I use Photoshop CS3 Camera RAW and it is possible to recover details from 1-2 stops or more using the exposure slider. Colour may suffer from extreme recovery though, but 2 stops recovery is still decent enough for certain images. Not sure about other software as they may perform differently.
WTA: Noise reduction tricks for Sony Alpha 900
- Thread starter acoustica
- Start date
- Status
I use Photoshop CS3 Camera RAW and it is possible to recover details from 1-2 stops or more using the exposure slider. Colour may suffer from extreme recovery though, but 2 stops recovery is still decent enough for certain images. Not sure about other software as they may perform differently.
The best cure is to have the image printed and evaluate from there.
Truth is, if you shoot it right without underexposing the result is stunning.
The only time when Noise become a problem is when you sit in-front of you screen and zoom in to 100% to see the noise.
Print the image on lustre paper, you will soon realise that the issue with noise disappear or not something you would worry about.
Most of the images on my website are done at ISO 800 or more (except those outdoor shots). Some I added a lot of grain during PP stage.
Shoot it right and stop worry about noise. We should spend more time on the creative process not the boring technical stuff that is not relevant in practical way.
Hope it helps.
Hart
Truth is, if you shoot it right without underexposing the result is stunning.
The only time when Noise become a problem is when you sit in-front of you screen and zoom in to 100% to see the noise.
Print the image on lustre paper, you will soon realise that the issue with noise disappear or not something you would worry about.
Most of the images on my website are done at ISO 800 or more (except those outdoor shots). Some I added a lot of grain during PP stage.
Shoot it right and stop worry about noise. We should spend more time on the creative process not the boring technical stuff that is not relevant in practical way.
Hope it helps.
Hart
Dearchivism
New Member
if i may give my humble opinion about noise reduction for sony alpha 900 (since i am still a beginner and need to learn more about photography):
i used to shot using iso 200-400 (with alpha 900), and for doing portrait shot i also used to bring sony flash (HVL 58 AM & HVL 20 AM), and the result is clear & good + i am satisfied with it (for my self, i find all results are low amount of noise). i have to say that sony alpha 900 (ofcourse with its own plus-minus aspects) is a great camera, that make me possible to learn + explore many things in photography with very user friendly way/ technology. i am almost 99% satisfied with the image quality result. the thing that i've learned is that i have to make the good setting for camera (iso, exposure, wb, flash, creative style, etc) in order to get the better result. so i have to pay more attention to set the camera. The mood and creativity of photo is also more important for me rather than thinking to much about noise at the photo itself. have a nice & happy shooting time for you all, cheer ;p
i used to shot using iso 200-400 (with alpha 900), and for doing portrait shot i also used to bring sony flash (HVL 58 AM & HVL 20 AM), and the result is clear & good + i am satisfied with it (for my self, i find all results are low amount of noise). i have to say that sony alpha 900 (ofcourse with its own plus-minus aspects) is a great camera, that make me possible to learn + explore many things in photography with very user friendly way/ technology. i am almost 99% satisfied with the image quality result. the thing that i've learned is that i have to make the good setting for camera (iso, exposure, wb, flash, creative style, etc) in order to get the better result. so i have to pay more attention to set the camera. The mood and creativity of photo is also more important for me rather than thinking to much about noise at the photo itself. have a nice & happy shooting time for you all, cheer ;p
acoustica
New Member
Ever shoot a concert which forbid flash usage, lately? you will have to use higher ISO then...can you share your tricks how to eliminate the noise then?
Yes, some people are happy with their A900, we know that..generally for someone to decide to buy a particular camera, they(majority) would already know the strengths and weaknesses of it and the camera must have impressed before the buyer actually bought it right..?
A problem faced by most cameras is the higher noise levels generated in low-light NON-STILL situations whereby flash is not allowed. If you do not experience such situations good for you, but this is what this thread is all about isnt it?
Each camera has its own limitations..and the thing about limits is...that's the maximum you can go...now point taken that if u over-exposed a 2-3 steps you have less noise fine...but in cases whereby the faster shutter speed is required, that will not really be an option....
Having reached the limit in-camera, you just have to resort to using noise reduction softwares available commercially if the noise is really an issue for that situation...else if it bothers so much, either get a really huge glass (200mm f/1.8?) or change your system...i do not believe that there is any other way to work around this.....
A problem faced by most cameras is the higher noise levels generated in low-light NON-STILL situations whereby flash is not allowed. If you do not experience such situations good for you, but this is what this thread is all about isnt it?
Each camera has its own limitations..and the thing about limits is...that's the maximum you can go...now point taken that if u over-exposed a 2-3 steps you have less noise fine...but in cases whereby the faster shutter speed is required, that will not really be an option....
Having reached the limit in-camera, you just have to resort to using noise reduction softwares available commercially if the noise is really an issue for that situation...else if it bothers so much, either get a really huge glass (200mm f/1.8?) or change your system...i do not believe that there is any other way to work around this.....
I refuse to shoot RAW as I find the work flow pretty time-consuming... so I shoot JPEG only... on an A900... I find that the noise is an issue if the shot is underexposed... the thing is that with Alphas and also KM, the meter seems tuned to underexposed... I noticed that even with JPEG, you can safely push the exposure by 1 stop and then when you look at the JPEG on your screen, there is some highlight clipping but when you print, it's none too obvious... many of my badly exposed shots don't suffer from noise issues when printed... you can hardly see the noise if you print it underexposed... it's only when you adjust curves to brighten it and sharpen the image that noise comes in... and the other issue with underexposure is that the image becomes very soft, and so it's not noise you're seeing but a degradation of the image due to underexposure...
So now I overexpose by 1 stop... heck care the highlights since they aren't always most important... and you get decent shots... I have shot mainly at ISO800 and underexposed like crazy but the noise was pretty acceptable... I'll post an image here..., cropped cos I don't want to put my subjects' faces online...
This is an uncorrected 100% crop, X.Fine JPEG, ISO400... the shot is at least 2 stops underexposed but there is no noise.
This is the corrected 100% crop, X.Fine JEPG (it's saved as a JPEG, so some compression artifacts)... you see some noise at the throat area where it's still a bit under and the shoulder where it's properly exposed, there is no noise... but there are sharpening artifacts... I overcooked it of course but these things don't really show up when you print small... like A4...
So now I overexpose by 1 stop... heck care the highlights since they aren't always most important... and you get decent shots... I have shot mainly at ISO800 and underexposed like crazy but the noise was pretty acceptable... I'll post an image here..., cropped cos I don't want to put my subjects' faces online...
This is an uncorrected 100% crop, X.Fine JPEG, ISO400... the shot is at least 2 stops underexposed but there is no noise.
This is the corrected 100% crop, X.Fine JEPG (it's saved as a JPEG, so some compression artifacts)... you see some noise at the throat area where it's still a bit under and the shoulder where it's properly exposed, there is no noise... but there are sharpening artifacts... I overcooked it of course but these things don't really show up when you print small... like A4...
Last edited:
As an add-on... these images are just simply post-processed for print... no sophisticated methods... I don't really know my PS so it's pretty crude... but the images turn out ok to me... I of course don't get to see every single wee detail in the shot but then again, I don't need to...
Anyway it would be good for someone to explain why the shot is underexposed when I'm shooting bounced flash at a ceiling about 6 feet high only with a F58 and the subject is less than 2m away... I always have trouble exposing this type of shots properly... even with direct flash the image is pretty underexposed... using centre-weighted metering... A priority plus f/8 (Tammy 24-135mm).. the lighting is definitely dim... it's no model shoot... just some snaps of people I know, individual portraits... maybe I should have gone ISO800? Or use manual and overexposed?
Anyway it would be good for someone to explain why the shot is underexposed when I'm shooting bounced flash at a ceiling about 6 feet high only with a F58 and the subject is less than 2m away... I always have trouble exposing this type of shots properly... even with direct flash the image is pretty underexposed... using centre-weighted metering... A priority plus f/8 (Tammy 24-135mm).. the lighting is definitely dim... it's no model shoot... just some snaps of people I know, individual portraits... maybe I should have gone ISO800? Or use manual and overexposed?
Sony will catch up in noise reduction. I do not doubt that. If nikon can do it with sony sensors, then I do not see why sony themselves can't. Even then sony seems to excel in detail retention even if it is noisy. It was said that minolta designed their glass to emphasis bokeh rather than sharpness. Maybe sony can improve noise, but chose to improve detail retention instead. Noise can removed via additional processing, but detail is lost if not captured in the first place.
No brand excels in everything without compromises (cost vs implementation). Thats what makes them different and gives us choices. For the shortcomings, photographers will always find a way to get around it or find a solution to improve it, else live with it and exploit the positives of the system. I too am waiting for sony's noise performance to improve. With the Exmor-R, things are looking up within the next year or so. Or earlier.
No brand excels in everything without compromises (cost vs implementation). Thats what makes them different and gives us choices. For the shortcomings, photographers will always find a way to get around it or find a solution to improve it, else live with it and exploit the positives of the system. I too am waiting for sony's noise performance to improve. With the Exmor-R, things are looking up within the next year or so. Or earlier.
Dearchivism
New Member
Ever shoot a concert which forbid flash usage, lately? you will have to use higher ISO then...can you share your tricks how to eliminate the noise then?
to acoustica :
(just want tho share my premature experience as a beginnner + a leaner in photography)
honestly i seldom shot the concert / night performance because until now it isn't being my interest yet, but someday i might be want to shot it +i will ask you all & all friends in this forum too for the advice + input ;p
when i get the condition where i have to increase the iso (maximum iso in low light i only set at 400 for doing portrait / shoting people) say because of less light / need more speed for shutter, i prefer to set all setting (brighness, contrast, saturation, sharpness, including WB) to less value/ level (like -2 or -3) so i can get more clear image quality (at least until now it still works and okay for me). but as what the word of photography means "drawing with light", i think (for myself) i need to get / to set the good light for making the better result, that why i usually bring the flash along with me. poor light makes me hard to get a nice / a satisfied result, so if it is possible to use flash, i prefer to use it. but if it is not allowed to use flash, (for myself) i try to shot with the lucky hope, might be even a bit blur but it can still be okay, or the appperance of noise is still accaptable. my concern is that i prefer to get / set the good light rather than force to shot with poor light (if the condition still gives me a chance for chosing). here i also want to share a photo that i had to use high iso (400) because i needed to get the higher shutter speed (and i had to do some PP for this photos because i failed to get / set the good light), but i still like the photo. failing (not get the good result) in shotting also give me a lesson and experience to explore and try with batter way for the next time.
have a nice day + happy shoting for all of you ;p
Camera: Sony DSLR-A900
Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/1000)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 90 mm
ISO Speed: 400
Exposure Bias: +1 EV
Flash: On, Fired
Metering Mode: Center-weighted average
Light Source: Daylight
Exposure Program: Manual
Custom Rendered: Normal
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Manual
Focal Length In35mm Format: 90 mm
Scene Capture Type: Standard
Contrast: Low
Saturation: Low
Sharpness: Soft
Creator Tool: Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Her Silence 01
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27143060@N08/3822660820/sizes/l/
to acoustica :
(just want tho share my premature experience as a beginnner + a leaner in photography)
honestly i seldom shot the concert / night performance because until now it isn't being my interest yet, but someday i might be want to shot it +i will ask you all & all friends in this forum too for the advice + input ;p
when i get the condition where i have to increase the iso (maximum iso in low light i only set at 400 for doing portrait / shoting people) say because of less light / need more speed for shutter, i prefer to set all setting (brighness, contrast, saturation, sharpness, including WB) to less value/ level (like -2 or -3) so i can get more clear image quality (at least until now it still works and okay for me). but as what the word of photography means "drawing with light", i think (for myself) i need to get / to set the good light for making the better result, that why i usually bring the flash along with me. poor light makes me hard to get a nice / a satisfied result, so if it is possible to use flash, i prefer to use it. but if it is not allowed to use flash, (for myself) i try to shot with the lucky hope, might be even a bit blur but it can still be okay, or the appperance of noise is still accaptable. my concern is that i prefer to get / set the good light rather than force to shot with poor light (if the condition still gives me a chance for chosing). here i also want to share a photo that i had to use high iso (400) because i needed to get the higher shutter speed (and i had to do some PP for this photos because i failed to get / set the good light), but i still like the photo. failing (not get the good result) in shotting also give me a lesson and experience to explore and try with batter way for the next time.
have a nice day + happy shoting for all of you ;p
Camera: Sony DSLR-A900
Exposure: 0.001 sec (1/1000)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 90 mm
ISO Speed: 400
Exposure Bias: +1 EV
Flash: On, Fired
Metering Mode: Center-weighted average
Light Source: Daylight
Exposure Program: Manual
Custom Rendered: Normal
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Manual
Focal Length In35mm Format: 90 mm
Scene Capture Type: Standard
Contrast: Low
Saturation: Low
Sharpness: Soft
Creator Tool: Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
Her Silence 01
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27143060@N08/3822660820/sizes/l/
Galdor
Senior Member
I totally shared your view bro. :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
Dearchivism
New Member
this was a music performance by Homogenic (Indonesia) at Esplanade Outdoor Theater, Bay Battle 2009 (night time, about 9 PM on Saturday 28 August 2009). i just wondered if i use iso 400 and dropped all the value / level setting (contrast, brightness, sharpness, saturation) how the result would be (without tripod + wihtout any falshes, only the stage lighting). i my self seldom take picture of any performance, but quite intersting and i also go a different experience and many good aspect for me to learn more. i am quite satisfied for the result (not so much noise appearence). some day i will tray for higher iso, wonder how quality of the result. have a nice and happy shotting time for all of you.
Camera: Sony DSLR-A900 + G Lens 70-200 mm f/2.8
Exposure: 0.077 sec (1/13)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 130 mm
ISO Speed: 400
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Off, Did not fire
Exposure Program: Manual
Date and Time (Original): 2009:08:28 21:17:49+08:00
Metering Mode: Center-weighted average
Light Source: Unknown
Color Space: sRGB
Custom Rendered: Normal
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Auto
Focal Length In35mm Format: 130 mm
Scene Capture Type: Standard
Contrast: Low (-2)
Saturation: Low (-2)
Sharpness: Soft (-2)
Brightness (-2)
Compression: JPEG (old-style)
Creator Tool: Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
#2 Homogenic On The Stage (Homogenic, from Indonesia, Bay Battle 2009, Esplanade Outdoor Theater, Singapore)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27143060@N08/3867116210/sizes/l/
Camera: Sony DSLR-A900 + G Lens 70-200 mm f/2.8
Exposure: 0.077 sec (1/13)
Aperture: f/2.8
Focal Length: 130 mm
ISO Speed: 400
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Off, Did not fire
Exposure Program: Manual
Date and Time (Original): 2009:08:28 21:17:49+08:00
Metering Mode: Center-weighted average
Light Source: Unknown
Color Space: sRGB
Custom Rendered: Normal
Exposure Mode: Manual
White Balance: Auto
Focal Length In35mm Format: 130 mm
Scene Capture Type: Standard
Contrast: Low (-2)
Saturation: Low (-2)
Sharpness: Soft (-2)
Brightness (-2)
Compression: JPEG (old-style)
Creator Tool: Adobe Photoshop CS2 Windows
#2 Homogenic On The Stage (Homogenic, from Indonesia, Bay Battle 2009, Esplanade Outdoor Theater, Singapore)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27143060@N08/3867116210/sizes/l/
frederickykfoo
Senior Member
Was flash use ?
looks light have flash.....:dunno:
I totally agree with Hart. It all boils down to print. If you get the exposure right...lately I have been doing - print straight off the camera print without touching up or do any PP.
rgds,
Sulhan
Last edited:
no flash used. just constant lighting frm modelling lamp coupled with the room's own lighting.
For Dearchivism's shot, the singer's lower forearm arm's skin tone is highly pixelated... it looks like a compression artifact? I notice that my shots tend to looks like that when the lighting is poor... is this underexposure or due to JPEG compression? I use to have this problem with my 7D... the exposure was always under and very hard to get rid of this kind of kinks in the skin tone at areas where light becomes dark... any advice?
Yes I think so too... but when you convert from RAW, you still get the banding... it's something to do with the way the data is recorded by the sensor... don't understand why... but it's quite common... when printed, it looks ok only when using original Epson inks and paper... once you use 3rd party paper (with the proper profiles), this banding gets accentuated till it looks unnatural... especially on gloss papers... it's less prominent on matte papers...
acoustica
New Member
When you shoot using ISO 400, you will not get trouble with the noise..you will be allowed to use ISO 400 or lower than 800 when you bring the tripod with you..the noise problem occurs when the tripod is not available for you to use...so this is actually the main question "How do we use our A900 handheld to do night shoots or concert shoots?"
this is my shot using ISO 400 with tripod :
I did not have guts to use higher ISO..
this is my shot using ISO 400 with tripod :
I did not have guts to use higher ISO..
acoustica
New Member
yes, it is true..but sometimes you will have to increase the ISO, once the camera says "BULB"...According to my humble opinion..
- Status
Similar threads
