://www.pbase.com/image/24551602/medium
 
Sheesh, that's a big diff. Sorry about the confusion
This pic was, as you might imagine, dreadfully noisy. Even Neat
Image couldn't begin to fix it.

So . . . in CS RAW, I increase shadows, lowered the contrast . . .
then gave it a gaussian blur to soften it, and darkened everyone
except the subject. Not exactly an accurate shot, but the end
result is pleasing.

http://www.pbase.com/image/24551602/medium
 
I played with Noise Ninja a bit, letting it build a profile for the image since the default A1 ISO 400 profile seemed ineffective. I boosted up the filtering which gave it a slight plastic look. I brushed some detail back into the hair. Unfortunately, the blue channel remains noisy...

Filtered:



Original:

 
I played with Noise Ninja a bit, letting it build a profile for the
image since the default A1 ISO 400 profile seemed ineffective. I
boosted up the filtering which gave it a slight plastic look. I
brushed some detail back into the hair. Unfortunately, the blue
channel remains noisy...

Filtered:



Original:

What a fantastic reslut!!! Well done...
Simon(UK)
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top