Using high ISO - Workflow and tips please

Lardyc7

Lardyc7

Messages
351
Name
Lee Parker
Edit My Images
Yes
So I'll be at Hyde tonight with my 1DmkIV and shooting at ISO12,500 from the off to try and keep shutter speeds up to 1/800-1/1000th depending on where on the pitch the action is. Now obviously there'll be a lot of noise, any pointers as to what people use to lessen it?

I use LR and have the Topaz progs which I use but wondered if anyone had any other tips or progs they use? I leave sharpening as the last thing I do.

ps please don't suggest 1Dx or Nikon......:)
 
I personally wouldn't shoot at that ISO. Nothing meaningful to be gained, but if you must, noise reduction in camera Raw is good, but whichever you choose, you're going to be left with a soft image that can't be sharpened. Faster lens is the ticket.
 
Craig20264 said:
Faster lens is the ticket.
Click to expand...
+1
Lardyc7 said:
wondered if anyone had any other tips or progs they use?
Click to expand...
I could recommend you try the Capture One 9 free 30 day
trial. I've been using and teaching it for years now and there
is, yet, no match in my book.

I have NEVER used sharpening…not even as the last step!
 
Trouble is, there aren't many long focal length lenses faster than f/2.8 commercially available.

I usually use lightroom, and consider myself fortunate that I'm not often shooting sports under floodlights.
 
Craig20264 said:
I personally wouldn't shoot at that ISO. Nothing meaningful to be gained, but if you must, noise reduction in camera Raw is good, but whichever you choose, you're going to be left with a soft image that can't be sharpened. Faster lens is the ticket.
Click to expand...
Kodiak Qc said:
+1

I could recommend you try the Capture One 9 free 30 day
trial. I've been using and teaching it for years now and there
is, yet, no match in my book.

I have NEVER used sharpening…not even as the last step!
Click to expand...

Guys, next time try taking a note of which forum you are in and what the subject area is.

As for never using sharpening - Hmmmmmmmm.
 
Lardyc7 said:
So I'll be at Hyde tonight with my 1DmkIV and shooting at ISO12,500 from the off to try and keep shutter speeds up to 1/800-1/1000th depending on where on the pitch the action is. Now obviously there'll be a lot of noise, any pointers as to what people use to lessen it?

I use LR and have the Topaz progs which I use but wondered if anyone had any other tips or progs they use? I leave sharpening as the last thing I do.

ps please don't suggest 1Dx or Nikon......:)
Click to expand...

12.500 is pushing it for a 1DIV so whatever happens you are going to get noise.

In PP balance the amount of sharpening with both Luminance and Colour NR.

Although these will probably be useless, my LR ballpark preset for low sharpening and high ISO NR is:

Sharp: 35,1.4,15,60
Luminance: 20,36,23
Colour: 17,51,50
 
DemiLion said:
Guys, next time try taking a note of which forum you are in and what the subject area is. As for never using sharpening - Hmm….
Click to expand...


I answered a question of the OP and commented
on a suggested strategy relevant to the subject.

The RAW converter I use has a sharpening tool
that I never use. There is, of course, the amount
of sharpening in the profile of the gear I use but I
never use extra sharpening.

I don't understand your post.
 
Kodiak Qc said:
I don't understand your post.
Click to expand...

I'm not getting into the sharpening issue on here. Suffice it to say, most photographers that I know consider it an essential part of the editing process. If they're good then they'll be considering both import and export sharpening.

As for the above comment, Lardy's post gave a realistic scenario for a lower league club under floodlights. That's with an f/2.8 lens.
Do you know any companies that produce a 300mm or 400mm f/1.8?
If so, have you won the lottery?
 
DemiLion said:
Lardy's post gave a realistic scenario for a lower league club under floodlights. That's with an f/2.8 lens.
Click to expand...

I do not read that he wrote anything about a lens…
Only a body, ISO, SS and software. So @Craig20264 's
tip is still relevant and my comment too.

As for using export sharpening. they can do whatever they
want.
 
Fill the frame.. That's the key to high ISO shots.. Get right behind the goals for shots coming towards you.. you can lower the shutter and thus the iso for those..

as for PP .. Using noise reduction can make the pictures look worse and flatten detail such as hair.. everyone knows its a night shot at hyde.. they wont be expecting perfection... or papers.... believe me noise isnt a massive problem...
 
Last edited:
Maybe I should've said I use f2.8 lenses (70-200 & 400).
And as I mainly shoot non-league footie the lights are crap!
I've tried shooting at 1/640th but find it a bit hit and miss regarding sharpness, probably made worse by having to shoot at high IOS's?
RAW isn't really an option as I'll miss the action.
DemiLion thanks for those settings, I'll have a go with those, and post some on here.
Kipax, cheers.
 
I used to use a photoshop plugin called "neat image" to reduce noise at lower league grounds. plenty of options and customisation bits so you can create a preset for each ground you visit or different floodlight sets depending on how much noise reduction is required.
 
I personally use Noise Ninja noise reduction as its an filter that can be imported into Adobe & has "targeting noise reduction". Also of course it can then be set up as an action within Adobe so can be added to every edited image automatically

I agree with Tony though tbh! most paper publications still use 72dpi & noise is still expected/accepted on night games under poor lights & don't show too much unless a pic editor decides to splash the image over a double spread!! (it's happened to me :( ).
 
If the pics aren't being wired and speed isn't an issue I'd agree with Kodiak on the Capture One suggestion. Shoot RAW (don't want to start another debate on this! Or maybe that would be fun!!)

It's an amazing program. Also, shooting RAW you can easily under expose by a stop and bring it back to correct exposure. Capture One will let you bring images back up to 4 stops under/over exposed, though I very rarely go past 2 stops. I would normally say get it right in camera, but there is scope to push it a little in this case. Also, it has a great noise reduction and sharpening features, as well as shadow and highlight retrieval. Worth checking out for sure. I will be looking up the other suggestions though, some sound interesting!
 
DemiLion said:
the exposure already indicates an f/2.8 being used
OK? 'Fella'?
Click to expand...
So where was the mention of the lens in the opening post then? You're going to have to explain you're comment I'm afraid.
Not being psychic myself I didn't have a clue what lens he was using, and if you're going to cherry pick parts of my post to suit your reply, you could mention that I advised that 'Camera Raw' was pretty good software for dealing with noise,
 
Craig20264 said:
So where was the mention of the lens in the opening post then? You're going to have to explain you're comment I'm afraid.
Not being psychic myself I didn't have a clue what lens he was using, and if you're going to cherry pick parts of my post to suit your reply, you could mention that I advised that 'Camera Raw' was pretty good software for dealing with noise,
Click to expand...


Getting 1/800th-1/1000th @ ISO 12,500 under low league lights is always going to mean an f/2.8 lens. You were the one that assumed he wasn't using a fast enough one.

That's why I said always pay attention to the forum that you're in and the subject.

As for shooting RAW, that won't make any difference to noise if you are exposing correctly and have the Jpeg engine set up properly.
 
DemiLion said:
Getting 1/800th-1/1000th @ ISO 12,500 under low league lights is always going to mean an f/2.8 lens.

As for shooting RAW, that won't make any difference to noise if you are exposing correctly and have the Jpeg engine set up properly.
Click to expand...

My God you're spouting some rubbish in that first line. I think you may have embarrassed yourself there. "ALWAYS going to be an f2.8 lens? Really, could it not have maybe, just possibly been an f3.5? hmmm.
Shooting in RAW. I've no idea what you're on about, and frankly I don't think you do either. Noise has absolutely nothing to do with exposure, It's a bi product of fast film or very light sensitive sensors, in other words, High ISO. The only way you can reduce it post shooting is to use noise reduction software. I just put forward the one I use 'Camera Raw' as a useful tool, and you need to shoot in RAW to use this particular piece of software. (Good luck reducing noise significantly with a j peg anyway)
I offered my advice to the OP. Don't really see what it's got to do with you anyway, I'm sure he can reply for himself if he feels the need, so no need for you to quote my original post really.
I'll bow out of this now and apologize to the op for getting side tracked with drivel.
 
DemiLion said:
As for shooting RAW, that won't make any difference to noise if you are exposing correctly and have the Jpeg engine set up properly.
Click to expand...

Maybe not as such, but shooting RAW gives you the opportunity to under expose saving yourself a stop, with no worse effect on noise once brought back to correct exposure. In my experience.
 
gibtheo said:
Maybe not as such, but shooting RAW gives you the opportunity to under expose saving yourself a stop, with no worse effect on noise once brought back to correct exposure. In my experience.
Click to expand...
Hi Steve,
That's not in the area that the OP is asking me thinks Steven!, He's sending images to clients within a tight time scale for paper publications?, & so will have to send JPEG!!.

I will eat my hat nay house if anyone on here sends Raw images to news publication outlets for tight deadline publications!!.
 
I presume the OP means 12800 which on a 1dmkIV is doable without all the faffing about.. just fill the frame.. you will resize anyways to nearly half which will make the pictures clean enough to use.. maybe dust/scratches in photoshop then away you go..
 
Haha! Yes, agreed, that's why I said, if not wiring in my first post. I wasn't sure if he was or not. I should pay more attention to previous threads maybe! Thanks for confirming that though. Obviously JPEG all the way!
 
Disregarding the RAW thing. I agree with Kipax there, fill the frame and expose well, I think you can get into more trouble shooting jpeg and trying to pull the file all over the place to sort out noise etc.
 
Craig20264 said:
My God you're spouting some rubbish in that first line. I think you may have embarrassed yourself there. "ALWAYS going to be an f2.8 lens? Really, could it not have maybe, just possibly been an f3.5? hmmm.
Shooting in RAW. I've no idea what you're on about, and frankly I don't think you do either. Noise has absolutely nothing to do with exposure, It's a bi product of fast film or very light sensitive sensors, in other words, High ISO. The only way you can reduce it post shooting is to use noise reduction software. I just put forward the one I use 'Camera Raw' as a useful tool, and you need to shoot in RAW to use this particular piece of software. (Good luck reducing noise significantly with a j peg anyway)
I offered my advice to the OP. Don't really see what it's got to do with you anyway, I'm sure he can reply for himself if he feels the need, so no need for you to quote my original post really.
I'll bow out of this now and apologize to the op for getting side tracked with drivel.
Click to expand...

Hi Craig.
I'm not getting into a crappy spat but you are wrong in assuming noise has no effect on exposures!!,

I can take the same image, (and have done), under the same conditions & there are differences in the noise depending on the light directions!!. I totally agree the only way to rebalance this is via noise reduction but the fact I have to even do this negates your statement!.

As to the minimum app?, this too is a stupid statement!, 2.8? 3.5? come on!!, we all know the differences are stupidly marginal on modern cameras? as is picking between 28,000 & 64,000? they all induce awful noise compared to "normal" images but are "acceptable" for publication ie Papers will love the newer versions! (I want a Nikon D5 lol).
 
Jesus what a post!
A sports shooter that cant shoot at 640th sec, Using noise reduction software at night games for press. Not that long ago you'd be well f@&$k!
Drop your ISO and use a lower shutter and fill the frame as suggested and if your not getting sharp images theres either something wrong or you need to practice. Not going to repeat everything but newspapers donot expect award winning photoshoped images from night games.
 
snapzz said:
Not going to repeat everything but newspapers donot expect award winning photoshoped images from night games.
Click to expand...

I am always suprised at how much better they look in print.. No idea what the paper does with them but I am not afraid of sending noisey pics in :)
 
In the days of a 1Dmk2 newspapers expected and got dark images. These days cameras handle poor lighting so much better but its still the image that counts regardless of quality. And yes I've always thought they look better in print and from such a low res file!
 
Craig20264 said:
My God you're spouting some rubbish in that first line. I think you may have embarrassed yourself there. "ALWAYS going to be an f2.8 lens? Really, could it not have maybe, just possibly been an f3.5? hmmm.
Shooting in RAW. I've no idea what you're on about, and frankly I don't think you do either. Noise has absolutely nothing to do with exposure, It's a bi product of fast film or very light sensitive sensors, in other words, High ISO. The only way you can reduce it post shooting is to use noise reduction software. I just put forward the one I use 'Camera Raw' as a useful tool, and you need to shoot in RAW to use this particular piece of software. (Good luck reducing noise significantly with a j peg anyway)
I offered my advice to the OP. Don't really see what it's got to do with you anyway, I'm sure he can reply for himself if he feels the need, so no need for you to quote my original post really.
I'll bow out of this now and apologize to the op for getting side tracked with drivel.
Click to expand...

My God you're a defensive sod. I posted a brief suggestion to check which forum you were in because it influences your answer. And whilst 'always' may not be strictly accurate I'll go for a 90% accuracy rating given those exposure settings and Hyde's lighting.

Exposure has a huge amount to do with noise. Buggering the exposure and trying to recover it (even but a stop) will hugely increase the noise, especially in the shadows.
The easiest way to minimise noise is to expose correctly or possibly ETTR.

By the way, you do know that you can open Jpegs in ACR don't you? In fact there are a couple of different ways to do it.
 
On my 1Dmk4 I try to stick at 10,000 iso. I adjust images, then use imagenomic noiseware to reduce the noise. Sharpen, then export. Seems OK for my use.
 
Is it always like this in here? I thought it was all egg chasers and blurry cars
It's more like the Wild West of TP, I,ll have to take a look around :LOL:
 
Blimey!
Snapzz at the moment I'm not shooting for the papers, but as I'm still learning wanted to pick the brains of the people that are. I have gone down to 1/640th to keep the iOS down, but at some of the grounds I'm shooting at the lights are dreadful so I'm then up to ISO 10,000 and still only getting 1/640th.
As I say, still learning and just wanted to pick brains.
I think I've improved a lot since getting advice (and constructive kickings) on here.
Maybe I should've worded it " is it acceptable to send shots in with noise"? Lol
 
Lardyc7 said:
Blimey!
Snapzz at the moment I'm not shooting for the papers, but as I'm still learning wanted to pick the brains of the people that are. I have gone down to 1/640th to keep the iOS down, but at some of the grounds I'm shooting at the lights are dreadful so I'm then up to ISO 10,000 and still only getting 1/640th.
As I say, still learning and just wanted to pick brains.
I think I've improved a lot since getting advice (and constructive kickings) on here.
Maybe I should've worded it " is it acceptable to send shots in with noise"? Lol
Click to expand...

I remember shooting under floodlights at 250th as I had no choice. You say your still learning then thats good but you need to learn to shoot at the lowest ISO you can while achieving sharpest images. I'm assuming the newspapers will be you targeted customers if shooting football and sometimes the harshest lessons learnt can be the best remembered. I've not covered professional football for a few years now but you will be wise to listen to those who still do ;)
 
As it happens the lights at Hyde are some of the best I've shot at lol.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top