Zeckson Chow
Senior Member
dDarkroom said:
Never mind ah. At least you can help by briefly say out the things I have to watch out for and I shall try it here lor.
How to save a noisy pic?
- Thread starter lastboltnut
- Start date
- Status
Never mind ah. At least you can help by briefly say out the things I have to watch out for and I shall try it here lor.
Zeckson Chow
Senior Member
yanyewkay said:
Oh... Does it help? You mean only when I post up my noisy picture then you are able to help? If I don't post any, there is no way that anybody can tell me how to reduce the level of noise in images resulted from shooting in high ISOs?
Mr Zeckson...
why you so long winded? and at times confusing.
i tot the thread started was asking the same thing?
"how to save a noisy pic?"
I was shocked when you mentioned that the noise at iso 200 is still not cool to you.
So you shot at higher iso right? or did you shoot at iso200?
u mentioned, indoors at f6.3, 200mm, high iso...mayb your shutter could be ard 1/60-1/90?
or did you really shoot at iso200? hmmm...did you get reasonable sharp picts?
in fact, what espn mentioned is also correct.
i think, i should start reading the thread again...i'm still a little confuse
why you so long winded? and at times confusing.
i tot the thread started was asking the same thing?
"how to save a noisy pic?"
I was shocked when you mentioned that the noise at iso 200 is still not cool to you.
So you shot at higher iso right? or did you shoot at iso200?
u mentioned, indoors at f6.3, 200mm, high iso...mayb your shutter could be ard 1/60-1/90?
or did you really shoot at iso200? hmmm...did you get reasonable sharp picts?
in fact, what espn mentioned is also correct.
i think, i should start reading the thread again...i'm still a little confuse
khairi said:Mr Zeckson...
why you so long winded? and at times confusing.
i tot the thread started was asking the same thing?
"how to save a noisy pic?"
I was shocked when you mentioned that the noise at iso 200 is still not cool to you.
So you shot at higher iso right? or did you shoot at iso200?
u mentioned, indoors at f6.3, 200mm, high iso...mayb your shutter could be ard 1/60-1/90?
or did you really shoot at iso200? hmmm...did you get reasonable sharp picts?
in fact, what espn mentioned is also correct.
i think, i should start reading the thread again...i'm still a little confuse
his question in bits and pieces... but from what i read, he says iso 200 is clean. but in certain situations where his flash fails and he has no f/2.8 lens available, he is forced to shoot at high iso where noise is more pronounced. maybe zc should restate what he is trying to say so all can understand better.
ISO200 by my standards isn't high. you were the one that said ISO200 resulted in noisy pics and you didn't want to run the images through a noise reduction software. I'm really interested to see how noisy an ISO200 picture can get, thus my request for you to post the ISO200 "noisy" picture.
It is a known fact that shooting at high ISO will result in noisy pictures, if you understood how the sensors work. However, if you insist in noise free images yet shooting at high ISOs you might have to resort to a better sensor cooling techniques such as phase change or peltier cooling attached to the sensor directly. This technique has been used successfully in astroimaging http://www.astrocam.org/cooling.htm more extermist have attached plates running liquid nitrogen to cool the sensor below zero.
A cheaper and more viable alternative is to change to a CMOS based DSLR body.
Have I answered your question?
It is a known fact that shooting at high ISO will result in noisy pictures, if you understood how the sensors work. However, if you insist in noise free images yet shooting at high ISOs you might have to resort to a better sensor cooling techniques such as phase change or peltier cooling attached to the sensor directly. This technique has been used successfully in astroimaging http://www.astrocam.org/cooling.htm more extermist have attached plates running liquid nitrogen to cool the sensor below zero.
A cheaper and more viable alternative is to change to a CMOS based DSLR body.
Have I answered your question?
lastboltnut
Senior Member
*sgih* going in circle.....:kok: :hammer: :flame: :blah: :hung:
Zeckson Chow
Senior Member
I am wondering, is what I said really unclear? Was it very long winded? In the first place, I never say that I don't find shooting in ISO200 is not cool enough. I said shooting in ISO200 produces almost no noise. I also said sometimes shooting in ISO200 is not adequate. Why inadequate? Because the scenario I gave in exhibition halls. Why? Because the result is always dark pictures. So what to do? Common sense from experience shooters will agree increasing the ISO sensitivity will help, as one of the ways.
Having high ISOs will definitely result in noisy pictures, this is also something that almost every photographer will know. So the threadstarter asked if there are ways to reduce the noise. Obviously, some pictures have already been shot with high ISOs and resulted in noisy pictures, that's why he asked. I added my own experience in this attention, which in still inline with the threadstarter's intention.
Then instead of getting some good answers or alternatives, I have people saying I am long winded, unclear, need to be like a crystal, post pictures, etc. which does not even answer any close to the intended question at all. If there are no possible ways, I can understand because I have been asking around too. Perhaps it might be due to the people I ask or the limited number of quality people I asked, I cannot get a good answer to this question. So I thought I could try and see if anybody in ClubSNAP knows any how-to or alternative workaround. Ha...
If one does not have any good answer to this question or is not prepared with any answer at all, one try not to contribute unnecessarily to the thread and stop wasting time and effort. This is what I abide by and not asking people to explain this and that or post pictures whereby even all these are done and still cannot get any answers. Thanks.
Edit:
v1.1 - Words in green to be removed
Having high ISOs will definitely result in noisy pictures, this is also something that almost every photographer will know. So the threadstarter asked if there are ways to reduce the noise. Obviously, some pictures have already been shot with high ISOs and resulted in noisy pictures, that's why he asked. I added my own experience in this attention, which in still inline with the threadstarter's intention.
Then instead of getting some good answers or alternatives, I have people saying I am long winded, unclear, need to be like a crystal, post pictures, etc. which does not even answer any close to the intended question at all. If there are no possible ways, I can understand because I have been asking around too. Perhaps it might be due to the people I ask or the limited number of quality people I asked, I cannot get a good answer to this question. So I thought I could try and see if anybody in ClubSNAP knows any how-to or alternative workaround. Ha...
If one does not have any good answer to this question or is not prepared with any answer at all, one try not to contribute unnecessarily to the thread and stop wasting time and effort. This is what I abide by and not asking people to explain this and that or post pictures whereby even all these are done and still cannot get any answers. Thanks.
Edit:
v1.1 - Words in green to be removed
Zeckson Chow
Senior Member
Oh yes, I forgot to add...
Thanks YYK for giving the idea of to a CMOS based DSLR body. Not too sure how much it will cost as I am not the extremist he refered on his post. I can live with the noise, just that when there is a question like this, I would love to find out too. It's good to have noise-free images though. Please read carefully, people, I said it is good to have, not must have. Please don't come and tell me I am not clear again ah.
To contribute my part to the question, I have heard some experienced photographers mentioned of an alternative but it might cost a little money. They said, invest on a good lens that offers vibration reduction. This could be an alternative to getting noise reduction software which also smoothen out a lot of details. The reason behind this thought being known that high ISOs will definitely result in noisy pictures and a non-cost way to reduce the noise is to shoot in low ISOs. Having said that, shooting in low ISOs in exhibition halls will result in underexposed images if you are standing from far zooming at 200mm even at F2.8. By using a good lens offering good vibration reduction, you can shoot at low ISOs and long shutter speeds to get a good exposure and still maintain sharp images. One may argue that why need VR? Get a cheaper means by mounting it on tripod or monopod. The question here is, is it practical to carry your tripod in a people-packed exhibition? Does the monopod work well ensuring you blur-free images on a non VR lens with long exposures?
Always consider the money factor when it comes to recommendations because you are going to spend the money to get the needed stuff if you don't already have one. You can try borrowing the stuff too if you can find. If you are very rich, yes, you can get anything you want as long as you are happy with it. But hey, we are not rich so we have to do something practical and of course, cost effective to get the best results our current limitation can offer.
Do I make any sense? Am I unclear?
Thanks YYK for giving the idea of to a CMOS based DSLR body. Not too sure how much it will cost as I am not the extremist he refered on his post. I can live with the noise, just that when there is a question like this, I would love to find out too. It's good to have noise-free images though. Please read carefully, people, I said it is good to have, not must have. Please don't come and tell me I am not clear again ah.
To contribute my part to the question, I have heard some experienced photographers mentioned of an alternative but it might cost a little money. They said, invest on a good lens that offers vibration reduction. This could be an alternative to getting noise reduction software which also smoothen out a lot of details. The reason behind this thought being known that high ISOs will definitely result in noisy pictures and a non-cost way to reduce the noise is to shoot in low ISOs. Having said that, shooting in low ISOs in exhibition halls will result in underexposed images if you are standing from far zooming at 200mm even at F2.8. By using a good lens offering good vibration reduction, you can shoot at low ISOs and long shutter speeds to get a good exposure and still maintain sharp images. One may argue that why need VR? Get a cheaper means by mounting it on tripod or monopod. The question here is, is it practical to carry your tripod in a people-packed exhibition? Does the monopod work well ensuring you blur-free images on a non VR lens with long exposures?
Always consider the money factor when it comes to recommendations because you are going to spend the money to get the needed stuff if you don't already have one. You can try borrowing the stuff too if you can find. If you are very rich, yes, you can get anything you want as long as you are happy with it. But hey, we are not rich so we have to do something practical and of course, cost effective to get the best results our current limitation can offer.
Do I make any sense? Am I unclear?
lastboltnut
Senior Member
Ok, thanks. bbb till :hung: :bsmilie: 
ortega said:
Zeckson Chow
Senior Member
lastboltnut said:Ok, thanks. bbb till :hung: :bsmilie:
If not, live with it lor. It's good to have noise-free images and noise is not something we cannot live with for. Good photographers know how to enjoy the pictures as a whole and not look at small nitpicks of it.
Edit:
v1.1 - Amended some words to make things more clear.
To be honest, I think being unclear is an understatement. ZC, your post are totally confusing. I mean, what is it exactly that you are trying to ask in the first place?
Why wouldn't posting a picture help? If you could just post a picture, maybe some of us will
be able to identify whether if noise is really a problem in your stated scenario. Or maybe it's just normal.
If you understand the limits of ISO settings, equipment and noise reduction software already, then why are you asking about noise in the first place? OR are you asking for if there is other methods beside the ones already stated?
If so, why can't you just say so instead of going in a round-about way? Of course you have to crystal clear about what you are asking, or else how can anyone help you at all?
Please stop asking questions like it is for the sake of simply asking, it's kind of annoying. If you genuinely need help, I won't mind giving my 2 cents worth too, but at least let us know what exactly you need help with.
Why wouldn't posting a picture help? If you could just post a picture, maybe some of us will
be able to identify whether if noise is really a problem in your stated scenario. Or maybe it's just normal.
If you understand the limits of ISO settings, equipment and noise reduction software already, then why are you asking about noise in the first place? OR are you asking for if there is other methods beside the ones already stated?
If so, why can't you just say so instead of going in a round-about way? Of course you have to crystal clear about what you are asking, or else how can anyone help you at all?
Please stop asking questions like it is for the sake of simply asking, it's kind of annoying. If you genuinely need help, I won't mind giving my 2 cents worth too, but at least let us know what exactly you need help with.
lastboltnut
Senior Member
Yah, actually I kind of like certain pics with noise.....like this one.
Zeckson Chow said:If not, live with it lor. It's good to have noise-free images and noise is not something we cannot live with for. Good photographers know how to enjoy the pictures as a whole and not look at small nitpicks of it.
Edit:
v1.1 - Amended some words to make things more clear.
Zeckson Chow
Senior Member
Zeckson Chow said:
Prismatic, haven't I already asked this? You think I like to be long-winded? Some nice guy say I am unclear, some even say I need to esprain and showed me CCTV... Isn't this more annoying?
lastboltnut
Senior Member
Ok, ok, I think no point wasting negative energy here......lets hold our hands together and move on, be it you are with the opposition of not.....:bsmilie:
Case close, ok?
Please contribute ways to save noisy pic if you any which are not mentioned in front.
Thanks guys!
Case close, ok?
Please contribute ways to save noisy pic if you any which are not mentioned in front.
Thanks guys!
lastboltnut said:Ok, ok, I think no point wasting negative energy here......lets hold our hands together and move on, be it you are with the opposition of not.....:bsmilie:
Case close, ok?
Please contribute ways to save noisy pic if you any which are not mentioned in front.
Thanks guys!
how was the result of the PS method?
lastboltnut
Senior Member
Haven't try.....:embrass: :bsmilie:
madmacs said:
- Status
Similar threads
